Slashdot Mirror
Dental Floss May Have No Medical Benefits, Says AP Report (gizmodo.com)
Joe_NoOne quotes a report from Gizmodo: Flossing may not yield the protective benefits we've been told to expect. Since 1979, the federal government in the U.S. has recommended daily flossing, but by law these dietary guidelines, which are updated every five years, have to be supported by scientific evidence. Surprisingly -- and without any notice -- the federal government dropped flossing from its dietary guidelines this year, telling the Associated Press that "the government acknowledged the effectiveness of flossing had never been researched, as required." AP national writer Jeff Donn reports: "The two leading professional groups -- the American Dental Association and the American Academy of Periodontology, for specialists in gum disease and implants -- cited other studies as proof of their claims that flossing prevents buildup of gunk known as plaque, early gum inflammation called gingivitis, and tooth decay. However, most of these studies used outdated methods or tested few people. Some lasted only two weeks, far too brief for a cavity or dental disease to develop. One tested 25 people after only a single use of floss. Such research, like the reviewed studies, focused on warning signs like bleeding and inflammation, barely dealing with gum disease or cavities. Wayne Aldredge, president of the periodontists' group, acknowledged the weak scientific evidence and the brief duration of many studies...Still, he urges his patients to floss to help avoid gum disease. 'It's like building a house and not painting two sides of it,' he said. 'Ultimately those two sides are going to rot away quicker.'"
Mine has aluminum siding.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
And coffee and cigarettes are the new wonder drug. Obvious clickbait headline to get everyone who wants to prove that all those years without flossing were justified, as they get their new dentures.
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
I have lots of experience over the years, (with me), and I've done it every way.
Floss. That's all there is to it. You will have trouble with your gums and with cavities if you don't.
You don't have to floss every day. Once a week is enough. Your dentist won't even be able to tell the difference.
Well, seeing as how I haven't been doing it anyway, this is great news.
Fine, don't floss:
but when you have a conversation with me, and you a piece of rotting meat stuck in your mouth for days on end, I'm taking 10 paces back.
46137
Did they study what happens if you have a little bit of orange gunk stuck between your teeth and would have a breakdown if you couldn't use floss to remove it?
Apparently there's no medial study that clearly demonstrates that jumping out the window is bad for your health.
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
as for years when I did not, my teeth were quite bad and my gum retracted. It also lead to occassional inflammation of affected areas. After I started using high pressure fluids to floss (icw 2 minute electronic brushing), even though my dentist didn't agree, the problems dissapeared. Fluid flossing is eg available from Waterpik. I use the Philips airfloss. Ymmd.
I'm not sure that I can buy into the "flossing is useless" argument.
I know when I floss I get all sorts of little bits and pieces of food particles coming out, and having that stuff sitting up in your gums for days or weeks DOES contribute to things like gingivitis and other types of gum disease. And I know for a fact that when I started flossing regularly the condition of my gums improved significantly, and I have the dental records to prove it. Maybe I'm atypical in that regard, but I doubt it.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
1. Floss
2. Smell used floss
3. Be totally grossed out.
4. Floss forever.
Story is a beat up. They didn't say it makes no difference. They just said the research supporting it was old and had poor methodology, possibly because "Big Floss" didn't think "floss research" was worth throwing money at and people have been doing it anyway because it's common sense.
So another clickbait headline which will have AP's media customers rubbing their hands with glee, but misleading and many people will take away the wrong conclusion.
My gums will bleed while I brush after a few weeks. if I floss regularly they don't. Good enough for me.
Not everything we know comes from randomized, large-scale trials. There are other ways to gain knowledge. This link shows why randomized, large-scale trials are not always the best idea.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
it does a much better job than toothpicks which break off and wedge in between teeth
Just have the study participants floss only half (the same half) of their mouth every day. Monitor their oral health for several years. If flossing makes a significant difference in dental decay, it should become obvious by the differing rate of decay of flossed and unflossed teeth.
It seems to me that this would be a reasonable approach to a study. Aside from flossing, the oral health of each subject should be the same on both sides of the mouth. That means you wouldn't have to account as much for variations in oral hygeine among subjects.
Disclaimer: I have never knowingly conducted or participated in medical research.
Give me my freedom, and I'll take care of my own security, thank you.
As a dentist, I'd unofficially support these findings. Although I'm an anon. cow... I'd make a lot more money from people in the long run... no? But once they run out of teeth I suppose, they aren't worth much and only the specialists could make $ off of them. Yes... I suck.
You check out that new toothbrush that has bluetooth app to track your brushing? Not sure if it does floss too.
How about this... frequent flossing rips, irritates & inflames your gums CAUSING gingival pockets over time? I don't know if it's true, but seems plausible in a world where up until recently stuffing peoples faces with amalgamated mercury was just peachy.
I thought it's been well known for decades that flossing leads to fewer abscesses? Why is that not mentioned.
It might not have any impact on gum disease or gingivitis, as there isn't research to show that, not having a big sore lump of pus in your mouth because you left some gristle in there for a week seems like a good reason to floss.
I know popcorn does it to me overnight if I don't floss and rinse will well. The fine little shells on the kernels gets between my gums and irritates them horribly.
Yes, because it make no sense.
One word for people who don't floss: Eww.
I call Bullshit. Breaking the law does NOT require intent before you can be charged.
"Honestly, officer, I didn't MEAN to speed. I just wasn't paying attention."
"But I didn't MEAN to kill that other hunter. I just shot at the sound and didn't know what was in the bushes."
"I didn't MEAN to run that stop sign. I didn't see it because I was busy playing with my cell phone."
If intent was part of the prosecution then there wouldn't be a need for the saying "Ignorance of the law is no defense." You can still be charged and prosecuted for breaking a law even if you didn't KNOW it was illegal.
Disclosing classified material, which she should have known was classified, is breaking the law. If I did that when I was in charge of classified information it would have gotten me arrested, my security clearance revoked, and my job changed. I would never be allowed to handle classified material again.
Instead the FBI says "Oh, let's not prosecute her because she didn't MEAN to reveal classified material over an illegal, unsecured email system.
The more likely reason they decided not to prosecute was that they didn't want to draw attention to the fact that multiple classified email messages were sent over an unsecured system and are possibly stored in the backup systems of the commercial email servers. Sweep it under the rug, deny there was any wrongdoing, and hope nobody remembers it once the election circus starts.
This scientific study bullshit is a disease. No different than lawyers twisting language until they find the outcome they were seeking... Oh but you can't prove x, y and z... And oh you didn't establish using a table saw leads to the presence of sawdust even though it is obvious to anyone with even a partially functioning brain.
Go redo your flawed studies. Knock yourselves out... but FFS but don't confuse the real world with your standards and methodologies and ivory tower bullshit and don't let the media anywhere near your work until you have something substantive to say.
I think he means it is difficult because of the uneven surface.
Otherwise, he may have dentures, and also had his scrotum ripped off in a gruesome skateboarding accident (that also explains the 'has no teeth' part).
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
There are actually states where going over the speed limit alone is not enough to get a citation, and there has to be demonstrative reason to think the person was be reckless or intentionally breaking the law...
Why is Snark Required?
I am sure that unwaxed floss is more effective at "cleaning" the surface of the teeth than waxed floss. Waxed floss glides effortlessly over the surface and there is little or no friction. Without friction, how can waxed floss scrape the surface of the tooth?? Any study on the effectiveness of flossing has to distinguish between the use of waxed and unwaxed floss. But try to find unwaxed floss when you need to buy some! Most drugstores sell only waxed floss or keep very little unwaxed floss in stock. If a proper study finds that flossing is not effective, I would bet money on their subjects using mostly or entirely waxed floss. By definition, waxed floss will do no work.
..that BIG FLOSS was behind the secret campaign to get us all to floss daily! Finally, I am vindicated!
So the true story is that the claim has not been prooven. This makes the claim not false, it makes it untested and unverified. As the claim still can be tested , it is not a believe. So the ball lies now in the corner of dental floss researchers to evaluate the effect in a real study.
Oh /. where art thou!
Here in Germany flossing is quite uncommon and I know only few persons that even own floss. Dentists also never seem to mention it. However, I do not know how dental health here compares to the one in the US and assume that other factors play a much bigger role then.
Despite the annoyance, anyone who has ever used dental floss can realize that it has immediate benefits.
That being said, the fact that weak scientific evidence was used to promote dental floss is a disgrace, but does not surprise me. It happens all the time.
Dramatic improvements in periodontal health are claimed for careful flossing. Careless flossing turns out not to matter.
.:Semper Absurda:.
Floss is part of the past. Go for interdental brush.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
British dental health is much better than in the US.
British Teeth Aren’t That Bad (American Teeth Are Far Worse)
Which countries' children have the worst teeth?
FYI that's why you guys invaded France back in the 1940s - Goering had some orange rind stuck between his teeth and couldn't get it out with a brush. There wasn't any floss available in Germany, so he decided to get some from the neighboring country.
It ended up being all for naught, though, when the Maquis developed the Floss Grenade. Since French-acquired floss could not be trusted, the German army eventually pulled back out of Paris.
#DeleteChrome
Well, here's a German who flosses daily before going to bed.
Maybe it's because some of my teeth are very close together and there's no chance for a brush to get between them, but I can feel the difference before and after flossing so that l still feel a bit dirty if I just brush without flossing.
What I think makes a way bigger difference than flossing or not: using an electric toothbrush.
My teeth are so close together I can't even floss properly - the floss thread disintegrates and gets stuck between my teeth. I use mouthwash instead, which probably does the same time of job even better.
Human brain may have no benefit, anecdotal evidence finds.
Requiem for the American Dream
And yet negligent homicide is still a crime.
Possibly Clinton Hilary was not involved in negligent homicide and other losses were not significant enough to judge prosecution.
No, we get it. You feel marvelous after doing both.
I guess this article is not referring to my swimsuit. https://goo.gl/HNLh8J
Mishandling Classified information most certainly is a crime. Espionage act, USC Title 18 para 739 (f). Nothing left or right wing about it. It's there in the code. Putting classified information on an unclassified network (civilian or government) is a crime. Sending that information via that unclassified network is a crime. I've had a clearance for over 20 years. I put classified information into an email not on the physically separate classified networks (which were not hacked) even once and I go to jail, not to the Whitehouse.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
I put classified information into an email not on the physically separate classified networks (which were not hacked) even once and I go to jail,
I've known people to have done worse. They lost their clearance, sometimes their jobs, but never ended up in jail. I think your CO scared you a little too much. Though, those from military generally don't get it. They are more greatly punished under UCMJ than civilians under the USC.
Again, as I noted, you are confusing the "law" with the actual law. What's written isn't the law. It's called "common law". We don't live under "Civil Law". The law isn't the law as written, but as applied. De facto, what she did was legal, because she wasn't found guilty of it in a court of law. Arguing that she broke the law because your opinion is that she should have been found guilty just shows that you know nothing of the law (even if you can quote it), and you shit on the principal of innocent until proven guilty. Why do you hate individual rights?
Learn to love Alaska
"the government acknowledged the effectiveness of flossing had never been researched, as required."
Jumping from 9th floor has never been researched, but it is known to be effective. Stupid science.
Not just floss. Parachutes, too, suffer from a serious shortage of controlled trials demonstrating their efficacy.
Article here.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
It wasn't my CO instilling fear, it was on the job experience and expertese. I was an Army Counterintelligence Agent (MOS 97B then 35L). I investigated such crimes, yes people did get off with lesser punishment but they were brought up on the actual crimes with the potential penalties. Military Lawyers and Judges like plea deals just as much as civilian courts do. I'm not saying she needs to go to jail for 10 years x 100+ classified emails. But she should have been indicted. The crimes are real, and they do not require intent. The law as applied is that you mishandle classified information, you face charges.
Let her be indicted and defend herself, if she can plea out to jay-walking fine. But she needs to face the charges for the crimes she committed. And I'm speaking from experience not misunderstanding.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
It wasn't my CO instilling fear, it was on the job experience and expertese.
Nope. It was the CO. The civilian rules may look similar if you read through the UCMJ and USC, but the application (de facto law, not theoretical) is vastly different. You saw different rules applied under the UCMJ, and found that more strict. I don't disagree. If Hillary were bound by the UCMJ, she'd have faced a trial. But the authorities ruled it wasn't a convictable offense. And looking at others in a similar circumstance in recent history, that's consistent. There's just more noise over it this time, because of who is involved.
Learn to love Alaska
Name one state where speeding alone is not a ticketable offense.
I must say that since I started flossing regularly, I have not had any more big fillings done on my teeth. If you get cavities between your teeth the dentist can't drill a small hole into it from the side and is obliged to make a big filling from the tooth's top surface. I normally only floss every second day, or when I have eaten sugary foods. I think a lot of it could be genetic - people with widely-spaced teeth probably won't get much tooth decay between their teeth.
Not saying that it should replace flossing, but oral probiotics (eg. http://blis.co.nz/) have proved efficiency in dental health (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=streptococcus%20salivarius%20k12).
Health wise we do better, but until fairly recently people tend not to worry too much about the cosmetic aspect so their teeth look bad.
I had a brace for some fairly serious overcrowding when I was a child, but once the problem was fixed they lost interest in neatening everything up. I'm kinda tempted to pay to get them fixed now that those invisible braces are available. It's not so much the looks as the getting food suck in them all the bloody time.
Also, I wish my wisdom teeth would stop trying to kill me. Intelligent design my arse.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I have always been a regular brusher but couldn't stand flossing so I didn't, and nearly every dentist I ever used nagged about it constantly.
Due to job changes and ambivalence and dislike of dental practice, I didn't go to the dentist for about 2 years. I had an old filling break, which basically forced me to go the dentist. I figured I probably had several cavities since I typically had at least one every dental visit, so I looked for a dentist who did sedation so I could get them all fixed at once in the easiest manner possible.
I gave the dentist my backstory and told him that not going to the dentist regularly was a dumb idea but that I was not going to floss, so don't tell me about flossing. If you bug me about flossing, I will just get up and leave I'm here for dental care, not lectures. He was pretty good about it.
Anyway, after an overhaul that included 2 crowns, a root canal and a few fillings I was back to decent shape. I started using (at their suggestion) a mouthwash with CPC (Crest ProHealth is the best known commercial brand, but generics are everywhere).
Since I started using CPC mouthwash my gums are in great shape and I've had zero cavities. The CPC seems to be an organic solvent for plaque and whatever sticky shit holds food particles in your mouth. I've brushed with an ultrasonic brush, rinsed my mouth with water thoroughly after and then used the CPC mouthwash and been AMAZED at the crap that comes out with the mouthwash.
I think in the absence of any dentistry, flossing is probably a good idea since it mechanically removes buildup in places brushes do nothing for. But I think that CPC mouthwash is a really decent substitute, since it not only treats your entire mouth and can get in places you can't floss or brush, it does an awful lot to nuke bacteria and growth that leads to cavities. I also think that the regular cleanings help, too. You just can't clean your own teeth the way a hygienist can with the tools and physical access they have.
Disclosing classified material, which she should have known was classified, is breaking the law. If I did that when I was in charge of classified information it would have gotten me arrested, my security clearance revoked, and my job changed. I would never be allowed to handle classified material again.
But nah Patreus was cool.
They dropped the recommendation since the legal requirements for evidence were not met. That's not the same thing as stating flossing has no benefits. Although from some associated stories folks were saying modern toothbrushes were able to clean the same areas as flossing, which implies flossing may once have been useful but no longer useful. For myself, I will keep doing it due to the various bits of food that get stuck here and there. My toothbrush might get them, unless I am not as careful or not paying attention when I brush that area, which is a real possibility. We'll call it a useful backup method.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
Dental work and dentists visits are included in your taxes in the UK. Unsurprisingly, when something is "free", it's more popular.
However, the free dentists only cover keeping your mouth medically happy. Teeth that look horrible, but are medically fine, get no work.
Hence why British teeth, in general, look like crap.
In the US, dental coverage isn't "free", except often when you're working your employer pays for it via insurance. Insurance coverage usually pays for the slight bit extra that takes a medical issue from being just repaired, to being repaired and looking good (eg amalgam vs. composite fillings). And thus those Americans that do get their dentistry covered (or pay for it out of their own pocket) end up with good looking results, not just medically fixed. But since some Americans have no jobs, and rare jobs don't pay for dental insurance... and many Americans with no jobs have little money, you see fewer Americans go to the dentist.
Anyways, what matters her is it's the "Big Book of British Smiles", not the "Big Book of British Dental Health".
What about water jet machines like the Waterpik ones? Have there been any good studies about whether those are helpful?
No a UCMJ matter is something like storing a camo net on top of your shop that's is a classified container in violation of AR 380-5; much less than setting up an unauthorized email server and routinely transmitting classified information through it, both marked and unmarked.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I'm in the civilian space. I just had to sign another one of the forms a couple weeks ago (you have to sign another one every time you're briefed on a new area). Believe me, those forms make it absolutely clear if you do what she did, expect to go to jail and also make it very clear that there is no statute of limitations on these sorts of things and if it comes to light you did it 40 years from now, you can still be prosecuted, spells out all the laws and everything and you must sign that you understand it all.
The most damning thing that you won't give a damn was the guidance given to all of us after the recommendation came out not to indict that if we did the same thing she did, we'd probably not get so lucky and we'd most probably go to prison. They couldn't officially say the reason was because we weren't as well connected, but it was heavily implied.
You don't know what you're talking about, I do. What she did was most certainly illegal. The forms make it clear the mishandling of classified material, maliciously or through carelessness are both illegal and can land you in prison for up to life. It can be grounds to have your clearance stripped for merely leaving a classified document out, unattended on your desk in a SCIF.
I'll just stop flossing based on the headline alone. What could possiblye go wrong?
Interesting citation. I find them difficult to use, and a short brush lifespan adds some expense.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Sauer
In some cases the rough spots that shred the floss will get worn off with repeated flossing. YMMV.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
The thing I got out of the second article was Brits have an extra tooth in their mouths. Yeah, looks like at least one extra.
Hey, wisdom teeth are wonderful - you're just supposed to have had a few teeth fall out to make room for them before they arrive.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
My teeth are so close together I can't even floss properly - the floss thread disintegrates and gets stuck between my teeth. I use mouthwash instead, which probably does the same time of job even better.
That's an orthodontic problem; a Dentist that doesn't discuss solutions with you about this has a piss poor standard of care.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I suspect the gigantic floss lobby is behind all of this!
Seriously though, update your studies already. Lazy science. Likely the dental associations never bothered because they were never required to.
Also horrible analogy and pretty insulting from a medical point of view. Kinda like saying we have no proof, but think it helps anyway, here I'll site a poor analogy that makes no sense yet give you the impression that you should just take my word for it because I think it is common sense...
... to tell me that leaving food to rot between my teeth in a bacteria-rich environment is a dumb idea.
My teeth are very crowded in places and even a thorough 2-minute brushing with an electric toothbrush and a rinse with mouthwash aren't enough to clean out the tight spaces. When my wisdom teeth were coming in, they hurt like hell, so I was avoiding regular flossing around them. Once I finally had them removed, I had a cavity in the spot where one of the wisdom teeth had pressed against the rear molar. I always assumed it decayed because the wisdom tooth had been wedged against it so tightly and I hadn't been running floss through there daily.
I'll gladly take the risk of wasting 1 minute of my day to floss.
Of course we should all make sure we're ingesting a bunch of fluoride in our drinking water. That will help.
So intentionally setting up an off site server doesn't show intent?
I had my first cavity around 45, and have only 2 and I'm close to 60. My mother had no cavities until her late 50's. You can have hard teeth (less cavities more gum problems) or soft teeth(more cavities less gum issues). Flossing is great for gum issues. They blew it on this one, having gum problems is very bad for health. Flossing is a no brainer.
Americans typically get their wisdom teeth pulled whenever insurance will cover getting it done. So it gets done early in case later there's no insurance. Or at least, that was the case for me (I'm Canadian, but our dental system is identical to the US one). I was 20, living at home and going to college. I would lose coverage under my dad's dental plan at 21, so the dentist was happy to request my wisdom teeth be pulled to prevent future costly issues. Frankly, it was a good idea because I didn't have dental coverage for 5 years after that.
In the UK dental coverage is permanent and included with your taxes. Thus I imagine nobody would have their wisdom teeth pulled in the UK until it was medically necessary.
And oh you didn't establish using a table saw leads to the presence of sawdust even though it is obvious
NB: Whoosh? A few years ago I'd have assumed this post was a joke, but the way the world is today its hard to be sure, so just in case...
If you'd never seen a table saw before, you'd have no reason to know that it produced sawdust. Fortunately, you just have to saw some wood to see the sawdust spurting out and bingo, you have evidence. Better still, that's reproducible evidence.
Obvious things are only obvious because the evidence is there for the asking.
Unfortunately, you can't watch someone floss their teeth and see the health benefits happening. You won't know for years - and the result could depend on a whole lot of other things like diet, brushing habits and general health. If you don't do some sort of research - which doesn't just have to be clinical trials, but does have to be rational, systematic and evidence-based - you have no way of knowing. You also have to consider that people who floss regularly might also have other good health and personal hygiene habits.
Of course, without research, you also have no idea whether flossing might even be harmful - its easy to come up with hypotheses that it could abrade the teeth, damage the gums, prevent "good" bacteria, damage fillings or make people feel better about eating sugary foods. Frankly, without research, those theories are just as good as the ones saying it is beneficial.
But then, we all know that doing something tedious and unpleasant must be good for us, because, well, its just obvious...
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
The Report is there is no scientific evidence that flossing has benefits.
That is not the same as flossing has no benefits. or flossing may have no benefits.
Dentists and flossers know they do.
The question is who should do a study and, How it should be done.
The benefits may be over sold, but are not zero.
Maybe that explains their funny accent.
Some studies say dog shit smells good.
There's never been a true, randomized large-scale trial of people being deprived of oxygen. Maybe AP national writer Jeff Donn should try going against conventional wisdom and tie a plastic bags firmly in place over his head.
Or maybe... just maybe, the obvious benefits of scraping out the shit that's stuck between your teeth doesn't need to be proven by a large scale trial any more than the benefits of not suffocating.
The forms will always make it sound worse than it is. Yes, they use scare tactics. Have you ever seen anyone prosecuted for mishandling? No, or you'd have mentioned it as well. Like I said, scare tactics, but no prosecutions. Not unlike HIPAA. Lots of noise, not too many actual fines or actions.
You are supporting my statements, not contradicting them.
Learn to love Alaska
Try the "Glide" floss. I have tight contacts too in places which will tear regular floss apart, but the Glide stuff works much better.
Having had a clearance for just about as long, I worked in the compusec office, and thus was involved in just about every security incident. Even had a case where I wasn't allowed to see the classified information, just assisted in running the checklist.
I never saw anybody go to prison for it, but most cases were obviously not intentional, even if boneheaded.
I don't read AC A human right
That's intent to set up an off-site server. That was perfectly legal (the law was changed about a year after Clinton left the State Department). We know that she had such intent, and it doesn't matter. She did not intend classified material to be on her servers, and that's the intent we're concerned about. (Intent doesn't mean intent to do wrong, or intent to break a law. It means intent to do something, and is important when that something is illegal. Petraeus deliberately gave classified material to someone without legal access. Clinton accidentally had classified material on her server. It's not necessary to show that Petraeus intended to do wrong or intended to break the law.)
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
...and every six months when I go the dentist for a checkup and cleaning, they tell me "whatever you're doing, keep it up!". So I keep not flossing...
Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
Wow, I knew you'd say stupid, but holy shit, cognitive dissonance much? You do realize that the forms are quoting the relevant laws, right? It's not shit they just made up for the forms. They were quoting the laws. Yes, they quote the worst case, but that doesn't change the fact that that is what can happen.
And the answer for mishandling is yes. It wasn't asked but yes. Almost all espionage convictions are because of mishandling (in those cases they're done maliciously and on purpose). At my office not a month ago a high level guy was fired and had a permanent ban put in place barring him from literally ever being allowed to handle classified information ever again because he was careless one time too many (and remember, this is with no damage having occurred). Like seriously, this isn't what the form says, it's what the law says, and they can choose to prosecute as harshly as they want. For carelessness will you spend the rest of your life in prison? Probably not. Will you lose your job and permission to ever work in the sector again? Most certainly. But if they decide to prosecute on excessive carelessness, can they? Oh yes, they can. And the problem is, something like an email server, that's not carelessness, that's on purpose. I'm wishing I had the training in front of me right now because they've got 3 case studies of individuals who are serving 25 year sentences because they decided to take their work home. The case studies on people who sold the info are people who are in prison for life.
You're speaking based on your opinion and belief, I'm speaking as a person who actually deals with this. Get off your high horse and realize this isn't religion, it's law, and your belief doesn't make it so. Start quoting laws that say I'm wrong and I'll start quoting laws that say I'm right and we'll do this in a factual way, not based off of belief.
No, you're supposed to eat food that contains a lot of dirt and sand which will grind away at the other teeth, reducing them so there will be space for the wisdom teeth.
Actually, people used to get wisdom teeth routinely extracted. In more recent times, because of the risk of complications, wisdom teeth are extracted only if they will or are causing problems for other teeth through impaction, or in the event of severe decay. If they aren't causing a problem, we tend to leave them alone.
You do realize that the forms are quoting the relevant laws, right?
The law, as written, isn't the law. The law, as applied, is the law. That's how Common Law works, and that's the system we live under. That so many people don't understand that doesn't make me wrong. The FBI said there is no cause to prosecute. Yet all the Hillary haters here think they know the law better than lawyers working for the FBI. And I'm a troll for pointing out that hubris in the Hillary haters.
Learn to love Alaska
They're great where you can get them to fit. If you can't fit them between the teeth they can't help you. Floss fits everywhere.
Look for teflon floss, brand name "Glide" or other.
I have been a dental hygienist for 25 years, and can tell you 99% of people that DO NOT floss have gingivitis and or Gum disease. Just google periodontal disease etiology and related systemic effects, then you can decide if flossing is necessary. BWT if your gums bleed when you brush or floss you indeed have gingivitis. Healthy gums don't bleed.
He was clearly incompetent. Sounds like apple vs orange.
With the cuts to phys ed that should stop.
oh, i thought you said MENTAL floss. Never mind.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
How would that work? Grinding down makes teeth shorter, not narrower, so it doesn't make any room for additional teeth in your jaw.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
So they say there are not enough scientific studies to prove the drinking water is good for you. So they are going to turn off everyone's water pipes. 8-P
These guys are fishing for Research Grant Money ! ;-)
Common sense should still apply. Cleaning = good
My dentist first recommended flossing, some years ago she recommended using dental sticks and a few years back we indeed needed to use interdental brushes. You can get them in different sizes. If the space is really to small, use small dental sticks.
For a large gab at the back, I use still some dental floss to get food out.
The stuff is called "Dental Floss". By definition it has medical benefits.
It may only benefit the bank accounts of the makers of dental floss, but I assure you it has some sort of Dental Benefits.
It makes them narrower (mesial-distal) because the grit gets between the teeth and causes the most wear.where the pressure is greatest.
The same scandals came out under Reagan, Bush, and other Republicans, and nobody from the right cared. But Hillary does it, and everyone loses their mind.
This logic is just baffling to me. So it's ok to commit a crime if someone else did?
They lost their clearance, sometimes their jobs, but never ended up in jail.
If it was up to me, I don't think she should be put in jail. But certainly fined and security clearances revoked, which would obviously preclude her from being president. Which is terrifying, given Donald Trump would be the alternative. (Yes, that's correct, I don't support Donald Trump.)
Remember Patraeus (registered Republican)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
In January 2015, the New York Times reported that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department had recommended bringing felony charges against Petraeus for providing classified information to Broadwell. Petraeus denied the allegations and was reported to have had no interest in a plea deal.[196] However, on Tuesday, March 3, 2015, the U.S. Justice Department announced that Petraeus agreed to plead guilty in federal court in Charlotte, North Carolina to a charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified information.[197] On April 23, 2015, a federal judge sentenced Petraeus to two yearsâ(TM) probation plus a fine of $100,000. The fine was more than double the amount the Justice Department had requested.[198]
Mishandling of classified information isn't a partisan issue.
Not unlike HIPAA. Lots of noise, not too many actual fines or actions.
Uh, what? You clearly don't work in healthcare or you'd know about alll the breaches and reporting rules and all of the fines levied by HHS.
You'd think you could at least do a cursory Google search before spouting off about subjects you're completely uneducated on.
You claim 15 in 20 years is a large number (your only link with any list of breaches lists 15)? I'm well aware of the actual numbers. You disagree with an opinion, and you are the one that doesn't understand the facts.
Learn to love Alaska
This logic is just baffling to me.
Obviously many thing baffle you.
So it's ok to commit a crime if someone else did?
I can't tell if you are really that dumb, or just a liar. I never said anything Hillary did was "OK". Just that the FBI effectively cleared her. And the same people going after her are the ones that defended similar things done previously. Pointing out someone else's hypocrisy isn't the same as justifying the most recent.
Learn to love Alaska
I can't tell if you are really that dumb, or just a liar.
How about we act like adults?
I never said anything Hillary did was "OK".
You're clearly attempting to minimize it.
Just that the FBI effectively cleared her.
That's exactly the problem, James Comey:
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.
The only reason she wasn't charged is because no one is going to sacrifice their careers going after her.
And the same people going after her are the ones that defended similar things done previously.
This is just a strawman argument. I didn't defend anyone who did similar things. I think Patraeus got exactly what he deserved. Criminal charges, thousands in fines, disgraced and his career ruined. But because I'm not a hypocrite , I think Hilary deserves the same.
Pointing out someone else's hypocrisy isn't the same as justifying the most recent.
Oh great! Just so we're clear then, you agree what Hilary did was wrong, right?
YOU, a fellow citizen, should be OUTRAGED - at the AP and other media outlets! What a twisted slant the AP has on this info!
The fact that there MAY have been inadequate research on floss (to meet government regulations for a listing) is absolutely NO basis to presume it 'may' not be beneficial! It 'may' ALSO actually be beneficial!
Is there a PAC of dentists that bought this misleading headline, in hopes of drumming up more clients?
WTF?! Here's a real headline for you: "News Reporting Agencies May Actually Be Detrimental To The Welfare Of Citizens and Need More Regulation".
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
Really? where?