# data[].attributes.body
Chewing Gum

Camel Balls Chews Pick 'n' Mix.

Golden Nuggets Chewing Gum.

400g Jar of Gum Balls.

Chupa Chups Fairy Floss Bubble Gum.

Hubba Bubba Groovy Grape Bubblegum.

Hubba Bubba Seriously Strawberry Bubblegum.

# data[].attributes.body
some bubble gum brands are marketed as being good for blowing bubbles, such as Bubblicious, Hubba Bubba, and Double Bubble. It may be helpful to try out different brands and experiment with different techniques to see which works best for you to blow the biggest bubble.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
50 centimeters and 8 millimeters in diameter.

That's over 19 inches wide!

The record is held by Alabama native, Chad Fell who broke the record in 2004 while chewing on three pieces of Dubble Bubble bubblegum.

Want to know his secret? Chew long enough so that all the sugar gets out, blow slow, and you'll end up with a gargantuan bubble that covers your entire face!

We like to imagine a bubble as big as Chad's could lift you off the ground and send you to space like the movie, !

All that to say, bubblegum is one of those confections that sends every person back to a time in their childhood when life was simple and the only thing you wanted to do was blow bubbles the size of a basketball.

As bubble gum lovers ourselves, we like to think we know a thing or two about what bubblegum is the best. So we decided to rally our team together and rank all the best bubblegum. Check out our list and let us know what you think!

The 10 Best Bubblegum According To A Candy Company
1. Dubble Bubble
Dubble Bubble is one of the oldest brands on this list which was founded in 1928. Originally made by the Fleer Chewing Gum Company, Dubble Bubble was the brainchild of Walter Demier, an accountant for Fleer. After watching his boss, Frank H. Fleer fail to create a bubblegum that wasn't too sticky, he started to test his own recipe which he perfected in 1928. The only problem was that he never wrote it down. From there, it took him 4 months and hundreds of test batches to get it back, but when he did, it was the perfect formula for blowing bubbles. Maybe it's the bright yellow wrapper or the wildly chewy texture that makes every kid think they can blow a bubble big enough to float away, but when it comes to the best bubblegum in the world, Dubble Bubble holds the top spot on this list.
2. Bazooka
Bazooka is a classic childhood bubblegum that has been around since 1947. A division of the famous sports card brand Topps, Bazooka was created to compliment the sports fanatics, specifically baseball fans, who would purchase the baseball trading cards. Topps sold the production rights for Bazooka to the sports juggernaut Fanatics in 2022. Bazooka is widely known for its iconic Bazooka Joe comic strips that came wrapped around every piece of gum, which were taken out of production in 2012 and replaced with brain-teasing puzzles instead. If you're a sports fan who loves to chew on a sweet treat while watching your favorite team, Bazooka is the bubblegum for you.
3. Hubba Bubba
Hubba Bubba is a bubblegum produced by Wm Wrigley Jr. Company. Created in 1979, Hubba Bubba got its famous name from the military term "hubba hubba" which was used to express approval. Hubba Bubba is branded as the bubblegum that won't stick to your skin when your big ol' bubble explodes onto your face after it bursts. It's also known as the rival gum to Bubblicious which was produced around the same time. When it comes to unique ways to sell gum, Hubba Bubba was made most popular by its Hubba Bubba tape which was six feet of bubblegum wrapped into a curricular tape dispenser making it incredibly attractive to youth who wanted to test their chewing ability by seeing just how much of the tape they could chew at one time-a challenge we've tried a few times here in our candy headquarters.
4. Bubblicious
Bubblicious is a bubblegum created in 1977 and produced by Cadbury Adams. This bubblegum brand was the first "soft" bubblegum to hit the U.S. market. Bubblicious is best known for its range of 28 different flavors over the years including classic bubblegum, strawberry, grape, blueberry, cotton candy, sour apple, tropical punch, and fruit twist. 2000's kids will remember it most when NBA legend LeBron James partnered with Bubblicious to make his favorite flavor, LeBron's Lightning Lemonade which was the athlete's go to chew while he played for the Cleveland Cavaliers. (Shoutout to our favorite basketball team!)
5. Big League Chew
If you played baseball or softball as a kid, chances are you had your fair share of Big League Chew. The bubblegum brand, which was introduced in 1980 by left-handed pitcher Rob Nelson and bat boy Todd Field, was originally pitched to Wrigley gum as a healthy alternative to chewing tobacco for baseball players-hence why it's conveniently packaged the same way as chewing tobacco. This bubblegum is a common confection amongst professional athletes, all the way down to the little leagues and has become a staple in sports. There's just something about throwing in a fat lip of bubblegum that makes you feel like a pro, not to mention Big League Chew now flexes a slew of flavors including Big Rally Blue Raspberry, Ground Ball Grape, Slammin' Strawberry, and Swinging Sour Apple.
6. Blow Pops Gum Balls
Everyone remembers the childhood classic candy, Blow Pops. But did you know that it also makes a gum ball? Yes, you read that correctly, Blow Pops makes its own bubblegum. Just imagine your favorite Blow Pop sucker, but inside out, with the chewy center as the star of the show. It comes in three distinct flavors, cherry, watermelon, and blue raspberry. Our personal favorite is the blue raspberry, but if you're a true bubblegum fan we recommend taking one of each and chewing all of them at the same time to get the best of all three flavors in every single bubble.
7. Cry Baby Bubble Gum Balls
What if you could mix bubblegum with your favorite sour candy? That was the mission of Cry Baby when it set out to create Cry Baby Bubble Gum Balls. Cry Baby is most popular for its hard candy that would make your mouth pucker up with its insanely sour flavors, so when they launched a variation that was bubblegum based, you know that kids all over the country flocked to their local candy shop to get their hands on a few. And if you're wondering just how sour Cry Baby Bubble Gum Balls are, let's just say that it's rather hard to blow a world record bubble when your mouth is zapped of all moisture thanks to the overwhelming sour flavor that coats every bit of your taste buds.
8. Fruit Stripe
If you're an older gum fan, then you've definitely heard of Fruit Stripe. The five-flavored gum was invented by James Parker in 1969 and produced by the Beech-Nut Company. This candy is recognized as the first multi-flavored pack of gum which consisted of melon, cherry, orange, lemon, and peach flavors. For all the flavor that Fruit Stripe packed, it only lasted for a matter of minutes, leading you to pick up another piece and try something new. It might not be the perfect piece of gum for blowing bubbles, but best believe it holds its own as one of the most iconic gums of all time.
9. Quench Gum
Quench Gum is unlike any other gum on this list as it was developed by Mueller Sports Medicine in the 1970s to aid athletes in performance. We've all seen athletes of different disciplines chewing gum while they play, so Mueller decided to make a gum that was packed full of electrolytes to enhance performance. The bubblegum company made a significant pivot in 2021 to rebrand with the hopes of finding new popularity and has continued to grow its reputation in the sports industry. You can find Quench Gum in double raspberry, orange fruit punch, strawberry watermelon, lemon, fruit punch, orange, and grape. If you're an athlete, or you just like to pretend you're one on the weekends, Quench might just be what you need to take your performance to another level.
10. Bubblegum Cigars
For those of you who remember Candy Cigarettes, Bubblegum Cigars are considered the close cousin to the retro candy. These were the bubblegum treats every kid wanted to chew back in the day because it was the closest thing you could get to dad's evening cigar that he'd have after dinner. Bubblegum Cigars were made famous in brick-and-mortar candy stores where you could grab a pack for a few cents and knaw on them all day. While they might lack the flexibility that is needed to blow massive bubbles, it holds a special place in bubblegum history, making it a must have on this list.

Ready to blow some bubbles?

Checkout our bubblegum category and grab all of your favorites from this list!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Best Bubblegum Ranked According To A Candy Company

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Do you know what the Guiness World Record is for the largest bubblegum bubble ever blown? 50 centimeters and 8 millimeters in diameter. That's over 19 inches wide! The record is held by Alabama native, Chad Fell who broke the record in 2004 while chewing on three pieces of Dubble Bubble bubblegum.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How do I make an order? - Just click on the product of your choice, add it to your cart. This will take you to your shopping cart where quantities can be changed. Then click 'checkout' to fill out your credit card details to pay for your chosen items. We also have a bank transfer option which will take longer as we have to wait for the payment to clear, please follow the instructions in the checkout cart.

How do I pay for my order? Is it safe to use my credit card? - When you checkout you are directed to Stripe secure payment gateway where you can enter your details safely.

Payment Options - On checkout you can either opt to pay by Credit Card, Paypal, Poli Live Bank Transfer, Afterpay or over the counter bank deposit. Credit Card, Afterpay and Paypal transactions are processed immediately and in most cases your order will be shipped on the same or next working day. Poli or Bank Transfer may take longer.

If you opt to pay by bank deposit your order will be shipped once the payment clears which generally takes 6-24 hours, overnight but in some cases (public holidays etc) this may take longer. If you are with Westpac it will be instant.

If you forgot to grab the bank details from the checkout please deposit orders into the account below. Please ensure you include your order number (i.e. #1234) as a reference when depositing. Your order number can be found in the order confirmation you receive by email.
Bank Details: ANZ - 01-0215-0252723-00
How much does shipping cost? - Checkout has all the delivery options currently available including our standard nationwide rate of $5.99, which does not include rural addresses. Rural deliveries come at an extra cost listed currently at $9.99 nationwide. Please email us at hello@unitedsweets.co.nz if you would like to enquire about Saturday or Urgent delivery or International Shipping.

We don't usually use/ collab with bloggers or social media influences, but feel free to email us at hello@unitedsweets.co.nz as every situation is different and considered.

In the past we have supported hundreds of events, people, teams, businesses, charities, clubs and schools with product donations. We don't offer any form of monetary sponsorship. Please send you request and information to Leyton at hello@unitedsweets.co.nz. Currently we are open to new opportunities to help out our local and National communities.

I'm after a certain product can you order it in for me? - We might already have a product you're interested in coming so please and we'll see if we can help you out! Otherwise use our FB page to stay up to date or make any suggestions, The more support a product has, the harder we try to get it in.

What if my order is wrong, lost or damaged? - We will always do our best to make sure our customers are happy. Please see check out our or contact us to discuss any problems directly, please email us at hello@unitedsweets.co.nz - We treat every enquiry different, depending on the situation.

I have a food allergy, how do I find out the ingredients in one of your products sold? - If a product is listed on the website as Nut Free, Gluten Free, Caffeine Free, Sugar Free, Diary Free, Gelatin Free or Fat Free, it is because it is on the outside packaging of the product itself. Please for specific product information if it is not listed and we will try to help. Currently we do not have the information for all products, but are hoping to have it in the future. We would suggest searching the internet if you are unsure about a product before you buy and more importantly, before consuming.

How long will my order take to arrive? - Orders will arrive between 1- 7 days depending on the delivery option you choose and the day your ordered. (Currently there are no weekend courier runs, so if you order Thursday night or Friday your order will arrive Monday.) To have the best possible chance of getting your parcel overnight please have your order in before 2pm daily, so it can make our last courier pick up for the day, which is at 4pm. We try our very best, working late and past our normal operation hours to get all packages sent off asap. Please check your track and trace first and give your parcel 7 days before contacting us about your order. (In case it was made on a Thursday but doesn't arrive until the Monday or Tuesday if in a rural area.) Rural packages usually take 1 extra day. To see our shipping rates.

A product is 'Currently Out of Stock' or Disappeared from the site. How long until it's available again? - Most items will be back in stock within two weeks others could be up to a month or 2 depending on the date of the next shipment. But they could also be able to be put back into stock immediately. If you are after something in particular, please contact us straight away by emailing at hello@unitedsweets.co.nz or for the quickest response, please Facebook message us FB :)

What's the difference between an 'expiration date' and a 'best before date? - An 'expiration date' is the date after which the product is of no use, whereas the 'best before date' indicates the date before the product gives its original flavour. Therefore it is still safe to consume products after this 'best before' date.

Our Policy on Best Before Dates - We stock short shelf life items - the dates are always listed so please check before you buy. Some items may include, but are not limited to: Hostess Twinkies, HoHos, Zingers, Cupcakes, Snoballs and Ding Dongs, certain flavours of chips and other products. Once you buy them, they are not returnable, since the information is in the products description for you to see. This is why the choice is yours if you want them. Best by dates are put on by the manufacturers to advise you that the product is still good, but quality may decline. So please think about it before you buy if you are unsure, we want your buying experience to be a good one! For those of you who love a great deal check out our dated but still delicious items.

Do you Wholesale? No sorry, we do not currently wholesale.

Do you Franchise? Please contact us if you'd like to learn more about United Sweets Franchising.

My question isn't answered here, what should I do now? - we'd love to help you out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dubble Bubble Gum.Â Original Flavour. 2 Pieces Only.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Secret Science of Gum - American Chemical Society

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why is gum chewy? What helps make the bubbles in bubble gum? Chew on the answers in Gum!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our science fun this week was inspired by the nonfiction picture book Pop!: The Invention of Bubble Gum by Meghan McCarthy. Kids will enjoy the lively story of how accountant Walter Diemer started mixing this and that ingredient (at the factory where he worked), until he had invented a gum that could be used to blow bubbles. What a sweet tale!

This book just cries out for some hands-on activities.
Activity 1. Which type/brand of gum blows the best bubbles?
Gather:

Several brands of bubble gum and regular gum

Ruler (decide on inches or cm)

Pair of tongs or cardboard bubble caliper (see below)

Volunteer(s) to chew the gum and blow bubbles

Paper and pencil to record the results

The most difficult part of this project is finding a standard way to measure bubbles that are often a moving target. Check this website for a photo of a "bubble caliper" used for measuring record bubbles. Think about how you might build something similar or find a pair of kitchen tongs that might open wide enough to accommodate the largest bubbles. Try to find the widest point of the bubble. Practice on a few bubbles to make sure your system works and is relatively consistent.

Predict which brand will produce the biggest bubble. Now give the volunteer(s) each one stick of each type/brand of gum. Allow them to chew the gum for a few minutes and then blow bubbles. When they are confident that they are blowing the best bubbles they can with that type of gum, have them blow a few more and measure them. Decide how many bubbles of each type of gum you are going to measure in advance, so you record the same number for each test.

When you are done, add up the size of the bubbles for each type, and then divide by the number of bubbles you measured for that type. This will give you an average. You might want to graph your results with a bar graph to easily see the differences between the brands/types.
Activity 2. What happens to the gum when you chew it? Does it gain weight from the moisture in your mouth, lose weight, or stay the same?
Gather:

accurate kitchen scales

gum

wax paper to protect the scale (or the wrapper)

watch or timer

First, predict what you thinkÂ will happen. Take the wrapper off the gum. Place a piece of wax paper on the scale, and tare or zero the scale. If your scale does not tare, the record how much the wax paper weighs. Next place the dry gum on the scale. Record the weight (subtract the weight of the waxed paper if you did not zero it). Leave the wax paper in place.

Now chew the gum for one minute and weigh again. Record the weight. Weigh again at five minute and then at ten minutes of chewing. What is happening? Did the results follow your prediction? Try to figure out why or why not. Test more sticks and different kinds of gum, and have your friends and relatives try it, too. See if you get the same results.
Activity 3. Make your own bubble gum.
This video shows how bubble gum is made in a factory.

You can find kits and online recipes to make your own bubble gum (for example at Steve Spangler).

Try some other formulas, too. Be sure to write down what ingredients and the methods you use. Maybe with some time and the right ingredients, you could be the next Walter Diemer and discover something thrilling and new.

Links to other activities:

How long does sweet flavor last? How much sugar is there in bubble gum? See an experiment at Teach Engineering.

Why is it sticky? Learn more about the sticky properties of gum at Science in School.

Do you chew bubble gum? Let me know if you try some experiments with it. I'd love to hear what you find out.
Pop!: The Invention of Bubble Gum

A few other books and kits relating to bubble gum science:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our science fun this week was inspired by the nonfiction picture book Pop!: The Invention of Bubble Gum by Meghan McCarthy. Kids will enjoy the lively story of how accountant Walter Diemer started ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bubble gum was invented in 1928, almost by accident, by a 23-year-old accountant named Walter Diemer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Table of Contents

Why are organic polymers important?

What are the examples of natural polymers?

Read a brief summary of this topic

polymer, any of a class of natural or synthetic substances composed of very large molecules, called macromolecules, that are multiples of simpler chemical units called monomers. Polymers make up many of the materials in living organisms, including, for example, proteins, cellulose, and nucleic acids. Moreover, they constitute the basis of such minerals as diamond, quartz, and feldspar and such man-made materials as concrete, glass, paper, plastics, and rubbers.

The word polymer designates an unspecified number of monomer units. When the number of monomers is very large, the compound is sometimes called a high polymer. Polymers are not restricted to monomers of the same chemical composition or molecular weight and structure. Some natural polymers are composed of one kind of monomer. Most natural and synthetic polymers, however, are made up of two or more different types of monomers; such polymers are known as copolymers.

Natural polymers: organic and inorganic

Organic polymers play a crucial role in living things, providing basic structural materials and participating in vital life processes. For example, the solid parts of all plants are made up of polymers. These include cellulose, lignin, and various resins. Cellulose is a polysaccharide, a polymer that is composed of sugar molecules. Lignin consists of a complicated three-dimensional network of polymers. Wood resins are polymers of a simple hydrocarbon, isoprene. Another familiar isoprene polymer is rubber.

Other important natural polymers include the proteins, which are polymers of amino acids, and the nucleic acids, which are polymers of nucleotides-complex molecules composed of nitrogen-containing bases, sugars, and phosphoric acid. The nucleic acids carry genetic information in the cell. Starches, important sources of food energy derived from plants, are natural polymers composed of glucose.

Science: Fact or Fiction?

Many inorganic polymers also are found in nature, including diamond and graphite. Both are composed of carbon. In diamond, carbon atoms are linked in a three-dimensional network that gives the material its hardness. In graphite, used as a lubricant and in pencil "leads," the carbon atoms link in planes that can slide across one another.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Polymer | Description, Examples, Types, Material, Uses, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
polymer, any of a class of natural or synthetic substances composed of very large molecules, called macromolecules, that are multiples of simpler chemical units called monomers. Polymers make up many of the materials in living organisms, including, for example, proteins, cellulose, and nucleic acids.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Saliva contamination is a major clinical problem in restorative procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the time of salivary contamination during light curing on the degree of conversion and the microhardness of a restorative composite resin. Eight groups of 10 samples for measuring the microhardness and eight groups of 5 samples for evaluating the degree of conversion were prepared. The samples of each group were contaminated with human saliva at a certain time. The first group (T0) was contaminated before light curing. The specimens in groups T2-T30 were contaminated at 2, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 s after the start of light curing, respectively. The samples of group T40 were contaminated after light curing. The degree of conversion and the microhardness of the specimens were measured by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy and Vickers hardness testing techniques, respectively. The results of this study revealed that there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the degree of conversion of the composite resin. Consistent with the findings for the degree of conversion, significant differences in the microhardness between the groups were not found. In conclusion, from a clinical point of view, the results of our study showed that the time of salivary contamination (before, during or after light curing of composite resin) has no significant effect on the polymerization (degree of conversion) and one of the important mechanical properties of dental composite resins (microhardness).

Keywords: saliva, contamination, composite resin, degree of conversion, microhardness

1. Introduction

Composite resins revolutionized modern restorative dentistry in the 1960s and caused improvements in esthetic quality as well as providing good mechanical and physical properties. A main process in the formation of composite resins is polymerization. Basically, this process involves a chemical reaction of monomer molecules to form polymer chains. The clinical success of composite resins directly depends on the degree of conversion after photopolymerization [ 1]. The degree of conversion is an important parameter in evaluating the polymerization efficacy and is defined as the percentage of reacted aliphatic C=C bonds from the dimethacrylate monomers that are present in their polymeric matrices [ 2]. There are several direct and indirect methods of measuring the degree of conversion, such as Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, electron spin resonance, infrared spectroscopy, dynamic mechanical thermal analysis and attenuated total reflection [ 3, 4].

Inadequate polymerization has several negative effects, including discoloration, decrease in mechanical properties (such as hardness), weakened bond strength between tooth and restoration, increased water sorption and solubility, potential pulpal damage and higher cytotoxicity [ 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. The mechanical properties of restorative composite resins play an important role in determining the clinical longevity of restorations [ 10]. In this way, microhardness is one of the most important properties that are correlated with compressive strength, wear resistance, degree of conversion and color stability [ 11, 12, 13, 14]. It is defined as the material surface resistance to plastic deformation by indentation.

With increased demand and the use of composite resins as an alternative to amalgam fillings, the contamination issue has become an important problem in dentistry [ 15, 16]. Salivary contamination can have adverse effects on the longevity of the restoration and may lead to sensitivity, tooth discoloration and finally, loss of the restoration [ 17]. Most caries occurs in areas where complete isolation is difficult, such as near or at the gingival margin where saliva contamination is likely to occur [ 18]; or when the use of a rubber dam is impossible in lengthy clinical treatment, especially in pediatric dentistry [ 19, 20]. Salivary contamination can occur at any time during a restorative procedure. The effect of salivary contamination on the composite resin bond strength has been the subject of several studies. Some of these papers showed that contamination with saliva decreases bond strength [ 17, 21, 22, 23], while others found no significant decrease in bond strength after salivary contamination [ 24, 25].

To the best of our knowledge, there have been no previous studies evaluating the effect of the time of salivary contamination of composite resins on the degree of conversion and the microhardness. Therefore, the main goal of this study was to investigate the effect of the time of salivary contamination during light curing on the degree of conversion and the microhardness of a composite resin. The null hypothesis was that the time of salivary contamination during light curing has no significant effect on the degree of conversion or the microhardness of composite resins.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sample Preparation

This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran (ethical code: IR.MUMS.REC.1392.13). Saliva was collected from a single individual aged 23 years in a sterile beaker and applied immediately to the test specimens. The volume of the saliva sample was set to 100 µL for each specimen.

To investigate the effect of the time of salivary contamination during light curing on the microhardness of composite resin, five molds (diameter of 4 mm and thickness of 2 mm, Dental school, Dental Materials Laboratory, Mashhad, Iran) was used to prepare disk-shaped specimens ( Figure 1 ). The mold was filled with a composite resin (Filtek TM Z350 XT, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA).

All specimens were light cured for 40 s using a light-emitting diode (LED) curing unit (500 mW/cm ², Bluephase ® C8, Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Schaan, Liechtenstein). The surface of each specimen was contaminated with human saliva and light curing was performed as follows (eight groups of n = 10 samples):

T0: Samples were contaminated with human saliva before the start of light curing, and then light cured for 40 s (negative control).

T2: Samples were contaminated with human saliva 2 s after the start of light curing.

T5: Samples were contaminated with human saliva 5 s after the start of light curing.

T10: Samples were contaminated with human saliva 10 s after the start of light curing.

T15: Samples were contaminated with human saliva 15 s after the start of light curing.

T20: Samples were contaminated with human saliva 20 s after the start of light curing.

T30: Samples were contaminated with human saliva 30 s after the start of light curing.

T40: Samples were light cured for 40 s, before being contaminated with human saliva (positive control).

The samples were stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h before testing.

2.2. Microhardness and Degree of Conversion Measurements

The microhardness of five points was measured with a Vickers hardness tester (Buhler microhardness tester, model no. 1600-6125, Braunschweig, Germany) using a 50 gf load for a 45 s dwell time. The mean of the five indentations' measurements was recorded as the Vickers hardness.

To measure the degree of conversion, the specimens were prepared in eight groups of five samples as described above for the microhardness test. The cured specimens were ground into a fine powder by a mortar and pestle, before 2 mg of the powder was mixed with 200 mg of potassium bromide (KBr) powder. Next, KBr pellets were prepared under heavy pressure. The degree of conversion was measured by FTIR spectroscopy (Avatar 370, Thermo Nicolet, San Diego, CA, USA) for both uncured and cured specimens. The degree of the conversion was determined using the changes in the ratios of absorbance intensities of aliphatic C=C (peak at 1638 cm −1) to aromatic C-C (peak at 1608 cm −1) in the cured and uncured states, according to the following equation:

Degree of conversion(%)=(1−(A a l i p h a t i c A a r o m a t i c ) c u r e d (A a l i p h a t i c A a r o m a t i c ) u n c u r e d )×100

2.3. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 11.5, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The data were analyzed by Shapiro-Wilk test to evaluate the normality of the data. Microhardness and degree of conversion data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests, respectively. Statistical significance was set at 5%.

3. Results

Descriptive statistics of the microhardness of composite resin for the eight groups are shown in Table 1 . None of the microhardness data followed a normal distribution as examined by the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Kruskal-Wallis test ( Table 2 ) demonstrated no significant differences between groups ( p > 0.05).

Table 1

Group

Microhardness (VHN)

Mean

Standard Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

Table 2

Group

Mean Rank

Χ ²

df

p-Value

T2

34.95

T5

32.80

T10

28.40

T15

53.05

T20

54.45

T30

30.65

T40

43.15

The degree of conversion values of the groups is represented in Table 3 . The Shapiro-Wilk test confirmed that the values were normally distributed. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that the difference in the degree of conversion between the groups was not statistically significant ( p > 0.05) ( Table 4 ), which followed the same trend as microhardness.

Table 3

Group

Degree of Conversion (%)

Mean

Standard Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

Table 4

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

p-Value

Between groups

61.637

7

8.805

1.541

0.189

Within groups

182.852

32

5.714

-

-

Total

244.489

39

-

-

-

4. Discussion

Saliva contamination is a major clinical problem in restorative procedures as it consists of 99% water. Jacobsen et al. [ 26] indicated that water interferes with the polymerization process of adhesive systems. Similarly, the presence of water may have an adverse effect on the polymerization of composite resins. Therefore, in this in vitro study, the effects of the time of salivary contamination during light curing on the degree of conversion and the microhardness were investigated. Several researchers studied the effects of saliva contamination on bond strength [ 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29] although the effect of the time of salivary contamination during light curing on the degree of conversion and the microhardness had not been evaluated.

The degree of conversion and the microhardness are two important properties that determine the mechanical and physical behavior of composite resin restorations. In this study, the degree of conversion and the microhardness of the samples were measured with the FTIR and Vickers hardness techniques, respectively, which are some of the most widely used techniques for evaluating the degree of conversion and the microhardness of composite resins. The results of this study revealed that the time of salivary contamination (before, during or after light curing) has no significant effect on the degree of conversion or the microhardness of a restorative composite resin. In other words, it had no significant effect on either the polymerization or mechanical behavior of the composite resin.

Several studies have shown a good correlation between the degree of conversion and the microhardness of composite resins [ 30, 31, 32]. However, some studies did not find this correlation [ 33, 34]. To our knowledge, there have been no studies evaluating the microhardness and the degree of conversion of composite resins, which were contaminated at different times of curing. Most of the studies focused on the effect of salivary contamination on the strength of the composite resin bond to the tooth. Sheikh et al. [ 35] studied the effect of saliva contamination and cleansing solutions on microtensile bond strengths of self-etch adhesives to dentin. Their results showed that neither saliva nor cleansing solutions adversely affected bond strength. Yoo et al. [ 23] found that saliva contamination and decontamination methods significantly affected the bond strength of one-step self-etching adhesive systems to dentin regardless of the type of materials evaluated. Kesar et al. [ 27] evaluated the effect of saliva contamination on the shear bond strength of self- and total-etch adhesive systems on enamel and dentin. Their results revealed that the shear bond strength of a self-etch adhesive system was better than the total-etch adhesive system, while there were no significant differences found within the subgroups of self-etch groups when the adhesive application was done before, after or without saliva contamination. Munaga et al. [ 22] found that saliva contamination significantly decreased the shear bond strength of the adhesive to dentin. Campoy et al. [ 36] evaluated the effect of saliva contamination at different stages of the bonding procedure on the bond failure rate of brackets, which were bonded with a hydrophilic self-etching primer. Their results showed that saliva contamination before or after the application of self-etching primer does not increase the clinical risk of bond failure in the bonding of brackets.

Moreover, some studies revealed that using a rubber dam is not necessary to achieve good results. Van Dijken et al. [ 37] showed that the use of a rubber dam had no effect on the marginal adaptation for anterior composites. Smales et al. [ 38] found that there were no clinically significant differences in the longevity rates of composite or amalgam, which could be directly related to the use or otherwise of rubber dams. In a review study, Cajazeira et al. [ 39] summarized that the operatory field isolation technique (rubber dam or cotton rolls) did not influence the longevity of restorations. Brunthaler et al. [ 40] concluded that the isolation method of the operative field and the professional status of operators (university or general dentist) had no significant effect on composite failure rates. According to these studies, the isolation of the operative field by using a rubber dam has no effect on the longevity of composite restorations. However, saliva contamination may have happened in this situation (without the use of rubber dam). The results of our study demonstrated that saliva contamination during the curing of composite restorations has no adverse effects on the degree of conversion and the microhardness. It should be considered when the light cured composites are polymerized toward the light cure units, the outer surface of composite restoration is first cured. Therefore, this may decrease the water penetration into composite restoration and this can be one of the reasons for the results of the current study, which demonstrated that salivary contamination has no negative effect on the degree of conversion of composite restorations.

Several studies revealed that the bond strength of adhesive systems was decreased by saliva contamination [ 41, 42, 43, 44]. However, saliva contamination did not have the same effect in different stages of bonding when using an adhesive [ 41, 45]. Our research focused on the effects of the saliva contamination on the step of the application of composite resins. From a clinical point of view, the results of our study showed that the time of salivary contamination (before, during or after light curing of composite resin) has no significant effect on the polymerization (degree of conversion) and one of the important mechanical properties of dental composite resins (microhardness).

5. Conclusions

Although previous studies demonstrated that salivary contamination before inserting composite resins may have adverse effects on bonding to tooth structures, the results of our study showed that saliva contamination during light curing of composite restorations has no significant effect on the degree of conversion or the microhardness of these materials.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Research Vice Chancellor of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences for financial support to conduct this study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.S. and A.B.; Methodology, R.S., A.B. and A.R.; Software, F.M.; Formal analysis, R.S. and A.B.; Investigation, F.M.; Resources, F.M., A.R.; Data curation, R.S.; Writing-original draft preparation, A.R.; Writing-review and editing, R.S., A.B. and A.R.; Supervision, R.S. and A.B.; Project administration, R.S.; Funding acquisition, R.S.

Funding

This research was funded by the Vice Chancellor of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences (Grant number: 910536).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

References

4. Tarle Z., Meniga A., Šutalo J. Correlation between degree of conversion and light transmission through resin composite samples. Acta Stomatol. Croat. 1995;29:9-14. [ Google Scholar]

7. Park J.-K., Kim T.-H., Ko C.-C., Garcia-Godoy F., Kim H.-I., Kwon Y.H. Effect of staining solutions on discoloration of resin nanocomposites. Am. J. Dent. 2010;23:39. [[ PMC free article] [ PubMed] Google Scholar]

9. Miletic V. Dental Composite Materials for Direct Restorations. Springer; New York, NY, USA: 2017. [ Google Scholar]

18. Neelagiri K., Kundabala M., Shashi R.A., Thomas M.S., Parolia A. Effects of saliva contamination and decontamination procedures on shear bond strength of self-etch dentine bonding systems: An in vitro study. J. Conserv. Dent. 2010;13:71. [[ PMC free article] [ PubMed] Google Scholar]

32. Galvão M.R., Caldas S.G.F.R., Bagnato V.S., De Souza Rastelli A.N., De Andrade M.F. Evaluation of degree of conversion and hardness of dental composites photo-activated with different light guide tips. Eur. J. Dent. 2013;7:86. [[ PMC free article] [ PubMed] Google Scholar]

Articles from Biomimetics are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Effect of the Time of Salivary Contamination during Light Curing on Degree of Conversion and Microhardness of a Restorative Composite Resin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Saliva contamination is a major clinical problem in restorative procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the time of salivary contamination during light curing on the degree of conversion and the microhardness of a restorative ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Remember being eight years old and trying to blow a gum bubble bigger than your head? You loved that sticky treat when you were a kid. Who are you kidding? You still love it.

So does everyone else. Bubble gum is everywhere, from vending machines to your favorite online bulk candy store.

But where did bubble gum come from?

The History of Bubble Gum

Gum has been around in one form or another since nearly the beginning of human history. The Maya had a version of it, and so did ancient northern Europeans.

When was Bubble Gum Invented and Who Invented It?

The first gum sold commercially was created by John Curtis in the 1840's. It was made from the resin of spruce trees. Over the years people invented artificial flavorings, chewier substances and new forms, like the .

Bubble gum was invented in 1906 by Frank Fleer. He wanted a way to stand out from his rival chewing gum manufacturers, and boy did he find it.

His first attempt was too sticky, which was called Blibber-Blubber, but Fleer didn't give up. He set a team to work on it. In 1928, 22 years after Fleer first got the idea, an employee named Walter Diemer created a successful formula, which is famously called Dubble Bubble.

Dubble Bubble

Is it any surprise, then, that Double Bubble has become one of America's favorite bubble gum brands with chewy treats in all kinds of flavors and forms. Including:

Dubble Bubble Gum Balls - This classic rainbow of bite-size gumballs includes strawberry, blueberry, lemon-lime, orange, cherry, banana, grape and pineapple.

Dubble Bubble Home Run Baseball Gum - They look like baseballs but they're really gum! Perfect for your baseball team, softball team, or sports-themed party.

Dubble Bubble Sugar Free Gum - Can't have sugar, but want to enjoy a chewy treat? Double Bubble has you covered with sugar free bubble gum.

Dubble Bubble Twists - Individually wrapped chunks of chewy gum with the classic flavor of Double Bubble.

Dubble Bubble Mix - If you just can't decide, get a bit of everything with gum balls, cry baby sour gumballs, and assorted flavored bubble gum twists in grape, apple, original, and watermelon flavors.

Beyond Double Bubble

Of course, Double Bubble isn't the only company to make bubble gum. Other manufacturers adjusted the idea and ran with it, resulting in some pretty innovative treats.

Big League Chew - Classic pouches of shredded gum makes you look like a baseball player from the heyday of the game.

Big League Chew Bubblegum Balls - Get the great flavor of Big League Chew in a classic gumball package.

Bubble Gum Cigars - Celebrate the birth of a baby with a cigar that's safe for the kiddies. It's a boy and it's a girl . Cigars help you welcome your little one.

Original Bazooka - A blast of bubblegum flavor in a hip new package.

Hubba Bubba Bubble Tape - Feet of fun! This gum tape comes inside its own tape dispenser. Rip off a little. Or take a lot. It's up to you. This twelve pack includes tangy tropical, sour blue raspberry and of course, awesome original. More than 72 feet of bubble gum fun.

Even more Bubble Gum Fun

For even more fun, visit our bulk candy store. There you'll find gumballs in every color of the rainbow, perfect for your party or candy buffet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The History of Bubble Gum: Who, When, and Why It Was Invented

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Shop our online candy store at Sweet Services! We offer bulk candy in a variety of candy colors, flavors for your events, weddings, and a whole lot more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The .gov means it's official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Affiliations

¹ School of Environment, Northeast Normal University, 2555 Jingyue Street, Changchun 130117, China.

² School of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, College Road, Cranfield, Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, United Kingdom.

³ School of Environment, Northeast Normal University, 2555 Jingyue Street, Changchun 130117, China. Electronic address: huoy362@nenu.edu.cn.

⁴ Jilin Academy of Agricultural Science, 1363 Shengtai Street, Changchun 130033, China. Electronic address: xiaodan_nky@163.com.

Affiliations

¹ School of Environment, Northeast Normal University, 2555 Jingyue Street, Changchun 130117, China.

² School of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, College Road, Cranfield, Bedfordshire MK43 0AL, United Kingdom.

³ School of Environment, Northeast Normal University, 2555 Jingyue Street, Changchun 130117, China. Electronic address: huoy362@nenu.edu.cn.

⁴ Jilin Academy of Agricultural Science, 1363 Shengtai Street, Changchun 130033, China. Electronic address: xiaodan_nky@163.com.

Abstract

Bubble aeration has been widely applied in water/wastewater treatment, however its low gas utilization rate results in high energy consumption. Application of micro-nanobubbles (MNB) has emerged as a process with the potential to significantly increase gas utilisation due to their high relative surface area and high gas-liquid mass transfer efficiency. In this study, we demonstrate through calibrated models that MNB of an optimum bubble size can shrink and burst at or below the water surface enabling (1) all encapsulated gas to thoroughly dissolve in water, and (2) the bursting of nanobubbles to potentially generate free radicals. Through the understanding of MNB dimensional characteristics and bubble behaviour in water, a dynamic model that integrated force balance (i.e. buoyancy force, gravity, drag force, Basset force and virtual mass force), and mass transfer was developed to describe the rising velocity and radius variation of MNB along its upward trajectory. Unlike for conventional millimetre-sized bubbles, intensive gas dissolution of MNBs led to radius reduction for small bubbles, while a large initial radius triggers bubble swelling. The initial water depth was also crucial, where greater depth could drive the potential for bubble shrinkage so that they were more liable to contract. For example, the optimum bubble size of air (42-194 μm) and oxygen (127-470 μm) MNB that could achieve complete gas transfer (100% gas utilisation) for a range of specific water depths (0.5-10 m) were calculated. The modelling results for microbubbles (10-530 μm) were well validated by the experimental data (R ²>0.85). However, the validation of the modelling results for nanobubble (<1 μm) aeration requires further study due to a lack of available empirical data. In this study, the proposed model and analysis provided new insights into understanding bubble dynamics in water and offered fundamental guidance for practitioners looking to upgrade bubble aeration system.

Keywords: Bubble dynamics; Gas-liquid transfer; Micro-nanobubble technology; Water and wastewater treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Similar articles

A comparative study of removal efficiency of organic contaminant in landfill leachate-contaminated groundwater under micro-nano-bubble and common bubble aeration.

Bai M, Liu Z, Zhan L, Liu Z, Fan Z. Bai M, et al. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2022 Dec;29(58):87534-87544. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-21805-7. Epub 2022 Jul 11. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2022. PMID: 35821314

Characteristics of micro-nano bubbles and potential application in groundwater bioremediation.

Li H, Hu L, Song D, Lin F. Li H, et al. Water Environ Res. 2014 Sep;86(9):844-51. doi: 10.2175/106143014x14062131177953. Water Environ Res. 2014. PMID: 25327025

Nanobubbles produced by nanopores to probe gas-liquid mass transfer characteristics.

Sharma H, Nirmalkar N, Zhang W. Sharma H, et al. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2024 Jul;665:274-285. doi: 10.1016/j.jcis.2024.03.080. Epub 2024 Mar 18. J Colloid Interface Sci. 2024. PMID: 38531273

Microbubble- and nanobubble-aeration for upgrading conventional activated sludge process: A review.

Zhou S, Liu M, Chen B, Sun L, Lu H. Zhou S, et al. Bioresour Technol. 2022 Oct;362:127826. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127826. Epub 2022 Aug 25. Bioresour Technol. 2022. PMID: 36029987 Review.

Stability of Engineered Micro or Nanobubbles for Biomedical Applications.

Park B, Yoon S, Choi Y, Jang J, Park S, Choi J. Park B, et al. Pharmaceutics. 2020 Nov 13;12(11):1089. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics12111089. Pharmaceutics. 2020. PMID: 33202709 Free PMC article. Review.

Cited by

Temperature impacts on the growth of hydrogen bubbles during ultrasonic vibration-enhanced hydrogen generation.

Su H, Sun J, Wang C, Wang H. Su H, et al. Ultrason Sonochem. 2024 Jan;102:106734. doi: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2023.106734. Epub 2023 Dec 16. Ultrason Sonochem. 2024. PMID: 38128391 Free PMC article.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
national center for biotechnology information

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A modelling approach to explore the optimum bubble size for micro-nanobubble aeration - PubMed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bubble aeration has been widely applied in water/wastewater treatment, however its low gas utilization rate results in high energy consumption. Application of micro-nanobubbles (MNB) has emerged as a process with the potential to significantly increase gas utilisation due to their high relative surf ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bubble gum (or bubblegum) is a type of chewing gum, designed to be inflated out of the mouth as a bubble.

While there is a bubble gum "flavor" - which various artificial flavorings including esters are mixed to obtain - it varies from one company to another. Esters used in synthetic bubble gum flavoring may include methyl salicylate, ethyl butyrate, benzyl acetate, amyl acetate or cinnamic aldehyde.[better source needed ] A natural bubble gum flavoring can be produced by combining banana, pineapple, cinnamon, cloves, and wintergreen. Vanilla, cherry, lemon, and orange oil have also been suggested as ingredients.

In modern chewing gum, if natural rubber such as chicle is used, it must pass several purity and cleanliness tests. However, most modern types of chewing gum use synthetic gum-based materials. These materials allow for longer lasting flavor, a softer texture, and a reduction in tackiness.

As a sort of chewing gum consisting of long-chain polysaccharides, bubblegum can typically exhibit linear and nonlinear viscoelastic behaviors. Therefore, the distinct deformations under chewing can be affected by shear rate, shear strain, and shear stress applied through teeth. Based on these, it is helpful to characterize the intrinsic rheological properties of chewing gums for future improvement and optimization of commercial products' texture and chewiness.

The linear viscoelastic (LVE) property can be probed on pre-shaped gum cuds through a small isothermal strain deformation (i.e., below yield strain) under small amplitude oscillatory shear (SAOS). Here the critical yield strain is defined as the modulus deviating about 10% from its initial value. Under it, gum cuds show elastic deformation that follows power-law behavior as a critical gel in the linear regime; otherwise, exhibiting nonlinear responses with increasing shear stress (plasticity). Normally, this yield strain is less than 1%.

Regarding plastic deformation, the nonlinear viscoelasticity can be explored through shear creep experiments (relaxation time) and the start-up of steady shear stress-controlled uniaxial/biaxial extension. The former demonstrates that fractional recovery, defined as the ratio between measured strain after deformation and recovered strain without adding shear stress, for chewing gums under moderate shear stress (~ 1000 Pa) is between 25% and 40%. This relatively high fractional recovery (the ability to recover its previous shape) is consistent with providing a satisfying sensory feel. On the contrary, bubble gums only show fractional recovery lower than 15%. Therefore, bubble gums can withstand more substantial stresses before break-up than normal chewing gums. This distinction is mainly due to its on-purpose design, which allows it to form and maintain large, stable bubbles when blown up through sizeable shear stress on the tongue.

The stretching experiment shows gum cuds owning strain hardening during uniaxial extension. In particular, the LVE regime is absent with applying a constant Hencky strain rate, like the plastic flow in polycrystals or polymers. Moreover, different values of Hencky strain rates can lead to either extensional viscosity plateaus before sagging (macroscopic failure) or necking (strain hardening) following a low/high strain rate. Typically, the strain softening at a low strain rate manifests the disintegration of brittle networks within gums. In contrast, the nonuniform deformation of polymers and crystallization induced by strain explain the strain hardening behavior at a high strain rate.

Various colors of bubble gum balls

In 1928, Walter Diemer, an accountant for the Fleer Chewing Gum Company in Philadelphia, was experimenting with new gum recipes. One recipe, based on a formula for a chewing gum called " Blibber-Blubber", was found to be less sticky than regular chewing gum and stretched more easily. This gum became highly successful and was eventually named by the president of Fleer as Dubble Bubble because of its stretchy texture.

This remained the dominant brand of bubble gum until after WWII, when Bazooka bubble gum entered the market.

Until the 1970s, bubble gum still tended to stick to one's face as a bubble popped. At that time, synthetic bubble gum was introduced, which would almost never stick. The first brands in the US to use these new synthetic gum bases were Hubba Bubba and Bubble Yum.[citation needed ]

Bubble gum got its distinctive pink color because the original recipe Diemer worked on produced a dingy gray colored gum, so he added red dye (diluted to pink), as that was the only dye he had on hand at the time.

In taste tests, children tend to prefer strawberry and blue raspberry flavors, rejecting more complex flavors, as they say these make them want to swallow the gum rather than continue chewing.

In 1996, Susan Montgomery Williams of Fresno, California, set the Guinness World Record for largest bubble gum bubble ever blown, which was 26 inches (66 cm) in diameter. However, Chad Fell holds the record for "Largest Hands-free Bubblegum Bubble" at 20 inches (51 cm), achieved on 24 April 2004.

Bubblegum Alley is a tourist attraction in downtown San Luis Obispo, California, known for its accumulation of used bubble gum on the walls of an alley.

The Market Theater Gum Wall is a brick wall covered in used chewing gum, located in an alleyway in Post Alley under Pike Place Market in Downtown Seattle.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bubble gum (or bubblegum) is a type of chewing gum, designed to be inflated out of the mouth as a bubble. While there is a bubble gum "flavor" - which various artificial flavorings including esters are mixed to obtain - it varies from one company to another.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Can you help me? What stuff do they put in gum to make it so soft/sweet?

The size of a bubble blown from a bubble gum depends on various factors, such as the amount of gum used, chewing technique, and the consistency of the gum. Additionally, different people may have different preferences for the texture and flavor of bubble gum, which can affect the size of the bubble blown.

There is no conclusive scientific evidence or studies that determine which bubble gum brand blows the biggest bubble. However, some bubble gum brands are marketed as being good for blowing bubbles, such as Bubblicious, Hubba Bubba, and Double Bubble. It may be helpful to try out different brands and experiment with different techniques to see which works best for you to blow the biggest bubble.

Science is not just a subject, it's a way of thinking!
Keep exploring!

Sid

To give gum its sweet taste, various sweeteners are added. These can include sugar, corn syrup, or artificial sweeteners like aspartame or sucralose. Sugar-free gums often use artificial sweeteners to provide sweetness without the added calories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ask an Expert: What bubble gum brand blows the biggest bubble?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Can you help me? What stuff do they put in gum to make it so soft/sweet? The size of a bubble blown from a bubble gum depends on various factors, such as the amount of gum used, chewing technique, and the consistency of the gum.