I've gone completely without sugar for many years of my life, and often preach the benefits of this to others. Yesterday a fellow anti-sugar enthusiast claimed:



I'm pretty sure this is complete ********. First off, how much honey do bears really eat anyway? I thought that was mostly in cartoons. Doesn't the energy in honey come from materials collected from flowers? How many acres of flowers does one need to produce enough honey to feed such a large animal? Its hard to imagine, ecologically, that wild honey would ever contribute much to a wild bears energy needs. And that doesn't even address the real question - why would all non-bear wild animals be completely immune to the effects of opportunistic bacterial growth? I mean, of course all animals have abundant bacteria in their mouths, and of course they can also suffer from malnutrition which effects the strength of their tooth surfaces, and of course some of those bacteria are going to produce teeth corroding substances just like it happens in our mouths...so why should they be immune to cavities?

So I fired up google and (not very objectively) set out to prove this claim wrong. I found quite a few websites where this claim was repeated, and many people who pointed out how flat out stupid the assertion was, but nobody provided any evidence on either side.

Yes it seems like there must be tons of evidence out there - in the hands of anyone who collects animal skulls or corpses, for any reason.

What say you? Does anyone have any facts or perspectives to share on this topic?

http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/index.jsp?cfile=htm/bc/20415.htm

Thanks slowhand! Sadly, anyone who just really wants to believe that wild animals just don't get cavities will disregard this evidence on the basis that cats and dogs are domesticated and forced to eat unnatural foods.

Of course, I do believe that cavities would be less common in wild animals than many humans, for exactly the bolded reason given:

As a bee keeper I can assure you that a wild hive can have up to a ton honey in it. Bears will completely devour an entire hive of honey in one sitting, they also eat berries among insects and small mammals. As to them getting cavities, it is feasible although I've never actually heard of it but its an interesting thought. I work for environmental evolutionary biology department at the UofA so I will ask around about this.

I've had some cats that got cavities, or at least rotted teeth that had to be pulled. I don't feed them sugar. Why would they get bad teeth?

That is a steaming load! Dogs and cats both can and do get cavities. LA county zoo has a Vet who is a dental expert for animals. many animals do not have constant growth or tooth replacement going on in nature.

Sugar is not the culprit and likewise the EXPERTS I know say that it is a matter of brushing habits and flossing! I don't floss every day but I do it at least once a week! I never had a cavity so far! Bacteria is the real enemy!

Now there was an article in the paper a few years back about an animal dentist at the LA zoo having to do a tooth extraction on a bear. I remember because of a picture where the bear was knocked out and strapped into a special tilt table and had a special fixture holding its mouth open and the dentist in its maw working. Even semi exotics like Raccoons and Skunks can have bad teeth too!

Likewise bears are more scavenger than predator. they love road score and likewise consume gravel which damages the tooth surface making a spot where the bacteria can attack the tooth. Dogs also are not picky scavengers.

Also a predominance for acidic foods can also contribute.

And Ammonia eats tooth enamel. There are people who believe drinking pee is good for you and also some who swish with it for white teeth. To those folks, you are sick, you know nothing and you think you do! There is a reason why your body threw it out in the first place. And to those who swish you likewise are sick! It already has been scientifically proven that Ammonia present in urine is what whitens teeth but at the expense of the enamel. In turn be cautious about tooth whiteners that use ammonia in any way shape or form! If you love your teeth stay away from any ammonia! (God, some people really are sick! Thinking consuming our own waste is good for you! Gag me and a half! )

So only bears get cavities in the animal kingdom besides us?

NOT!

Cats have a common dental problem called feline odontoclastic resorption
which is colloquially referred to as cat cavities but which is actually a
very different process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feline_odontoclastic_resorptive_lesion

Here is a site with info on dental issues for zoo animals...
http://www.zoodent.com/clinical/primates/caries.html

So of course ay animal can get cavities...

It is certainly not uncommon in primates
http://www.zoodent.com/clinical/primates/caries.html

Thats a lot of honey.

In my view, I think they get cavities because cavities are a natural consequence of having certain kinds of bacteria to thriving in one's mouth. Sugar and other foods make the environment more favorable to those bacteria, but sugar isn't strictly necessary.

But what I really want is solid evidence that exposes how completely stupid this suggestion is "wild animals (except bears) don't get cavities, because cavities are strictly result of our sugary diets".

When you tell these people about the cavities in cats, dogs, or any animal that has access to human food or human-processed food, they just change their argument from 'sugar' to 'processed food', and say "oh, of course cats get cavities - they are eat human made food. But wild animals (except honey-eating bears), with proper diets, don't get cavities'. I'm sure its false, but i want evidence.

You don't really 'need' evidence to prove them wrong. Tell them that they need to provide evidence for their statements. (I thought that is what all you scientists do LOL)

Yes, you are right, its the bacteria's secretions that cause cavities, but sugar isn't innocent. Sugar feeds the bacteria. Of course you can eat a lot of sugar if you can keep those bacteria from growing, but for people with imperfect dental hygiene practices, sugar increases their risk.

You are right, that is what rational people do when talking to other rational people, or to people who are interested in learning to be rational. But some people seem to be beyond reach - incapable of realizing their beliefs are unsubstantiated until contrary evidence is provided... should we just always let them lie to themselves? If enough of them keep repeating a falsehood to each other, more and more people start to believe it.

On the other hand - while it makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever that wild animals would be immune to cavities, the ultra-skeptic part of me realizes that I can't really be certain, until I get evidence.

Thanks again, Slowhand! Unfortunately for my openly biased agenda, it actually strengthens their case.



They can just say that primates are really similar to humans, and besides these ones were in captivity eating human food, so of course they got cavities. And they even say the reason is refined carbs...which wild animals (bears excepted) generally can't access.

I mean... I can accept the idea that humans, bears, and primates-with-access-to-sugar get the most cavities in the animal kingdom... its just the notion that wild animals 'simply don't get cavities' that just seems self evidently false.

What criterion would satisfy?

massage,

What would constitute being adequate evidence to the contrary, on your view? IOW, what would it take for "wild animals just don't get cavities" to be true? If there is any naturally occurring substance which can produce cavities, either directly or indirectly, that is eaten by wild animals, then the claim is implausible.

Sugarcane grows in the wild.

One other thing to consider... long before the existence of modern technology which is necessary to produce the alleged "culprit" - man-made/altered substances(refined sugars and what-not)- we have solid evidence of humans with cavities. How then, do those who argue that it is by our own devices that cavities exist, reconcile that?

Plenty of natural sugars out there. The fact that wild animals never go to the dentist is the most compelling factor in why we do not see wild animal cavities.

Wild life preserves may have some data. Food for thought.

You could also come from the perspective that different sources of sugars at the end of the day are not as different as most people think.


Here is an article by Dr Novella on the topic of HFCS and how most sugars natural or otherwise tend to break down into the same thing. The real point for me is that natural is not better in any meaningful way.

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/high-fructose-corn-syrup-the-latest-nutritional-boogeyman/

A set of skulls of wild animals that show them getting cavities (that are clearly not the result of mechanical damage) in non-negligible percentages.

Exactly! I once knew - I'm not exaggerating here - over a hundred functional adult human beings, some working professionals whom you'd think would have decent thinking skills, who honestly believed that wild animals don't suffer from hardly any diseases at all, ever, based of 'evidence' such as 'When have you ever seen a wild animal suffering from any disease?'.

I mean... the very definition of 'wild' requires a minimal amount of interaction with humans.

'Natural' can't be better in any meaningful way when the very concept of 'natural' isn't well defined..and many people who share my dietary dogmas are sadly unaware of this. To argue that "something is healthier because it is 'natural' " is just a collection of meaningless words.

I wouldn't argue that 'natural' is 'better', but that eating three apples has a different effect on the body than eating an equal quantity of sugar in the form of twinkies.

My impression is that Novella is saying HFCS are not that different from any other kind of refined sugar, so singling it out as a 'bad guy' is not sensible.

Edit: I thoughtlessly used the word 'sugar' when I meant 'refined sugar'. Aside from a brief period, I've always eaten fruit.

Dogs and cats are not used to eating soft food in the wild. Devouring carcasses has lots of hard to chew material.

Soft food causes bad teeth in our domestic animals.

I only give a small amount to my dog once a week or so.

Also they need chewy stuff like dental chews. This cleans their teeth and massages the gums.