Serum IgG titers to selected periodontal species, combined with demographic and behavioral characteristics, resulted in a moderately accurate classification of periodontal status in epidemiologic studies. The external validity of these findings must be examined further.

Demographic, behavioural, and oral- and general health-related characteristics were strong determinants of systemic antibody responses to periodontal bacteria in a nationally representative sample of US adults.

Paramedian insertion of orthodontic mini-implants is increasingly used to anchor molar distalizers. The aim of this review was to systematically examine the available measurements of vertical palatal bone height (VBH). PUBMED, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched using specific search terms. Hand searches of bibliographies of articles were also performed to identify studies measuring VBH or bone thickness in the human palate. Sixteen studies were included, arising from 19 published articles. Repeat presentations were excluded. Ten of the 11 computed tomogram (CT)-based studies presented data from 956 orthodontic patients on average VBH and its variation at a range of palatal sites. Individual data were not available, and pooling of data was not feasible because of heterogeneity of subjects, different measurement sites, different CT methods and their associated software. The compilation of data did indicate that the region 3-4mm behind the incisive foramen and 3-9mm lateral to the midpalatal suture should normally provide sufficient VBH to anchor molar distalizers. The risks of unwanted effects during distalization should be small, but the limitations listed above and the small numbers of studies available impair the precision of the estimates and do not allow the results to be generalized. Paramedian anchorage in the anterior palate can be recommended for molar distalization but, given the great inter-individual variability of the palatal bone height, it must be preceded by reliable CT-based imaging in patients identified by routine investigations as being at risk.

Evidence is accumulating that Listerine® is effective in improving oral health, but the absence of systematic toxicological studies means that an accurate safety assessment cannot be made.

The mouthwash, Listerine®, was compounded in 1879 from four essential oils. Later, the oils were replaced by one ingredient per oil with approximately 25% ethanol as a vehicle to keep them in solution. From then on, Listerine® was no longer a medicinal plant product. In 2003, a review by the FDA Subcommittee on Oral Health Care Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use concluded that the product is effective and safe, and a review of studies published in the meantime showed that Listerine® fulfils the consensus criteria for an effective antigingivitis/antiplaque product. However, concerns have been raised about the long-term safety of some of the ingredients, particularly the ethanol content, and in the light of these concerns, the evidence has been re-examined for both the efficacy and safety of Listerine®. In summary, the studies support the claim that Listerine® shows benefit for oral health, but the concerns over its safety remain to be clarified. Until these have been addressed, high risk populations (children, alcohol addicts, patients with genetic deficiencies in ethanol metabolism) should use alcohol-free mouthwashes for the maintenance of oral health.

The rhizome of Sanguinaria canadensis (SC, bloodroot) contains an active principle with antimicrobial, antiinflammatory, antioxidative and immunomodulatory effects. For this reason SC extract has been added to toothpastes and mouthwashes in various concentrations. When tested separately, neither the toothpastes nor the mouthwashes with SC extract had any demonstrable clinical effectiveness against dental plaque and gingivitis. Although using them together twice a day seemed more effective than using placebo, more recent studies have shown conflicting results. Preclinical safety studies up to 2000, which did not include studies longer than 6 months, were thought not to indicate any appreciable potential for harm - to the oral mucosa in particular. In 2003, the FDA Subcommittee on Oral Health Care Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use concluded from a review that using SC-containing products is safe. However, for reasons unknown, the review failed to consider publications between 1999 and 2001 that suggested a possible link between the use of SC-containing products and the pre-neoplastic lesion, leukoplakia. As it happened, bloodroot had already been removed (in 2001) from the formula of one of the most widely used products in question and the brand has since then disappeared altogether from the worldwide market.

Preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies demonstrate potent effects of pomegranate preparations in cancer cell lines and animal models with chemically induced cancers. We have carried out one systematic review of the effectiveness of pomegranate products in the treatment of cancer and another on their safety. The PubMed search provided 162 references for pomegranate and cancer and 122 references for pomegranate and safety/toxicity. We identified 4 clinical studies investigating 3 pomegranate products, of which one was inappropriate because of the low polyphenol content. The evidence of clinical effectiveness was poor because the quality of the studies was poor. Although there is no concern over safety with the doses used in the clinical studies, pomegranate preparations may be harmful by inducing synthetic drug metabolism through activation of liver enzymes. We have analysed various pomegranate products for their content of anthocyanins, punicalagin, and ellagic acid in order to compare them with the benchmark doses from published data. If the amount of coactive constituents is not declared, patients risk not benefiting from the putative pomegranate effects. Moreover, pomegranate end products are affected by many determinants. Their declaration should be incorporated into the regulatory guidance and controlled before pomegranate products enter the market.

Listerine® is one of the most popular mouthwashes worldwide and claims to combat harmful bacteria. In the past century, its recipe was changed from an essential oil mouthwash to a five-component mixture (thymol, menthol, eucalyptol, and methyl salicylate dissolved in 27% ethanol). The aim of this study was to get preliminary information about the antimicrobial activities of individual Listerine® components and their mixtures. We tested the bacterial strains Streptococcus mutans, Enterococcus faecalis, and Eikenella corrodens and the yeast Candida albicans. The established minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) assay and the minimum bactericidal/fungicidal concentration (MBC/MFC) assay were applied. None of the combinations of two phenols at the concentrations contained within Listerine® were associated with either an additive or synergistic effect. Thymol had lower MIC and MBC/MFC values than the other Listerine® components and Listerine® against E. corrodens and C. albicans. The mixtures consisting of eucalyptol, methyl salicylate, and thymol were the most effective against S. mutans and E. faecalis and more effective than Listerine®. Our results demonstrate that the phenols and their concentrations as contained within Listerine® could be further optimized in terms of selecting those which increase their general effectiveness, at concentrations that do not induce harm.