![](//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a4/Symbol_start_class.svg/35px-Symbol_start_class.svg.png) |
![WikiProject icon](//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Extra_Coop_supermarket%2C_Bergen_Storsenter%2C_Norway_2017-11-01_confectionery_%28godteri%29.jpg/100px-Extra_Coop_supermarket%2C_Bergen_Storsenter%2C_Norway_2017-11-01_confectionery_%28godteri%29.jpg) | This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Brands
, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
brands
on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion
and see a list of open tasks.
Brands
Wikipedia:WikiProject Brands
Template:WikiProject Brands
Brands articles
| | ???
| This article has not yet received a rating on the
project's importance scale
.
|
|
|
This is why I NEVER trust wiki articles. If you actually read the study in the "clinical research" section most of them is crap.
take reference 7.
The experiment is fundamentally flawed. The Oral B brush is clearly designed NOT to be effective if used in a traditional brushing back-and forth motion (ie.bass method) because of it's brush head shape, but to be with rotational-oscillation and hovering over each surface of the teeth. That's why when used in the off mode, it produced extremely low plaque removal scores, and when turned on, it worked as it was designed to, producing a statistically significant change. On the other hand, since the sonicare brush head is so similar to traditional brush head, the small n used in this study would not have the power to produce a statistically different result even if there were one. this article is clearly just a ploy by Proctor and Gamble, who owns Oral B, to attack sonicare.
I'm going to delete that sentence cause the research is ridiculously flawed.
- student DDS
174.6.129.27
(
talk
) 22:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
[
reply
]
removed the comment by "Smart recovery" as it appears to be a shameless attempt at marketing a shameless program. In other words, SPAM! Please resubmit your comments, smart recovery, without reference to your email or website. Thank you.
TLAGT
And here, folks, we see Philips and Braun marketing fighting each other in their natural habitat. Crickey!
??Preceding
unsigned
comment added by
78.119.28.72
(
talk
) 23:53, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
[
reply
]
Many users to cite the expense of brush heads. Before reverting my edits, Urban rose, please give a reason for the reverts. Otherwise you look like a wiki-nanny.
?Preceding
unsigned
comment added by
75.140.22.70
(
talk
) 20:01, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
[
reply
]
I am hoping we can create an analysis of the various models of Sonicare, I mean Norelco Sonicare, toothbrushes as I would find this comparison helpful. I believe that while there are a variety of models offered the major difference is in the brushing program--the computer controlled brushing pattern.
--
TMH
(
talk
) 19:20, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
[
reply
]
The article should explain what is "sonic" about the toothbrush.
DavidFarmbrough
(
talk
) 01:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
There does not appear to be any "sonic" component, merely mechanical brush action. I suppose it's just a catchy name, like "Wonder Bread".
Lynxx2
(
talk
) 03:12, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
[
reply
]
If you look at just about any kind of computer component you will have an endless historical list. This would be helpful to those that are trying to figure out a number of things including whether they are looking at a counterfeit product etc.
108.223.5.124
(
talk
) 03:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
[
reply
]
- Since
Wikipedia is not a directory
, such a list would only be appropriate for this article if
independent
reliable sources
cover each of these models individually. ??
Newslinger
talk
10:20, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
[
reply
]