Objectives To provide contemporary, national population-based estimates of complete tooth loss of older adults by English language proficiency. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the 2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey among participants ≥50 years of age (n=10,452, weighted=111,895,290). Results The prevalence of complete tooth loss was higher among those with limited English proficiency (Spanish speaking: 13.7%; Other languages: 16.9%) than those proficient in English (Spanish speaking: 5.0%; Other languages: 6.0%). After adjusting for education, complete tooth loss was less common among participants for whom Spanish was their primary, with limited English proficiency relative to English only (adjusted odds ratio: 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.42-0.76). Among those without complete tooth loss, dental visit in the past year were less common among participants with primary languages other than English as compared to those who only speak English. Discussion Research is needed to examine the relationship of aging, oral health, and access to care.

It is shown here that the ability of B lymphocytes to act as supportive host cells for virus infections requires they be activated from the resting Gostage of the cell cycle. I have used a series of activation regimens, which allow B cells to progress to different stages in their activation/differentiation pathway toward antibody secretion, in order to evaluate the extent of activation required to support vesicular stomatitis or Newcastle disease virus infections. At least three distinct phases during B cell activation which affected VSV infection were defined. Freshly isolated resting murine splenic B cells in the Go phase of the cell cycle do not support VSV, assessed by protein synthesis, infectious center formation, and PFU production. Small B cells cultured for 48 hours without stimulation still do not support VSV. B cells stimulated with the lymphokines found in Con A activated supernatants from splenic T cells or cloned T cell lines transited into the G1 phase of the cell cycle but remain refractory to VSV. These VSV non-supportive B cell populations do take up virus particles and transcribe viral mRNAs which can be translated in vitro, suggesting a translational block to VSV. B cells stimulated into the S phase of the cell cycle with anti-immunoglobulin synthesize VSV proteins and increased numbers of infectious centers, but only low level PFU synthesis (center) is observed. Co-stimulation with anti-Ig and lymphokines, which supports differentiation to antibody secretion, enhanced PFU synthesis without further increasing the number of infected B cells. LPS, which activates B cells directly to antibody secretion by a pathway different from anti-Ig, induced infectious centers, and PFUs at levels comparable to those seen when stably transformed permissive cell lines are infected. Co-stimulation of LPS activated B cells with the same lymphokine populations that enhance PFU production when anti-Ig is used as a stimulator suppresses PFU production completely, suggesting that anti-Ig and LPS activated B cells are differentially responsive to lymphokines. NDV infection of murine B cells differed markedly from VSV infection, as all B cell populations examined gave a similar response pattern. NDV viral proteins were synthesized by B cells in each of the activation states previously described, even freshly isolated B cells. Infectious center formation increased up to 5-fold over the levels observed with unstimulated B cells after anti-Ig or LPS activation. However, PFU synthesis was low (center) for all B cell populations. These results suggest that these two similar viruses may be dependent on different host cell factors and that these factors are induced for VSV but not NDV by the B cell activators employed here or that the process of infection of B cell by these two viruses induces different cellular responses.