Basically:
Plaque causes gingivitis. Gingivitis is inflammation caused by the irritation of the tissue surrounding the teeth by the toxins released as waste products of the bacteria within the plaque. Since (supposedly) the presence of inflammation, only, results in no permanent damage to the tissues, why floss? I can only imagine that this is probably the stupid, short-sighted logic gleaned from the latest research conducted by the "evidence based" lemmings that have contributed to the deterioration of the dental profession the past 30 years or so.
The "researchers" pointed to the fact that many past studies have been extremely short-term, and therefore, totally unreliable. Stupid, stupid people. Try these facts on for size: Plaque begins to turn into calculus (calcium deposits) after approximately 24 hours. (The calcium precipitates out of saliva, settling within the "skeletons" [functioning as a matrix] of the dead bacteria in the plaque.) The combination of the calculus and the plaque that is now present (and obviously increasing, if not removed constantly) that invades the tissue (gingiva) surrounding the teeth irritates the heck out of the bone beneath the tissue, also. The bone begins to resorb and remodel to get away from the irritation. As the calculus builds up over time beneath the gingiva surrounding the teeth, bone is most often permanently lost. This is what periodontal disease is. If the short studies concerning plaque referred to as unreliable by the "researchers" were longer, they would be tainted by the influence of the presence of a considerable amount of calculus, and no longer be a result of the effects of mainly the plaque.
So, it ain't the plaque in its initial form that is the cause of periodontal disease, it's what it becomes that does the trick. If it is removed, or even just disrupted, on a daily basis, calculus has trouble forming in any appreciable amount. Therefore, if one flosses every day, it prevents periodontal disease.
As far as the decay situation, flossing removes the bacteria that remains between the teeth that brushing does not, and
cannot, remove. Therefore, the acidic toxins produced by the bacteria in the plaque that break down the enamel situated in areas between teeth are now removed by the floss. The result is no decay initiated in the areas between the teeth.
Just imagine how much additional income that would be generated for dentists if just a small fraction of the populace stopped flossing---------and think of what the public would then be paying monetarily and in lost teeth.
I hope I explained these factual concepts well enough to convince the members of DBR (other than Wheat, of course) to floss.
(UNCheat people aren't educated enough to understand what I explained, anyway--------and I certainly would not want to say anything that would be of benefit to them
)
By the way, it's almost 3 a.m., and I am not going to take the time to edit my run-on sentences or additional bad grammar. Sorry. I have got to get some sleep.
ricks