Hi.
I have been watching these since the last deal that I missed out on. While a little more expensive than last time, this appears to be for the SOOCAS X3 model, so hopefully the issues with which model type you are getting won't arise here.
Edit: With 2 replacement brush heads added to the cart I qualified for free expedited shipping (DHL).
Banggood only have the white SOOCAS atm for $81.43. I'm not sure how these compare to the Phillips as this will be my first foray into electric toothbrushes.
The Phillips one would seriously have to be a freaking awesome toothbrush to justify 3x the price. I have the Xiaomi one and I already think it's awesome
But now China knows the condition of your teeth!
Beware, sonic toothbrushes are not as effective as oscillating brushes that oral-B offers. You guys are probably paying double the price for a less effective toothrbush (oral B model i see on sale for 20-25 regularly).
Two studies, using the same experimental gingivitis model, compared an earlier Sonicare device and the Oral‐B oscillating–rotating toothbrush. In both studies, the oscillating–rotating brush was more effective in improving the level of gingival health (Putt et al. 2001; Van der Weijden et al. 2002a). These findings confirmed the findings of an earlier 6‐week cross‐over study (Isaacs et al. 1998), in which the improvement in gingival condition was 8.6% greater with the oscillating–rotating brush. Rosema et al.(2005) compared the Sonicare Elite to the Oral‐B Professional Care 7000 and again found that the oscillating–rotating pulsation brush was more effective.
Disagree. Evidence suggests the opposite. Not sure you can reference studies from 1990? both oral b and philips would have developed alot in 20 years right? Battery tech alone has come a long way.
That last study you quote has 38 people (tiny), no p values and very limited info about the authors conflict of interest. After 4 weeks study stopped… how can study this be used for anything? Were the 2 groups similar? Did any have more significant dental disease.
Here's a summary of most recent oral b vs philips studies for last 10 years, in everyone philips sonicare superior in every domain. All these studies have p values.
http://www.dental-tribune.com/uploads/downloads/52efca6a62a2…
Did you just link a brochure made by sonicare as your evidence??..
I quoted multiple studies with a lot of them made after 2000.
Battery tech has nothing to do with how sonic and oscillating technologies differ; battery improvements apply to both techs.
There was also a Cochrane review in 2011 (holy grail of literature reviews), which also showed oscillating reduced plaque and gingivitis more than those with sonic action in the short‐term. Althought the differences were minor, it clearly supports the mountain of evidence against sonic toothbruses.
@masster:
I simply disagreed with the evidence you provided. Battery tech is highly relevant and as I described relevant to both models and making studies that are pre-2000 not particularly useful. I did say above, both Oral B and Philips would have made some progress in 20 years right? So evidence comparing their performance 20 years ago isn't useful.
The cochrane studies only relates to compariing oscillating vs manual toothbrushes.
And yes I did provide a link to a philips summary on purpose… (and convenience) simply highlighting selective evidence, yes of course philips is going to only show evidence favouring them. Above yuo provided tiny studies of low quality full of bias. I did the same, on purpose.. Bias is everywhere and unless accounted for makes referencing EBM to support "this is better than that" baseless.
Please explain how battery tech is relevant? Battery doesn't change the fundamental technology behind oscillating and sonic, that hasn't changed at all.
What kind of progress do you think have been made in the past 10 years in electric toothbrushes that you can honestly disregard studies done in the 2000's? It's an electric toothbrush not rocket science.
you are looking at the wrong cochrane review, i'm looking at the one that compared two or more electric brushes with different modes of action (oscillating and sonic.
The studies i've mentioned are completely independent and has no conflict of interest unlike those in Sonicare brochures. If you read the actual studies i quoted, you can see that they have p values lol. I'm guesing you don't have access to their full papers. their studies range from 38-100 participants (bigger or same as the ones in your biased brochure) and are all statistically significant (p value below 0.05), otherwise i would not have mentioned them.
@masster: I would have thought battery tech is relevant for battery storage, more power stored gives more options with length of clean or program options. I would expect the Philips energy requirements are higher given the higher speed involved so would potentially benefit from more battery power? Making studies up to 20+ years older less impressive?
I have access to whatever studies if I bothered to login to my relevant portal, but I'm not bothered. It's sunday and we're talking about toothbrushes. Relax and stop being so defensive. The studies you provided didn't sway my view of the superiority of either mode. I simply replied to your comment to counter your quoting EBM stuff which was really weak.
Again all the studies you continue to quote are tiny. 100 people is tiny.
The philips brochure simply references studies to their benefit, they weren't necessarily studies funded by philips.
Which specific cochrane study supports the oscillating over the sonicare variant?
Completely independent? Really? But the main fellow in one of your mentioned items appears to be paid by manufacturers? I haven't bothered to look at the others: "Van der Weijden, Slot and their research team at ACTA have formerly received either external advisor fees, lecturer fees or research grants from toothbrush manufacturers. Among these were Braun AG, Colgate, Dentaid, GABA, Lactona, Oral-B, Philips, Procter & Gamble, Sara Lee, Sunstar and Unilever."
Whole I absolutely love that for once people are presenting actual evidence on Ozbargain, a lot of the studies in that document you presented were in vitro studies and those that weren't were fairly limited in scope.
As to battery storage? Fairly irrelevant given that most electric toothbrushes will last for a dozen or more uses on any cleaning program they do.
Yeah i wasnt using that philips study to say philips is better, it was just a set of research conveniently selected studies by philips to show the opposite opinion. I am sure they're biased to show that outcome. I just dont like how people quote EBM to prove a point when they have simply selective research to form their opinion whixh defeats the entire purpose of their point (i have evidence therefore you're wrong), in this case based on tiny studies with lots of potential bias problems (selection one of them).
Battery storage irrelevant now between brands but compare them to batteries from 1990s? Just not sure the current 18650 battery which powers most brands? lasts a dozen uses would have an equivalent 20 years ago.. so the current programs by either brand may not have been available.
Battery storage helps with charge, that has nothing to do with efficacy of the fundamental technology of oscillating vs sonic.
Cochrane systematic review was done 2011 so it's not even old (Deacon et al. 2011) and all of the others are quoted except one is in 2000's
100 people is not tiny for a study of this topic (your brochure had less), the results were statistically significant.
Then why did you say the study i quoted had no p value when you are clearly wrong? If you are going to claim this, at least read the full study dude.
I'm talking about the research article saying they are free of conflict of interest
haha yes you were using the philips to study to say philips is better.
you clearly wrote "Disagree. Evidence suggests the opposite.", you dont even remember what you said?
Batteries dont change how a toothbrush works dude.
Also that's why we have statistical analysis, they are all statistically significant and convenience sampling is quite common and accepted.
You're getting off topic now, rather than your original point, you're trying to mock/attack me, your argument failing is it? Could you give this conchrane study you promoted?
I disagreed with your point that oscillating is better. I disagreed with the evidende you provided. Clearly a brochure by philips is going to promote philips. That's the point I am making, you selected things conveniently to serve your viewpoint.
Sorry not sure how a study for 4 weeks on 38 people supports a single thing. Convenience sampling is common and accepted? I have never heard of this being used in EBM, that's the whole point of EBM, you control for selection bias. 100 people is a tiny study.
Batteries in a battery powered device are not important. I disagree, can you simply accept someone having a different opinion? You dont get to win the internet.
Instead of being so defensive, why not strengthen your viewpoint and clearly state your evidece. You seem to have strong opinions on the matter.
You picked the most biased source possible, i chose a variety papers which also agreed with the cochrane review (Deacon et al. 2011).
If you can find any bigger sample size then go ahead, but not every study is going to have 10,000 people, the statistical significance, statistical power and alpha-cronbach is what is important to take away from a decent sized study.
Tell me what selection bias there is in a double blind RCT with convenience sampling for a study on toothbrushing?? Another study i quoted used was a randomised, split-mouth study where participants used BOTH electric toothbrushes.
you make claims about p values not being on the papers which shows you haven't even read the study and then you use a brochure as evidence lol. If you want to say "evidence suggests opposite" at least use a better source.
And then you go on about battery which isn't relevant at all with regards to effectiveness of a toothbrush technology. If you have evidence that having a toothbrush that can last me 5 hours without recharge compared to 1 hour is better at cleaning my teeth then feel free to share. Your argument hasn't been very convincing.
This is why you shouldn't mention things as fact without stating it's just your thoughts, when you aren't too sure. Now a lot of people have seen your earlier comments without reading the full thread thinking masster didn't know what he was talking about.
Thats why I use mario toothbrushes rather than sonic.
https://target.scene7.com/is/image/Target/16239417?wid=520&h…
I've used both and prefer the sonic toothbrushes. They do a better job for me.
Having purchased one of these from the last deal after using the cheapish oral b brushes for the last few years I am convinced that the Xiaomin doing a much better job than the oral b ever did. my mouth feels cleaner, gums stronger, teeth sensitively has improved and my dentist remarked last week that I am doing a much better job than I was previous check up 6 months ago. to anyone on the fence it is a great toothbrush at a fantastic price. I had a Phillips a few years ago and loved it but wasn't too keen on paying $200+, the Xiaomi is very close in quality for a fraction of the price. It comes with a US plug however the voltage adapter is within the charging station so I replaced the whole plug with one from Bunnings. Highly recommend it.
Couldn't let the inside academia pass this opportunity by. BTW - I looked this up from a strictly neutral perspective.
From my quick search, this is the result from a Cochrane Lit review (Forrest & Miller 2004) on all forms of brushing:
RESULTS:
Looks like Masster was right on this one..
I'd be keen to know the difference to. I've got a Philips Diamond Care. However now that I have all the accessories I was able to buy a replacement handle after 3 years of use for about $80 from ebay so not much more than this.
What's the replacement brush head life/cost like on these? Because that's where the biggest cost usually ends up coming from over the life of the toothbrush.
I've been using mine for 2.5 weeks every day and according the the app, it says 74 with a picture of the toothbrush head
Absolutely no idea what any of the text says because it's in Chinese but I assume it means it's 74% used
If that's the case, these heads do no last long at all
Or it could mean. 2.5 weeks for every 25% use? So 2.5 weeks by 4 is 10 weeks before replacing brush heads. Just a guess.
I don't think replacement cost is an issue. The heads lifespan is 90 days(recommended)
I'd be interested to know if Sonicare brush heads fit the Xiaomi (and vice versa).
Nope. I tried putting Sonicare head on but it didn't fit.
How did they get the new model? I went to a Xiaomi store and they're awaiting stock. Btw these are $40 in China
if anyone wants 1 in sydney I grabbed 1 extra didnt needf from the last deal PM me
Does anyone know if Xiaomi have shavers and/or beard trimmers?
They have a trimmer under a different name in their store
I remember looking it up a few months back I'll see if I can find it
Xiaomi yueli trimmer
Think it might be too big for a beard though..
Beware, sonic toothbrushes are not as effective as oscillating brushes that oral-B offers. You guys are probably paying double the price for a less effective toothrbush (oral B model i see on sale for 20-25 regularly).
Two studies, using the same experimental gingivitis model, compared an earlier Sonicare device and the Oral‐B oscillating–rotating toothbrush. In both studies, the oscillating–rotating brush was more
effective in improving the level of gingival health (Putt et al. 2001; Van der Weijden et al. 2002a). These
findings confirmed the findings of an earlier 6‐week cross‐over study (Isaacs et al. 1998), in which the
improvement in gingival condition was 8.6% greater with the oscillating–rotating brush. Rosema et al.
(2005) compared the Sonicare Elite to the Oral‐B Professional Care 7000 and again found that the oscillating–rotating pulsation brush was more effective
8.6% greater…
You wanna pay double for an inferior product? go ahead.
I have been using oral-b for years. I switched to the Xiaomi one a few weeks ago and all I can say is that with the Xiaomi brush my teeth feel cleaner 24/7(I brush my teeth twice/day for 2 minutes).
Sounds like a superior product with a possibly less effective technique.
So no.
8.6% is a significant difference when you are talking about clinical trials
The studies you cited are more a decade old. They are no longer valid because of the advancement in sonicare technology in subsequent versions of the product. It's rather like comparing Andoid and iOS now using versions then.
There have been advancements in both oscillating and sonic brushes, it's not like oscillating brushes haven't made any improvements.
There was also a Cochrane review in 2011 (holy grail of literature reviews), which also showed oscillating reduced plaque and gingivitis more than those with sonic action in the short‐term. Although the differences were minor, it clearly supports the mountain of evidence against sonic toothbrushes for the past 2 decades.
True that there are advancements from both sides. I'm not advocating either, merely pointing out the invalidity of using decade's old research to arrive at a conclusion.
It's an electric toothbrush not a smartphone, the toothbrush moves certain ways depending on oscillating or sonic, i dont see how it's going to be drastically different now unless you can enlighten me.
@masster: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9487839
I have only been using the Xiaomi for e few weeks and it definitely cleans better than my oral b the space between the teeth
@masster: Why not? you posted a 2001 study and after that you commented "It's an electric toothbrush not a smartphone"… :)
How annoying is it to get replacement heads for these?
I reckon! :p
I don't know. I trust the Chinese with a lot of things; phones, robot vaccums, IP cams. Brushing teeth, isn't one of them.
You trust the Chinese more with an IP camera than an electric toothbrush?
What if the brush heads were were realistic imitations made with toxic plastics and/or heavy metals?
The fact is the Philip brush head you could be using are most likely made in China, too- Probably from the same factory which Xiaomi used…so what's the difference?
This brush is amazing. The battery is still on full bars and I have been using it for 2 weeks. Totally kills the philips I had which died on me.
Any diff bw the black and white one apart from colour?
Not that I know of. But the white replacement heads come in different types. https://www.gearbest.com/tooth-care/pp_625954.html?wid=21
Are there any off-brand heads -because the genuine heads are nearly $8 each!
(I can't believe I'm looking for off-brand accessories for a Xiaomi product)
It's a false economy to cheap out on brush heads that last for 3 months. Considering a good manual toothbrush that costs a couple of dollars only lasts a month.
You r Genius
OP, I couldn't find the replacement heads in Black on the site. Help?
Cheers.
Edit: Too slow
Bought one from last deal and stopped working within 2 weeks. Had to pay $25 USD for a replacement which I'm still waiting on. Hoping the replacement is not a dud as I like the toothbrush compared to my Oral B.
Is there anything Xiaomi don't make?
Also is it even worth buying electric toothbrushes?
Perhaps it matters more how you brush, than the brush? ;-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsKcZmLdxC4
What are these issues with the old models you speak of? (I grabbed one from the last deal, it has a circle button)
Just that some purchasers expected the newer oval button model in that last deal.
can anyone confirm if SOOCAS takes Sonicare replacement heads?
the tip looks similar on pictures, but not sure :/
sry, somebody already confirmed - they don't fit!
I bought mine for AU$50.85 delivered from Banggood a month ago. Received the new version with oval button. Very happy with mine so far — I've been wondering if the Philips DiamondClean is worth 3x the price. Although it'd be great if a travel charging case was available for the X3…