Talk:Human tooth

message: If you don't brush your teeth after one week they will be white. It is scientifically proven.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.65.24.248 (talk) 14:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: maybe a new page on dental care? -- Tarquin 13:27 Apr 20, 2003 (UTC)
Hmmm... the link to canine now points to a page on family Canidae, the dogs.  Should we install a disambig page, even though one of the two ambiguous objects does not yet exist?
Shimmin 12:39, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

text: yup. done :-) -- Tarquin 13:43, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Dental care

message: : Hello, I experienced a painful tooth decay. I have uploaded a picture of my tooth before and after operation. A root canal couldn't be done, so the tooth has been broken to four pieces and cleaned out. (Probably one of the biggest pain I have ever felt in my life)
However the picture is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Toothdecay.jpg . If there is an expert at the subject please use it. If anybody thinks it should be presented on this page , add it then :) I'm just photographing it.  -- Nerval 3:50 AM : 21 Jan 2004
:Sympathies. I hope the swelling (to the right in the picture) goes down soon. Perhaps other pictures as healing takes place? Great contribution! Mr. Jones 22:22, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely no problem, actually pictures were taken' with a Digital SLR on Macro mode. It has Carl Zeiss lens, it provides very high clarity and surely vividity. The hard part was to place the cam on my mouth and taking the picture without breathing. (Macro settings takes several seconds, probably 15 seconds at total) From today I'll continue to take several shots, hopefully it will be useful to someone. I was really sad that my dentist had to show me xrays and explain the tooth on a toy. Our techonology is advanced in half to take a picture of the whole mouth. I'll continue posting :) Nerval
Here's a dental X-ray image (:zh-min-nan:Image:Chiu-khi_X-ray.jpg).  It seems a more typical example of dental x-ray, at least for typical problems.  Unfortunately it's a bit small.  A-giau 21:08, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: On the talk page for tricuspid, which currently mentions only the heart, someone mentions that there are also teeth called tricuspids. Is this true? It's not mentioned on teeth, so I haven't done anything to disambiguate. Someone with more knowledge of teeth should look into this... Tbutzon 03:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tricuspids?

message: Does the first set have 20 teeth and the second 12, or does the second have 32 ? Do all the 20 teeth fall off ? Jay 14:40, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Count of teeth

message: *From article: "Brushing teeth immediately after eating sugar is not recommended, because sugar softens the enamel, which can then be damaged by brushing. Better to wait half an hour after eating sugary foods before brushing."
I think we can clarify this.
1.  Does rinsing one's mouth with water or milk following meals lessen this damage caused by brushing?
2.  This advice seems to conflict with an assertion in the dental cavities article: "Plaque and bacteria begin to accumulate within 20 minutes after eating, the time when most bacterial activity occurs."  
Does the first half hour following meals not contain significant bacterial activity?--Nectarflowed (talk) 08:35, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly, I do not know everything, but I have not heard this recommendation before.  Can we get a specific ada source or something of that nature to back up the statement?  It is so counterintuitive that further explanation would be nice to have in case people would want to look into the matter.  -Dozenist talk 03:47, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I've heard of the recommendation not to brush until 30mins have passed since vomitting or gastric reflux, but not after eating acidic foods. I didn't think acidic foods were acidic enough to cause that much dental erosion (unless consumed regularly and over a long period of time, example, wine drinkers and coca-cola addicts). What kind oo pH range does acidic foods fall into? 3-4?Billyb 11:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Don't brush following sugar?

message: I saw a request at Wikipedia:Requested pictures for a cross-section of a tooth, so I made one. I placed it rather randomly in the article — move as appropriate. The image can be found at :Image:ToothSection.jpg. Please feel free to critique — it's (relatively) easy to edit images. — Asbestos | Talk 01:45, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cross section image

message: Are Caries the British spelling for Cavities or something? EvilPhoenix talk 10:27, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
More like the technical/Latin term
No, no, no and no. Caries is the disease, while cavities are the signs of the disease. In medicine, a sign, unlike a symptom, is something that can be observed by an outside observer who is not the patient. There is a big difference between "caries" and "cavities".
Caries is the abstract problem, the disease you have in your mouth, and the noun "caries" is usually a non-count noun, which means they usually don't use it in the plural grammatical number, unless, for example, you're talking about different types of caries. The noun "caries" is derived from the Latin noun "caries" (same spelling, but different pronunciation), which is a noun of the fourth type of declension of the Latin language.
:That's incorrect.  The word caries in Latin is a fifth declension noun (like facies for 'appearance', spes for 'hope', and res for 'thing').  The fourth declension nouns, which you alluded to, belong to a class of nouns known as the u- class while the fifth declension nouns belong to a class of nouns known as the e- class.  For what it's worth, fifth declension nouns are almost overwhelmingly feminine.  See Latin for more details.  The singular and plural of fifth declension nouns look alike; that's why some English speakers think that caries is a non-count noun, but the fact is, the noun takes a different kind of adjective depending on whether it is singular or plural.  E.g., caries gravida (a state of heavy tooth decay) and caries leves (states of light tooth decay).  Look at the associated adjective to see if the noun is singular or plural.
"Caries" in Latin and "caries" in English are usually both abstract nouns, which means they describe something that is abstract and immaterial.
"Cavities", on the other hand, are the concrete medical signs you see. They are the holes you see in the enamel or dentin of teeth. The noun "cavity", unlike the English noun "caries", is usually a count noun and concrete. They use to use the plural of the noun, "cavities", which means "holes". But in Latin, the Latin noun "cavitas", from which the English noun "cavity" is derived, was originally an abstract noun with the "ending" -itas, which was an ending usually used to form a quality noun (nomen qualitatis) from an adjective. In this case, the noun cavitas was derived from cavus, which meant "hollow". So cavitas originally meant "the quality of being hollow" or "hollowness". But then again, in addition to "hollowness", it came to mean "hole". That is the concrete thing, instead of the "hollowness", which is the abstract property of something that is hollow. But again, that's what it meant originally, but the meanings of words in languages change through time.
At least when it comes to teeth, the noun cavity usually means the hole or pit you can observe or perceive in a tooth, and it is a medical sign of caries, which is the disease instead of the sign or signs of the actual disease.
Just in case, the noun cavitation, which means the formation of cavities, does not mean the disease, caries, nor the cavities themselves.
My synoptic summary:
caries     	the disease
cavity     	a medical sign of the disease
cavities   	multiple medical signs of the disease
cavitation 	the formation of one cavity or of multiple cavities
to cavitate	to form one cavity or multiple cavities
 2004-12-29T22:45Z 18:41, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caries/cavities 

message: Among the very first few missions on the space shuttle, the caries bacterium was cultured in zero gravity to see how well it could propagate in space.  The results, as I understand it, showed conclusively that zero gravity has no effect on the caries bacterium.
Have there been any updates on the culturing of this bacterium?
There was also some talk about gene splicing the influenza virus into caries bacterium but that was more in line with science fiction than science fact.  Viruses are small, being bits and pieces of DNA or RNA.  Bacteria, on the other hand, are quite large.  The two are not likely to meet.  Still, has there been any progress with an anti-caries vaccination?
There are a multitude of acidogenic bacteria that contribute to the formation of caries, not just one.  That is why a successful vaccine has never been developed. Dr-G - Illigetimi nil carborundum est. 17:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caries as a weapon of war 

message: Don't be so hasty to rule out a vaccine.  See  (Taubman, 2006, Nat Rev Immunol 6(7):555), or run a PubMed search. Mike Serfas 18:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vaccination against dental caries may be possible

message: In the article it says that teeth are not bones (I agree), but that one of the reasons they are not considered as such is because they do not form joints with the jaw.  I'm reading an anatomy and physiology text that says otherwise; am I misreading this text, or does the dental industry not consider gomphoses as articulations (joints)?
By the definition I have of articulation/arthrosis (again, joints) it is a point of contact between two bones, between bone and cartilage, or between bone and teeth.  
This point of contact usually utilizes connective tissue, which according to the same text is evident with teeth in the "dense fibrous connective tissue between a tooth and its socket..." called the "periodontal ligament (membrane)."
Anyone care to comment?
I was also interested in a bit of controversy brought up in class over the functional classification of these 'teeth joints' being synarthrotic, or immovable.  Apparently there is some discussion about an appropriate (very minimal) amount of movement of teeth within their sockets.  My teeth move ever so slightly, but noticeably, and I think it's a good thing that they do, because it gives me that 'nick of time' to back off the 'chew' if I'm going up against something that would break my teeth.  
Again, any thoughts?
Thanks,
tonya@fairnec.com
Teeth are not bones because the embryological tissue that they arise from is not the same as for bone, despite them sharing a similar structural and chemical makeup as bone.  Teeth are derived primarily from ectoderm (with a contribution from ectomesenchyme) whereas bone is mesodermal in origin.  
Therefore, it is not correct to say that teeth are not bones because they do not form joints with bone.  As you correctly point out, a gomphosis is a type of joint.  In fact, a professor of mine in dental school had the desire for joints to be redefined to include contact points between teeth, as he felt that the articulation between teeth formed the basis of a joint, despite the lack of connective tissue.  Semantics, I know.  I will edit this tomorrow to correct the problem.Dr-G - Illigetimi nil carborundum est. 02:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is considerable similarity between the constituents and pathologies of dentine and bone.  In fact, bovine dentine is being explored as a possible bone substitute for medical use.(see )  Bear in mind, however, that enamel is a completely different material with a different embryonic origin - in terms of physical location it has more in common with hair and horn than bone, though it has a unique composition. Mike Serfas 19:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teeth and Joints 

message: My 8 year old daughter was keen to add something and learn how Wikipedia works so we took a photo of her 3 baby teeth so far. My idea was to put them on the 'tooth fairy' page as a gift but she firmly said she doesn't believe in the tooth fairy so I added them next to the infant teeth :)
Cas Liber 22:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How terribly sweet.--EchetusXe (talk) 18:31, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  teaching kids about wikipedia  

message: Hello there. I was studying anatomy and recently got told that the teeth are not pushed out. The formation of bones can contribute to this fact since the odontoclasts (bone tissue destroying cells) form at the tip of the teeth that is growing, and at base of the deciduous set, making them loose. Either this information is wrong but that is what my textbook said otherwise.
This is not yet known. Any claim about what gets teeth to erupt is speculation / hypothesis.
DoctaDontist (talk) 13:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teeth being "pushed" out of the jaw? 

message: One treatment is permanent bridges. What is that? 70.55.156.233 18:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is permanent bridges? 

message: How's this for a definition of a tooth:  a highly mineralised functional unit of the dentition? -Dr-G - Illigetimi nil carborundum est. 23:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of a Tooth 

message: * Rodents' incisors grow continuously throughout their lives.  Their decidous incisors are shed before they are born.
Rodents do not have deciduous teeth. And it's not spelled correctly ;) 
Hence I removed it.
Tummers 13:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rodents 

message: To improve the article, a lot of information has been added, moved around, and deleted.  Most tooth related articles on wikipedia are human related, and the majority of this article is about human teeth.  Previously, there were sentences scattered in the introduction about animal teeth, but I think an entire section on animal teeth is warranted (and not just the current simple bullet points).  The article is beginning to look more cohesive and structured, and hopefully an animal-tooth expert will come along to help out. - Dozenist talk 22:55, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Collaboration 

message: I fail to see how Conodont and Bruxism are relevant to this article. As far as i can see a conodont is just a worm with teeth, and bruxism is pathological tooth clenching. If they deserve mention than maybe other animals with teeth like turtles etc need to be mentioned.... and other conditions of the teeth. These can be easily accessed via the category pages, therefore i am removing them until they can be justified. Bouncingmolar 02:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: See Also links

message: The article is well written, good prose. The lead paragraph is good. References are a bit lacking in some areas; most notably, 'anatomy', 'dentin', 'cementin','pulp', 'periodontum', 'plaque', 'dentures and false teeth'. The 'enamel' section and 'tooth care' sections seem well done and referenced. These can be used as a model for other sections. References may not be quite as important in the sections under 'parts', if the main articles that are being referred to are well referenced (then, this article sort of references that article). But I checked these other articles, and they are mainly start-class, with virtually no references currently.
'Periodontum' probably shouldn't be in its own main section. It seems like this might belong in the 'parts' section.
'Dentures and false teeth' can be expanded, and referenced. No mention of George Washington's teeth (yes, I know the wooden teeth are a myth; might be interested in mentioning).
'Abnormalities of the dentition' seems to be just a list. Some prose would help in this area, since many users may not know what a 'dentition' refers to.
The 'in animals' section could be expanded; more references, write out as prose instead of just a list. What animal has the largest known teeth? the smallest? This might be a common question that people would go to an encyclopedia for, and should probably be covered.
Overall, I'd probably rate this at the upper end of the B-class, but cannot put it at GA-class quite yet, as it's still missing some data and references. Getting close, though! Editors might want to review the good article criteria, as well as [{WP:CITE]].
Good luck! Dr. Cash 01:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have relisted the article to be a good article nominee. Most of the issues above have been addressed. Sections have been renamed and expanded to be more relevant. References have been littered throughout the article now. There is still no mention of George Washington's teeth, but I figured such information would be more appropriate in the denture article! :-P - Dozenist talk 16:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA review

message: Okay, Im not sure if this is mentioned but I was wonderring something. I have two weird things about my teeth. The first is the teeth right beside your front teeth on both side(Not sure their name) well, I had my Baby teeth and they didn't get loose. My permanant teeth just protruded from the side of my gums, covering them up. Why is that?
The second isn't as weird. I am 13 and I have only lost 5 or 6 teeth, not sure if that is weird but...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.147.16.141 (talk) 00:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Me 

message: No matter how hard I brush my teeth, they always appear to be yellowish instead of white, so shouldn't it say that teeth are yellowish instead of white? Fangusu (talk) 13:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tooth colour

message: Topic: Black stains
caused by dental plaque
layer of iron compounds, probably ferric sulfide.
Hint to paper / source:
Investigations into Black Extrinsic Tooth Stain
by J.S. Reid, J.A. Beeley and D.G. MacDonald
J DENT RES 1977; 56; 895
Online available unter URL: http://jdr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/56/8/895.pdf
Thank you!
Dieter Burkhard, Switzerland
Grammar school teacher  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.75.50.114 (talk) 21:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  new sub-chapter required: black stain on teeth 

message: Mention if there are any differences in the teeth of males vs. females. Jidanni (talk) 09:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Male vs. Female

message: I request editing in order to add the Haitian creole equivalent to the list of languages in the left-side column. Rajkiandris--Rajkiandris (talk) 06:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing language 

message: This article is one of a  number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue   are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.
The following request appears on that page:
Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes"  would be appreciated.
Please update the Queue page as appropriate.
Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Pending changes

message: My canine teeth, and premolars are all fairly pointed. Though I know of folks with larger/longer canines, most folks don't seem to have pointed premolars. [] How common is this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.183.80 (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Human "fangs"/pointy teeth

message: The introductory paragraphs of this article are evidently copy-pasted from the general "Tooth" article.  There is no need to go into detail about rodents, etc.   Someone should edit this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.182.131 (talk) 21:18, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove all the nonhuman material 

message: Could someone with some expertise expand this paragraph, perhaps adding a couple of graphics, to explain exactly the number, names, and arrangement of the primary teeth and, separately, the adult teeth?  The paragraph is basically a long run-on of information that seems incomplete and hard to break down.  Thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.182.131 (talk) 21:20, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paragrah beginning "Humans usually have 20 primary teeth..." 

message: Imagine Reason (talk) 14:29, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the article on overcrowded teeth? 

message: I uploaded a panoramic X-ray showing all 32 teeth with no cavities or fillings or other dental work at :File:X-ray of all 32 human teeth.jpg. Not sure if it would be useful in this article or not. Ruhrfisch  ><>°° 03:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  X-ray of all 32 teeth 

message: In the section on oral hygiene, should this article say that teeth should be brushed for a minimum of two minutes every time one brushes one's teeth? Vorbee (talk) 18:30, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Two minutes

message: What is it called when you have an extra tooth between 24 and 25
Amenominakanushi (talk) 04:49, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dental Deformity