Grant-in-Aid for Co-operative Research (A)
|Allocation Type||Single-year Grants|
Functional basic dentistry
|Research Institution||TOHOKU UNIVERSITY|
YAMADA Tadashi Tohoku Univ Sch Dent, Professor, 歯学部, 教授 (50005021)
KANEHIRA Takashi Hokkaido Univ Sch Dent, Lecturer, 歯学部, 講師 (90194935)
IIJIMA Yoichi Nagasaki Univ Sch Dent, Associate Prof, 歯学部, 助教授 (70094860)
MATSUKUBO Takashi Tokyo Dental College, Associate Prof, 歯学部, 助教授 (90112804)
NISHIZAWA Toshiki Jap NIDR,Dpt Oral Sci, Senior Scientits, 口腔科学部, 主任研究官 (00072942)
HOSHINO Etsuro Niigata Univ Sch Dent, Professor, 歯学部, 教授 (90124619)
請井 繁樹 北海道大学, 歯学部, 助手 (50184990)
|Project Period (FY)
1992 – 1994
Completed(Fiscal Year 1994)
|Budget Amount *help
¥12,000,000 (Direct Cost : ¥12,000,000)
Fiscal Year 1994 : ¥3,000,000 (Direct Cost : ¥3,000,000)
Fiscal Year 1993 : ¥3,000,000 (Direct Cost : ¥3,000,000)
Fiscal Year 1992 : ¥6,000,000 (Direct Cost : ¥6,000,000)
|Keywords||Foods / Dental-caries / Indwelling-electrde / Sugar-substitutes / pH-in-Plaque / Intraoral-cariogenicity-test / Cariogenicity / Food-Materials / 食品の齲蝕誘発性の検定 / 代用糖 / 甘味料 / 口腔内脱灰再石灰化法 / 齲蝕予防 / 酸産生 / 内蔵電極法 / 代用糖(甘味料) / 歯垢微生物|
We have investigated for 3 years how we should evaluate cariogenicity of foods and materials for good processing. We reached the conclusions as follows :
1.It is important and essential to distinguish the evaluation of cariogenicity of foods from the evaluation of the materials for food processing.
2.It is reasonable to accept the definition at the San Antonio Consensus Conference in 1986 about the negative and the positive controls. These are sucrose as the positive and sorbitol as the negative control.
3.If a food does not drop plaque pH no less than 5.7by indwelling electrode method, this food could be concluded as noncariogenic. Non-acidogenic food should be noncariogenic.
4.On the other hand all the foods drop the pH less than 5.7 should not be considered cariogenic. This kind of misleading should be avoided.
5.If a food drops plaque pH less than 5.0, this food does not seem worth evaluating its cariogenicity by other methods. This food may have little chance to be evaluated noncariogenic, or even low cariogenic.
6.If a food drops plaque pH between 5.7 an 5.0 or 5.2, this food seems to be worth testing for its low cariogenicity by animal experiments and intraoral cariogenicity tests.
7.A test to find out the microorganisms in dental plaque to be able to ferment a sugar substitute gives us a useful information to find out if microorganisms in dental plaque have a possibility to adapt to this sugar substitute.
8.There are many difficulties to use animal experiments for evaluating cariogenicity of a food for human.