If a proper study is conducted, will resolve based on that. Otherwise, the resolver will attempt collect data to resolve the market. Resolution will be based on the informed judgement of the resolver about what best fits the intent. Resolver is me by default, or the manifold moderation team if my resolution is disputed. In the absence of a well-conducted study, the estimate will necessarily be imperfect.
Feel free to suggest improved criteria
Update 2026-06-29 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator intends to resolve this market NO, based on an update referenced in an Astral Codex Ten open thread, using their informed judgment as outlined in the resolution criteria.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,895 | |
| 2 | Ṁ300 | |
| 3 | Ṁ246 | |
| 4 | Ṁ212 | |
| 5 | Ṁ158 |
People are also trading
Based on "Resolution will be based on the informed judgement of the resolver about what best fits the intent" and the update from this https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/open-thread-440 I intend to resolve this NO, does anyone disagree?
The treatment is meant to reduce dental acid by replacing S. mutans.
I've asked multiple AI models to estimate how much oral acid production is due to S. mutans, and they come up with intervals like 30-50%, 35-58%, 10-30%. There isn't good quantitative data, and there are other variables like how localized the acid is, whether it's beneath a biofilm, etc. That said, it seems very plausible to me that this treatment would reduce dental decay.
I would personally not take this, even though I'm very willing to take experimental treatments. This is an irreversible medical treatment with no safety data and the upside is very limited. Would be very excited about a good trial though. FDA made this too difficult to trial