IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags cavities , childrens , linked , smoke

Reply
Old 12th March 2003, 11:21 AM   #1
zakur
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 3,264
Secondhand smoke linked to children's cavities

Quote:
Research: Secondhand smoke may give kids cavities

CHICAGO, Illinois (Reuters) -- Add time in the dentist's chair to the childhood risks from inhaling secondhand cigarette smoke, researchers said on Tuesday.

Children subjected to environmental cigarette smoke developed higher blood levels of cotinine, a byproduct of nicotine, and those children tended to have more cavities in their deciduous, or primary, teeth.

"Exposure to tobacco smoke nearly doubles a child's risk of having cavities," said study author and pediatrician Andrew Aligne, who led a team of researchers from the University of Rochester, New York, and the Center for Child Health Research.
zakur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2003, 01:19 PM   #2
Plutarck
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
...

...bahahahahah!

Quote:
Still, tooth decay remains the most common chronic childhood disease and Americans spend $4.5 billion yearly on treatment, the report said.
It is nice to know that we in America have so few 'real' problems that tooth decay is the most common "chronic childhood disease".

But I don't think that was the point...


Edited to add:

I would, however, like to hear from those more knowledgable in the subject itself, and who can actually find a more usefully detailed report of the "study" (call me anal, but I don't like using the word "study" to refer to a survey), to share with us their opinions of the issue itself.
  Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2003, 02:30 PM   #3
QuarkChild
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 354
Quote:
call me anal, but I don't like using the word "study" to refer to a survey
Would you like to come join the other anal retents in my "Controlled Studies, lack thereof" thread?

We're discussing the same issue.
__________________
Veni, vidi, integrati per partum. I came, I saw, I integrated by parts.
QuarkChild is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2003, 03:07 PM   #4
Plutarck
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally posted by QuarkChild

Would you like to come join the other anal retents in my "Controlled Studies, lack thereof" thread?

We're discussing the same issue.
I definately will, and I hadn't noticed it. I'll make an attempt at a post as soon as I get the chance; gotta finish my argumentative essay. 4 hours and counting to get it done to meet my desired timeline...
  Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2003, 03:46 PM   #5
Marvel Frozen
Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 237
Quote:
call me anal, but I don't like using the word "study" to refer to a survey
After reading this link: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml...toryID=2363894, I don't think this was just a survey. This is what that link has to say about how the study was done:
Quote:
In the current study, published in the March 12th issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, Aligne and his colleagues from the University of Rochester in New York reviewed national data collected between 1988 and 1994 on 3,531 children.

The authors noted whether the children showed signs of tooth decay, and if they had elevated levels of cotinine, a byproduct of nicotine, in their blood.

More than half of the children had levels of cotinine in their bodies that suggested they had been exposed to secondhand smoke. Children with the highest cotinine levels also had twice the risk of cavities in their baby teeth.

This relationship persisted even when the researchers accounted for the influence of family income, the region where the children lived and how often they visited the dentist.
Marvel Frozen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2003, 06:56 PM   #6
QuarkChild
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 354
Good point.
The researchers seem to have been more careful in this case than in a lot of studies that get cited in news articles.
__________________
Veni, vidi, integrati per partum. I came, I saw, I integrated by parts.
QuarkChild is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2003, 09:20 AM   #7
Salvius
New Blood
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Is it just me, or does this:
Quote:
The authors noted whether the children showed signs of tooth decay, and if they had elevated levels of cotinine, a byproduct of nicotine, in their blood.

More than half of the children had levels of cotinine in their bodies that suggested they had been exposed to secondhand smoke. Children with the highest cotinine levels also had twice the risk of cavities in their baby teeth.
...indicate that technically, they haven't linked cavities to secondhand smoke exposure? They've linked cavities to elevated levels of cotinine, and seem to be assuming that elevated cotinine levels are caused by secondhand smoke.

This may well be a reasonable assumption, but then I'd expect it to be more strongly worded than saying the cotinine levels "suggested" they'd been exposed to smoke.
__________________
?Give a man a fire and he?s warm for a day, but set fire to him and he?s warm for the rest of his life.?
-- (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)
Salvius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2003, 09:26 AM   #8
garys_2k
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally posted by Salvius
Is it just me, or does this:

...indicate that technically, they haven't linked cavities to secondhand smoke exposure? They've linked cavities to elevated levels of cotinine, and seem to be assuming that elevated cotinine levels are caused by secondhand smoke.

This may well be a reasonable assumption, but then I'd expect it to be more strongly worded than saying the cotinine levels "suggested" they'd been exposed to smoke.
Sure, kids with more contine have more dental problems, and it's likely that second hand smoke (environmental tobacco smoke, ETS) causes elevated contine levels.

But does ETS cause these dental problems? Maybe, maybe not. There could be cofactors that happen to coincide with families that smoke that also lead to dental problems. What kind of diet do those kids have, for instance (do smokers buy more sweet junk)?
__________________
- Gary
garys_2k is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2003, 03:30 AM   #9
edthedoc
Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 163
Association is NOT the same as causation.

A more likely reason is that children who are exposed to cigarette smoke are more likely to be from less affluent households and therefore are more likely to have poor dental hygiene.

In the UK there is clear link between low income families and smoking and low income families and dental caries etc.

This is just a theory but has a certain logic to it.
edthedoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2003, 05:55 AM   #10
Weasel
New Blood
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2
Have a look at this.

The piece in question is near the bottom. The site is in general well worth a browse.

Weasel
Weasel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:22 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.