Ali zavareian

• Doctor of Dental Surgery
• Director and Owner at Interdisciplinary Medical Innovation & Systems Lab

Discussion Text:

In the past, people relied on letters to communicate, which often carried a certain level of emotional depth and intentionality. The sender usually knew the recipient well and carefully crafted their words. Today, instant text messaging dominates our daily communication—often written quickly, emotionally charged, and without the cues of tone, facial expression, or body language.

As text is just a sequence of words, the emotional or humorous intent can be easily lost. A joke, sarcasm, or even an idiom may be misinterpreted as rudeness or aggression, especially when the sender and receiver are unfamiliar with each other’s tone and habits.

This raises several questions:

Can AI help detect emotionally ambiguous phrases in real time?

Could messaging platforms incorporate emotional context detection—perhaps through biometric inputs (e.g., heart rate, stress indicators)—to adjust tone or recommend changes to the message?

Can AI assist in disambiguating multi-layered texts before they're sent, warning the sender about possible misunderstandings?

In emotionally complex societies with fast-paced digital interactions, could such AI tools promote empathy, reduce conflict, and improve relationships?

I would love to hear your thoughts—especially from researchers in communication science, affective computing, HCI, and digital psychology.

Can we design smarter communication tools that understand how we feel, not just what we type?

In my experience, optimal human performance—especially in high-stakes or public-facing professions—rests on four essential pillars, much like the legs of a stable chair:

1. Knowledge and technical skill (knowing how to do the task)

2. Experience (having done it repeatedly and under various conditions)

3. Tools and external conditions (availability of necessary resources)

4. Mental and physical readiness (being in a functional state to act effectively)

While the first three are widely addressed in education, certification, and workplace systems, the fourth pillar—real-time readiness of the human operator—is often neglected. Yet, it may be the most decisive one in practice.

There are times when, despite having more experience and better tools than before, performance suffers due to emotional fatigue, distraction, or physical depletion. These states are rarely assessed objectively in professional workflows.

This raises a critical question:

> Can we develop a system that evaluates not just whether a person can perform a task, but whether they should*, based on their current mental and physical state?*

With current advances in wearable technology and AI, I believe the answer is yes. A multimodal readiness-check system could combine:

Physiological data: heart rate variability, tremors, sleep quality, respiration

Affective computing: facial microexpressions, voice tone, speech patterns

Behavioral patterns: task delays, error rates, response time variability

Personal baselines: adaptive learning for each individual's norms

The system could generate a daily or task-specific readiness index, and recommend role adjustments, soft interventions (e.g., breaks, task reallocation), or supportive resources.

This idea has applications not only in surgery and aviation, but also in education, public service, research, and any role where human error can cascade into systemic harm.

I am aware of relevant work in human factors engineering, decision fatigue, and AI-assisted behavioral monitoring, but I would love to hear broader perspectives.

Has anyone worked on such systems, or studied the feasibility of integrating real-time human readiness into professional workflows?

What technical, ethical, or social barriers do you foresee? Could such systems be piloted in medical or academic settings?

In selected cases of subgingival caries or fractures where conventional intraoral deep margin elevation (DME) is not feasible due to limited access and moisture control, could an extraoral approach be considered? This would involve atraumatic extraction, extraoral DME under ideal isolation and visualization, followed by immediate replantation and stabilization.

With recent advances in adhesive dentistry and biocompatible restorative materials, this technique may provide a conservative alternative to extraction in otherwise hopeless cases.

I would greatly appreciate insights from colleagues who have encountered similar clinical challenges or have explored this concept in practice or research. Your thoughts and experiences are most welcome.

Discussion:

While framework rocking in prosthetic restorations is commonly attributed to misfit or deformation of the metal substructure, clinical experience suggests that in many cases, the issue arises after ceramic build-up, even when the framework alone had previously shown excellent fit.

A critical yet often overlooked factor in these cases is the interference of soft tissue—particularly in the pontic area and the interproximal papilla. If ceramic layering does not respect the soft tissue contours or encroaches upon the gingiva or papilla, it can create a pseudo-rocking effect that mimics framework instability.

Key Observations:

1. False Rocking Due to Soft Tissue Impingement:

In one recent case, despite careful impression-taking, precise model pouring, ditching, and an excellent initial fit of the metal framework, significant rocking occurred after ceramic layering. Upon examination, the issue was not related to thermal distortion, but rather due to soft tissue rebound and interproximal papilla hypertrophy, which were not captured in the working cast.

After performing rotational curettage to release the tissue around the margins and carefully removing the excess papilla in the pontic area, the framework seated fully and passively.

2. Limitations of Ditch Models:

Because ditching eliminates soft tissue simulation, we often lose sight of potential interferences that only become relevant in the mouth. Therefore, it is highly advisable to work in parallel with a solid cast or “witness cast”, especially for evaluating ceramic-layered restorations in their final form. This helps in detecting any tissue impingement or bulkiness early.

3. Proximal Contact as a Rocking Factor:

Tight or misaligned proximal contacts can prevent full seating and, in some cases, simulate rocking—especially when only one side of the bridge is contacting tightly. This can mislead clinicians to adjust the intaglio or the abutment interfaces unnecessarily, potentially worsening the situation.

---

Clinical Recommendations:

Always verify the final ceramic restoration on a solid cast prior to intraoral try-in to assess soft tissue clearance.

Consider placing a well-adapted temporary restoration to shape the gingiva and preserve papilla contours before final seating.

Examine and adjust proximal contacts carefully before making adjustments to internal surfaces or abutments.

Avoid over-polishing or over-adjusting internal fits when rocking is noticed post-ceramic, as the issue might lie elsewhere.

---

Invitation to Colleagues:

Have you encountered cases where post-ceramic rocking was not due to metal distortion but related to soft tissue or contact issues?

What techniques or protocols have you developed to prevent or manage this type of pseudo-rocking?

Your clinical insights and experiences are highly appreciated to help expand this important discussion.

In both the maxilla and mandible, buccal bone resorption tends to be more prominent than lingual or palatal resorption. While traditional explanations often focus on the thickness and vascular supply of cortical plates, I have been considering a possible additional factor rooted in functional intraoral pressures.

During daily activities such as swallowing and nasal breathing, the oral cavity is frequently exposed to negative pressure, especially when the mouth is closed. In swallowing, a clear suction force is generated as the tongue creates a seal and propels the bolus posteriorly. Even during quiet nasal breathing, when the mouth remains closed, the oral cavity may experience subtle but chronic suction-like effects, due to its position as a non-ventilated yet flexible compartment within the upper airway.

This led me to hypothesize that a consistent tensile force may exist along the lingual and palatal ridge, serving as a protective or even stimulatory influence on bone preservation, while the buccal aspect may be exposed to a relatively compressive or stress-shielded environment, especially in the absence of masticatory loading or in edentulous patients. The directionality and persistence of these forces could partially explain the observed asymmetry in resorption patterns.

Additionally, before tooth extraction, the lingual and palatal cortices often display greater bone density, cortical thickness, and vascularization, which further supports their post-extraction preservation. However, the functional biomechanical environment—including intraoral pressure dynamics—may also contribute in ways that remain under-investigated.

I would be very interested to hear if others have explored or considered this perspective, especially in the context of edentulous arch modeling, prosthodontic design, or maxillofacial biomechanics.

Discussion body:

In the clinical assessment of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMD), we typically focus on occlusion, parafunctional habits, stress, trauma, and muscle function. However, one potential contributor is often overlooked: the patient's sleeping position and pillow characteristics.

While these may not be primary etiological factors, there is growing evidence that pillow height, firmness, shape, and its compatibility with the individual’s body size and sleeping habits can influence TMJ-related pain and dysfunction. For example:

Sleeping on the back with a properly supportive pillow may help reduce joint pressure and improve alignment.

A pillow that is too low or soft may cause posterior mandibular displacement, increasing strain on the joint.

Sleeping on the side with poor support may lead to unilateral joint compression.

Inadequate head and neck support may increase cervical muscle tension and indirectly affect masticatory muscles.

Some studies have addressed this (e.g., Putnams, Headache TMJ Clinic, and several clinical blogs), but the topic still lacks strong clinical focus and deeper investigation in academic literature.

Have you considered this in your own practice? Do you ask patients about their sleep setup, or recommend specific sleeping positions or pillows for TMJ relief?

In some clinical situations, cotton fibers or similar materials get entangled with rotary tools due to friction, especially around sharp or broken parts. This sparked an idea:

What if we intentionally use a friction-based fiber tip (such as cotton or synthetic fibers) attached to a rotary handpiece in reverse motion to engage and retrieve separated instruments from root canals?

The stronger and more heat-resistant the fibers, the higher the chances of effective engagement and removal. Has anyone tried similar techniques? I’d appreciate your thoughts on the potential feasibility, limitations, or testing approaches.

For most of human history, daily life involved hunting, fleeing, building—physical challenges that led to frequent micro-injuries and activated the body's regenerative systems.

In the sedentary, protected environments of today, such injury-repair cycles have largely vanished.

> Could the chronic under-stimulation of our natural regenerative pathways contribute to the rise in aging-related diseases and cancer?

Should medicine explore controlled therapies that replicate the ancient cycle of micro-damage and repair—such as micro-needling, mechanical stimulation, or other regenerative protocols?

I warmly welcome thoughts from experts in regenerative medicine, evolutionary biology, oncology, and physiology on this intriguing hypothesis.

Human beings evolved as free, physically active creatures, constantly adapting to the challenges of survival. Yet modern life cages individuals within rigid societal structures, cognitive overloads, and emotional suppression—pressures often misaligned with our biological nature.

Today, mental health disorders are increasingly widespread. But instead of structural solutions, many governments appear to tolerate or even legalize various "escapes": tobacco, alcohol, recreational drugs, and endless distractions.

> Is this passive acceptance a strategic way to manage unrest and avoid the high costs of real mental health reform?

I invite scholars and professionals in psychology, psychiatry, sociology, and public policy to discuss:

Are we treating symptoms while ignoring the deeper causes?

What alternative models could better align human nature with modern civilization?

Discussion Prompt:

On March 18, 2025, at the American Dynamism Summit, U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance https://www.whitehouse.gov/remarks/2025/03/remarks-by-vice-president-vance-at-american-dynamism-summit/

sharply criticized the global practice of outsourcing “low-value” labor to developing nations while retaining “high-value” innovation and design within advanced economies.

He described this dependency on cheap labor—either through offshoring or immigration—as an “addiction” that weakens national resilience and inhibits local innovation. Vance highlighted how this division has allowed manufacturing nations to catch up in design and knowledge, challenging the earlier assumption that they would remain limited to labor.

This creates a global dilemma:

Model 1: Developing countries strive to internalize more of the value chain to gain autonomy.

Model 2: Developed countries attempt to retain knowledge leadership by limiting knowledge diffusion.

We invite scholars, technologists, and policymakers to propose a third, balanced model—one that fosters equitable knowledge transfer, builds capacity in emerging economies, and protects innovation ecosystems in advanced nations.

Contribute your frameworks, case studies, or hybrid models to envision a future of mutual growth, sustainable collaboration, and ethical global integration.

Let’s reimagine the global value chain—together.

Many students around the world learn both British and American English at the same time, without knowing the differences clearly. This can make things confusing — especially when it comes to pronunciation and word choice. For example, the word “during” is said like "dyu-ring" in British English and "doo-ring" in American English. The same thing happens with words like “student” and “duty”, where the sound of the letter “u” changes depending on the accent. In the early stages of learning, it might be more helpful to focus on just one accent, so learners can build a stronger base.

But this also leads to a good question: Should teachers stick to one accent, or introduce both from the beginning to help students be more flexible? It’s a topic worth exploring more in language education.

Discussion:

In many developing societies, the family is regarded as the core unit of identity and duty. While this can provide emotional support, I wonder whether it often functions more as a social obligation than a space for personal development.

Could the emphasis on early marriage, multiple children, and self-sacrifice for the family—common in many traditional cultures—be one of the factors slowing down innovation, autonomy, and broader societal development, especially when compared with more individual-centric cultures in developed countries?

I’m curious to hear your thoughts, especially from cross-cultural or psychological perspectives.