The burden of proof is on the person making the absurd claim, not one that is well accepted in the scientific community. I love how HN is super critical about anything tech related but is basically the flat earthers of hygiene.
Regardless of where the burden of proof lies, it seems silly to say "Dental cleaning is backed by years of scientific research" and then balk at providing any reference on "procedural" grounds.
Didn't the United States government remove flossing from their official health recommendations because there isn't actually any scientific evidence in favor of it, and the law required the government only make recommendations backed by science? From what I understand much of dentistry isn't actually backed by science but is rather just the opinions of dentists. So I think it's justified to ask where you are getting the evidence for the empirical claims you are making.
