The theory of Tooth Decay and Why it’s Flawed
You might have heard about the theory of tooth decay that was published in the 1900’s. while it did serve as a good ground in some cases, it actually is a flawed theory. However, the dental field did have it at the forefront for many years, but there are some flaws to this that you should know, and while your Santa Clarita dentist might not speak about it, it’ll be discussed here. This article will go over why the theory is flawed, and it doesn’t explain it in all of the cases, since there are a few exceptions. Now, this doesn’t mean that it doesn’t work for some. It actually might, but it doesn’t work for everyone.
Now, the first is that teeth don’t always decay when there is food debris there. There are some people that are actually almost immune to cavities even when there is food in their teeth.
Now, while there appears to be times when there is less of a decay in teeth, there is an increase in susceptibility to dental decay when you’re pregnant, have a stressful time, and a systemic illness. This in turn will imply that there is a systemic component to tooth decay as a result.
Now, there is also the factor that dead teeth appear to have more of a proneness to decay than the love ones. If decay happens from the outside, then the teeth that are root filled would be susceptible to this as much as teeth without the root canal fillings. From this, teeth with pulp should decay at the same rate as teeth without pulp, but in truth, dead teeth decay more readily, so if there isn’t pulp, it’ll break down faster. This could imply that there is a missing nutrient supply to the tooth.
Now, decay that starts between the teeth might end up affecting only one of the two teeth. Often, bacteria don’t strike evenly, and this implies that there is a systemic condition that causes cavities.
You might also notice that mottled and poorly calcified enamel is not more susceptible to decay than normal enamel, so that does imply that there is more to this tan the quality of the enamel.
Now, because of these exceptions, it also does suggest that there is something missing from this theory. Dentistry must also consider more than just bacteria and sugar when it comes to analyzing why a tooth might decay. There are other predisposing factors that do come into this that lead to decay, and it does relate to the structure of the tooth along with the processes to give minerals back and increase the nourishing of this.
Now, when it was first studied, it was found that tooth enamel is actually made up of an organic matrix that gets nutrients from inside of the tooth from a fluid that flows from the pulp into the inside of the tooth and then onto the mouth. This is typically called dental lymph. Now when you sweat, you do have the fluid from the body move from the skin to the outside, and in a way the dental lymph is like this. Now, the quality and flow of these is definitely important to consider, and when it flows right, it causes tooth decay resistance. The tooth is a live structure, so it needs nutrients supplied to it just like any other part of the body. If the nutrients aren’t actually there, then this will cause tooth decay and other problems.
This is where the other predisposing conditions come in. if you’re not getting nutrients to the tooth, then it will decay. It’s a much sounder theory than the ones simply saying that sugar is the sole cause. Sugar is a big part of it, but also look at the other nutrients that you have as well, and you might be able to talk to your Santa Clarita dentist about this as well to get further information. You owe it to yourself to understand your oral health and to make sure that you have the best one possible, and you can make sure that you do so with this too.