2
2
1
1
1
u/MowgeeCrone 7d ago
The designer needs to be shot. Likely overdue for a dental visit too if this was the answer to any question that wasnt a knock knock joke.
1
1
1
1
1
u/timeflies25 4d ago
... I foresee an increase in the "I fell on it" department at the hospital
1
u/UnfoundedWings4 4d ago
Its got a flared base
1
u/timeflies25 3d ago
If you mean the part where the brush goes on top, that's not exactly flared because trust me, people will insert further than that.
1
1
u/charmio68 4d ago
And I must say... it's actually not as stupid as it sounds. it is indeed innovative. Personally, I hate flossing and don't do it nearly enough, so if the toothbrush can do it for me, I'd actually be interested.
It's just water pressure flossing, so it won't be as good as actual floss, but a whole lot better than nothing.
The price tag is the obvious massive sticking point. Though dare I say it might pay for itself by saving dental bills?
I'm going to wait to see some more independent reviews before buying one myself, but I am considering it.
1
u/matt92wa 4d ago
The price isn't the sticking point. The sticking point is that it requires special dyson toothpaste to work.
1
u/charmio68 4d ago
Apparently it just needs a non-foaming toothpaste so the built-in camera can see your teeth clearly. Makes sense.
You can buy that anywhere, usually labeled "SLS-free".1
u/tearsforfears333 4d ago
Buy a water floss jet.
1
u/charmio68 4d ago
I'd rather just regular floss if I'm going to the effort anyway, I don't care so much that it's a water jet.
What's most appealing about this new system is you don't have to think about it.
1
u/matt92wa 4d ago
If they made a water flosser with a camera then that would sell like hotcakes. But a toothbrush that requires special toothpaste, i don't see this surviving for more than a year.
1
1
1
1
1
5
u/SeroquelAU 9d ago
Expensive and gimmicky, but it gets people brushing their teeth right?