Talk:Wisdom tooth

There's an apparently mis-pasted line in the treatment controversy section, beginning "sensation on the anterior 2/3 of the tongue...".

Mine are bursting through as we speak. It's a b!tch. I'm not going to get it removed, but I hope its done and over with soon.

-G

• "Wisdom teeth are sometimes described as an example of a "vestigial" trait that may be disappearing from our species via evolution."

For something to disappear via evolution, it can't just be useless. It has to actually prevent an animal from sucessfully mating as often as if the trait were lacking. Wisdom teeth, like fifth toes and male nipples may be useless, but don't prevent people from mating. I'm removing the bit about disappearing. --Jbaber

Evolution can explain Wisdom teeth being less common because. 1. human mouth is now smaller, 2. Wisdom tooth coming in causes immense pain... perhaps removal, then perhaps infection in the past when medical care was poor. Those with Wisdom teeth were then less likely to reproduce becaues of these problems and therefore now the frequency for people with less teeth is more common... --Martin 198.133.139.5 18:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Removed reference to Answers In Genesis. This is irrelevant. "Wisdom teeth are an example of a vestigial structure, [1] although Answers in Genesis, a Christian organization. denies they are evidence of evolution. [2]" Unbelievable what they will throw into an article on wisdom teeth. Are Al Qaeda's opinions on wisdom teeth included too?????

I can't agree that wisdom teeth haven't prevented people from mating. A trait only needs to make a very small change in percentage reproduction to be selected out. The relevent period isn't now, it's the period between the introduction of modern diet and modern dentistry. Jbaber is arguing that hardly anybody was ever incapacitated or killed by dodgy wisdom teeth in this period, and I find it exceedingly irritating when people presume that they can guess that a trait has no effect on reproduction. And like it or not, true or otherwise, wisdom teeth ARE often described as disappearing through evolution so the statement is quite valid. New scientist has some interesting background: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/evolution/dn7035

Gravity is often described as a "force", but physicists will tell us that gravity is merely a term to describe the effects of the curvature of spacetime caused by mass. Just because something is "often described as" being a certain thing or a certain way does not necessarily validate the description.

I can't agree that dodgy wisom teeth would have any significant impact on a breeding population. The question is not whether wisdom tooth complications can lead to death, but whether they tend to lead to death before the individual is able to progenate and pass on the genes for growing wisdom teeth. None of mine have been removed, though I've been advised to have them taken out, as they are all impacted, but I resist due to my lack of any symptoms. I am 33 and have two offspring who are already practically of an age capable of progenation themselves.

The teeth aren't going to be "selected out" by evolution unless they present a significant pressure in favor of the mortality and subsequent lack of progenation of individuals within the population who carry the gene that instructs wisdom teeth to grow.

Those individuals who, by genetic anomaly, do not grow wisdom teeth, would be "selected" by virtue of having a higher chance of procreating and passing on their particular genetic anomaly. That kind of selection isn't going to happen unless the problems that wisdom teeth can potentially lead to prove to be mortal to people before they can breed and pass on the genes for growing wisdom teeth.

Since humans are capable of progenating in their early teens, and most wisdom teeth complications come in the 20s (and in some cases, not until well into the 30s, if at all), I am unable to buy the idea that they are just "dissapearing", or that there is any evidence that they are being selected out.

What would appear to be a change selected by evolutionary pressure is our shorter jaws (well, shorter than our nut-chomping, grain-grinding Australopithecine ancestors'), which no longer accommodate the full set of teeth our DNA insists we grow. -Tenmiles 06:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

• Most of the information on the original page seems to have been copied from http://www.agd.org/consumer/topics/wisdom/main.html, but some parts have been added/changed around.

Does anyone know about how common it is to have dentists remove wisdom teeth without the procedure being necessary?

Extremely uncommon nowadays- I am a dentist working in the UK. A body called NICE makes guidelines on the matter- nowadays I dont touch a wisdom tooth unless it has given at least 2 episodes of pericoronitis, or there is some other pathology present such as a cyst or resopbtion of another tooth caused by the wisdom tooth Ashley Payne 08:16, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This may not be so true in the United States where dentistry is an entirely private industry. Many people I've known have had their wisdom teeth out based on the prognosis that they would impact if they had the chance to continue growing. --Jbaber

I doubt preventative removal is all that common in the USA. I was going to have my wisdom teeth removed until I found out how much it would cost. That is an awful lot of money to remove something that has never given me any problems. Besides, I wouldn't call dentistry in America entirely private considering the tremendous number of state laws telling insurance companies what to cover. - Paul

I beleeeive if you make it to the (U.S.)military and still have them, they'll take them out. Maybe only if you're going to be stationed overseas-- When my wisdom teeth came in, and caused me no problems, my mother agreed that hers hadn't given her any trouble either, but the army insisted on taking them out. Cantras 19:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

As I understand it, wisdom teeth removal is more rare in the UK than the USA. In the USA, it is often preventive, whereas in the UK it is to fix a problem. 68.49.142.108

Just a small note that I made a new "impactions" section and moved three paragraphs from the leading text there, and reorganized impaction types by how common they are, and explained that sorting in text. I think that change now appears as much larger than it was in reality in the history due to the moving, so I hope I didn't scare anyone. ;-) -- Jugalator 21:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

The problem with the wisdom teeth is that there is no room for them because we don't lose our teeth anymore. Instead of the extreme measure of removing them, why don't we remove one of the existing molars to let the wisdom tooth grow in? I'm obviously missing something. -- Myria 08:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

--I guess because it is unlikly that the wisdom tooth will bridge the gap, it may or may not move in to a degree, but you will typically have an annoying gap in between your teeth which food will get lodged in.

I also do not see why it would be less extreme to extract a perfectly healthy tooth that is functioning normally and has time to develop fully as opposed to extract a tooth in its developing stages. - Dozenist talk 03:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think that they mean removing a different molar earlier on, when it starts to grow in, so that there will be room for the wisdom tooth. An interesting idea, but then you'd have to go for a few years with a giant space back there, and, as said before, they might not take up enough space to fill the gap. --Linktoreality 03:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Not to mention the fact, as noted in the tooth development article, third molars (aka wisdom teeth) are absent in 20 - 23% of the population. That would be a bit of a disappointment if you believed another tooth would replace the tooth extracted, but as it turns out you are in that 20 - 23%. Anyways, I think taking the third molar out really is the best solution even if you could somehow be assured that the third molar would come in. Third molars, especially mandibular (lower) ones are the most likely to have an odd shape and deep grooves, so they would be more prone to decay. Endodontic (root canal) treatment would likely be more difficult since root shapes of third molars are usually very curved. And even if everything previously mentioned was discounted, there is still a problem that the third molar would not erupt into the mouth in a nice position. It would be a bit posterior... further back in the mouth, and though it would drift forward, it could very well have a steep tilt to it, which make for a food trap, greater chance for decay, and make it more difficult for the teeth to bite properly together. - Dozenist talk 06:10, 7 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think the big reason we wouldn't remove the molars instead of the wisdom teeth is because the molars have already finished growing into the mouth and integrated with the underlying nerves. The wisdom teeth, on the other hand, are often pulled out before they have finished development and growth towards the nerve. In short, removing a fully grown tooth would be many times more traumatic to the jaw bone, gums, and nerves than removing a half developed wisdom tooth. Removing molars is probably more likely to cause permanent damage to the underlying nerves than removing wisdom teeth. Calsolt 05:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have 28 teeth. Nothing unusual about that. Except what I thought were my wisdom teeth arrived in my late teens/early twenties - they did the whole erupting-through-gums thing that wisdom teeth are supposed to do.

All my teeth (except for one of these recent interlopers which is a bit wonky) are perfectly straight and healthy, and there are no gaps. I've never needed dental work. On the mandible I have four incisors, two canines, four premolars and four molars. Same for the maxilla.

So where have my missing teeth gone? ;-) --HiddenInPlainSight 18:55, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Maybe they are hiding!!! ;) Well, if you have had a pan lately and there are apparently no third molars, then it is good you are one of those people who have them missing and do not have to deal with them. - Dozenist talk 22:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Someone should really write some stuff on what to do when you get wisdom teeth coming through. How much is it supposed to hurt before you see a dentist? How long until they should be ok?

I dunno. Mine seem to have started coming in. The one on the right is fine, the one on the left started aching yesterday :(

just had the bottom two that were both growing to the right taken out in less time than it took for the anesthetic to work its magic with what looked like an over-engineered screwdriver! i went to the dentist _before_ it hurt badly :P when my teeth and gums hurt or felt weird when they were coming through in the first place i rinsed with salty water and massaged them with my tongue. and took care of my teeth. here endeth the lesson. 20060310

I was wondering whether or not the gumline heals to its original shape after removing a wisdom tooth that had not erupted. In my case, it has been a little more than 3 months after an excruciating removal, where the dentist removed much of the rear gum line on my top right jaw. Now what I have is a deep groove where my gums should normally be, and food often gets stuck back there now. A minor annoyance, but an annoyance nonetheless, which I hope will clear up if the gums do heal.

Yes, I agree with this. I had a lower wisdom tooth removed and it left a substantial dip / gap behind the second molar. My tongue now feels strange against the back of the second molar and the gap is very evident to me. Indeed, my mouth does not feel comfortable anymore. I would do anything to get that tooth back, roll on tooth regeneration and I would do it. I am of the opinion that the removal of wisdom teeth is often pointless. If a person has a larger jaw, then why should these pefectly functional teeth be seen as a nuisance.

One does not have to have them removed. They go to the dentist and they have x-rays done and the dentist can monitor your wisdom teeth. The only reason he/she would recommend removal would be because it is causing a cyst, an infection or the patient has complained of pain. If my wisdom teeth had come in perfectly and not have been impacted there is no way in hell I was going to put myself through what I just put myself (2 days ago I had all of my wisdom teeth surgically removed). I do recommend getting them taken out if they are going to cause problems in the long run!!

I am having mine removed in two separte surgeries. I have already had teh first two removed (from my left side) the top is healed up fine. There was a flap and some puss for a few days with some hydrogen peroxide and my tounge I manged to remove the puss and force the flap to heal in place. The bottom on the other hand was a different story. Earlier on it was the easier one, but now it has the gap in it and food gets stuck in it. The surgery itself was paied for by the provence (low income family) but anesthetic was not. So I had to only have basic freezing, though that wasn't so bad. The top tooth only needed a standard extraction while the bottom one needed to be cut out. In a couple days I'll be going in for the second set. Kc4 23:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm 35 years old and my dentist told me that the wisdom teeth may keep growing even at this age, actually a growth spurt may affect the other teeth adversely. Having experienced the complications of extraction in my relatives, I rather prefer to keep them as long as possible (one has a small cavity that will need to be filled, two are standing irregular, but they don't hurt). To the dentists reading this - do such "growth spurts" at my age really happen? Or are they just trying to talk me into something? --84.115.129.76 10:13, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Dentist911 added the following line:

Odontophobia is the fear of dental surgery and a surprising number of people have the fear/concern that after their wisdom teeth are removed, they will no longer possess as much intelligence as they once did. Although such an idea would usually be considered ridiculous, there is evidence to support this claim.

This statement is very unclear, and if there's evidence, we need a reference. Do you mean evidence that some people fear that removal of wisdom teeth will cause them to be dumber? If that's the case, I don't know if that's relevant, since there are tons of crackpot theories out there, but maybe I'm wrong. On the other hand, if you mean "there is evidence to support that removal of wisdom teeth makes you dumber," then we DEFINITELY need to see some references for that.

Anyway. Lastly, this was added to the "impactions" section. That doesn't seem to be a very good fit there. Perhaps it could be reduced to a sentence in the opening intro? You could also create the page odontophobia - seems like there isn't one right now. SnowFire 05:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I have done my homework but am not entirely confident about my recent edit. Is an operculum considered an, or part of an, impaction? Is it a type, or part, of soft tissue impaction? I believe it's neither, but may be wrong.

The previous Etymology reinterated the common misconception in the Netherlands that the Dutch word derives from 'far-standing molars', and that the English word is a mistranslation of this word. Even in the Netherlands this is nothing more than folk etymology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.84.61.67 (talk • contribs)

A friend of mine is having a get-together soon and another friend of mine says he may not be able to make it because he might still be sick. He says he's sick from having his wisdom teeth pulled. Two questions--How does having your wisdom teeth pulled make you sick, and is it normal to HAVE wisdom teeth at 15 years old? --Kiwi 10:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

1) Your friend could be sore from the actual procedure, but he could be sick from the medication. 2) At 15 years of age, a wisdom tooth is usually not in the mouth, but it may be impacted. Usually, the wisdom teeth are formed during that age, see tooth development. Of course, for your particular friend, though, who knows. Those are just some ideas. - Dozenist talk 15:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Another thing after the surgery that a patient can experience is numbness. It is normally temporary in younger patients, but may be more likely to be permanent in older patients. Permanent numbness can occur because of the closeness of the wisdom teeth to the nerve. 71.250.35.162 22:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Apart from some numbness being due to the anaesthetic, wouldn't a damaged nerve be a consequence of a poorly executed extraction by the dentist, rather than a side effect of removed wisdom teeth that sits close to a nerve? Proximity of a tooth to a nerve should be inconsequential if an extraction is performed well, shouldn't it? --IanUK

Well, I guess there are a various number of situations that may occur during an extraction, but some things have to be done with a best guess. It is sometimes difficult to be 100% certain where a nerve is in relation to a tooth. A nerve can run right beside a tooth, or creates an indentation through a tooth, or even runs directly through the roots of a tooth. Especially in the cases where the nerve tunnels through a tooth, it is extremely difficult to avoid damage to the nerve during an extraction. - Dozenist talk 14:39, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think the effect on the nerve has more to do with how extensive the growth is. If the wisdom teeth have taken root in the underlying jaw, there will be more trauma to the nerve and possibly even damage. If the teeth are extracted before they have fully grown into the mouth (at a younger age), they are further from the nerve and long or even short term damage should be minimal. My surgeon pointed out that my roots had not yet grown into the underlying jaw and so the risk of damage would be minimal. Calsolt 05:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I don't think there's really any question that wisdom teeth constitute vestigial structures. However, there is perhaps controversy. [1] [2] The first of the linked references is an anti-evolution website arguing that wisdom teeth are not evidence of evolution but are instead the result of some sort of change in the genetics of the human population that somehow isn't actually evoltuion, and the second source argues that wisdom teeth are evidence of evolution. I imagine the conclusion of the latter of these two sources has more proponents and should thus be more represented in the article. I'm going to try to make the article less weasely by citing these sources, although I realize this could be a genesis for an edit war. Theshibboleth 12:47, 24 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

• "If the bleeding lasts for more than a day without decreasing despite having followed the surgeon's directions, the surgeon should be contacted as soon as possible. This is not supposed to happen under normal circumstances and signals that a serious problem is present."

It mentions a "serious problem," yet there is no description. If it's serious, shouldn't we get to know what it is?

I do not agree with the diagnosis in the caption under the orthopantomogram showing impactions. There is no way to tell if the upper right wisdom tooth is impacted from the radiograph. It may be normally erupted with a distal angulation. The same can be said for the lower right (however this is clarified in the caption). While this would not really affect Joe Soap reading about his impacted wisdom teeth, a dental student reading this would end up mildly confused, methinks. I vote for change to ignore the right side altogether, or at least to clarify that the diagnosis of the right wisdom teeth was made clinically. Dr-G - Illigetimi nil carborundum est. 16:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Apparently it seems to be attractive to add even more foreign words to the description. It getting a bit messy. Also, I am not sure how to prevent the claim that we owe the name to the Dutch East India Company from entering the ethymology section. It says that its a folk ethymology, but some still felt like adding that we might owe the word to seafaring dutchmen. Australnaut

1) What % of people develop wisdom teeth 2) For what % of these are they problematic (requiring extraction)

Good call. Also, there needs to be information on which countries commonly practice extraction. I'm reasonably sure that it isn't done in the whole developed world. Esn 04:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I would also like to know what problems are supposed to occur if teeth are left behind. I can't seem to find any information explaining this. Kc4 19:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I Just found a great source on this, should be included in article. Kc4 19:49, 25 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Absolute rubbish. Use of refined carbohydrates in the diet has only appeared in the most recent 5% of human evolution, and has not been around long enough to effect an evolutionary change. Evidence of this is borne out in DMFT studies of indigenous populations. As has been previously pointed out the correct theory relates to shortening of the jaws over an evolutionary period. I will remove this. The cited reference is a website of dubious quality, IMO. Dr-G - Illigetimi nil carborundum est. 23:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

It is redundant to say the purpose of wisdom teeth because scientist know why they exist in humans. They exist because our ancestors had wisdom teeth as do all other apes besides humans. Perhaps discussing the current trend for the frequency of humans without wisdom teeth being discussed (though this might not be an issue of evolution since all animals have variation, and the lack of wisdom teeth isn't an adaptation but just a variation that is being discovered with more and more people finding dental care or it could be evolution as I have discussed above though wisdom teeth will probably not disappear from humans without a change in our societal structure). Martin 198.133.139.5 18:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

That is so wrong. Read Tinbergen's four questions. Plus this part of the article: "For nonbehavioral aspects of biology (e.g., anatomy), three of the four questions are applicable. Only the proximate mechanism is not relevant, as it cannot be an explanation for itself." You're only talking about the proximate explanation, and have removed the ultimate explanation. Thank you for editing Wikipedia. --Bernard Marx 21:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Not entirely, if you had read the above discussion post, you would see that evidence from the fossil record does not support the "early loss of molars" theory. It quite simply didn't happen over a long enough period to affect an evolutionary shift. Tinbergens's questions do not address the amount of time required to affect an evolutionary change, only the proposed mode of action. Also they are philosophically theoretical, not a set of provable theorems. This article requires an evidence base to support statements, and whilst the university of manitoba website is a source of moderate quality, please try and back up your claims with citations, if you wish to replace the offending material. Also please read above discussion. Thank you for editing wikipedia. Dr-G - Illigetimi non carborundum est. 15:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Also, normal variation is a quite acceptable description of wisdom teeth, in many humans wisdom teeth are functional and do not contribute to pathology, and in many they are nonfunctional, unerupted, impacted or cause other problems. Genetic heterogenicity has been suggested as a reason for the lack of space for wisdom teeth, as expressed by a discrepancy between jaw size and combined tooth size. Tinbergen's questions may be applicable in this situation, but again, there it is not correct to say that wisdom teeth are vestigial as in many humans they play a normal functional role.Dr-G - Illigetimi non carborundum est. 15:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply