Answer · confidence: partial
Why are lick counts so different, maybe from licking hard, fast, or spit?
Research question: Why do the reported lick counts differ so much, and what conditions such as lick force, speed, or saliva might explain it?
The records show that a Purdue licking machine required 364 licks to reach the center of a Tootsie Pop, whereas human volunteers required 252, demonstrating that different methods yield different counts 10. While the provided facts do not explicitly link saliva or lick force to these specific candy counts, they note that saliva protection and viscosity vary significantly between individuals and conditions 27. Additionally, the hardness of a product affects how long it takes to dissolve, which can alter the consumption experience 1. Therefore, the variation in counts is attributed to the difference between mechanical and human performance, with individual physiological factors like saliva potentially influencing the process 102.
Checked 2026-10-15. Only documented and supported facts are used.
Dig deeper on this questionSources
[1] supported
Harder lollipops and lozenges take longer to dissolve, which slows drug release and means the same product can behave differently depending on how it is consumed.
"time to dissolve and thus slow down the drug release."A Review of Medicated Confectioneries (2023)
[2] supported
Saliva protection varies significantly from person to person, which can change how much an acidic candy erodes teeth.
"The salivary protection undergoes significant variations among individuals."Erosive potential of sugar-free hard candies dissolved in water and artificial saliva (2016)
[3] supported
Saliva ingredient concentrations depend on flow rate, gland, gender, time of day, stimulus, and several other factors, so sampling standardization remains unsolved.
"Sampling standardization still seems to be an unsolved problem as the concentration of the ingredients depends on the flow rate, the gland, gender, time of the day, the stimulus, and several other factors [24, 27]."Sensors for in situ monitoring of oral and dental health parameters in saliva (2023)
[4] supported
Smaller drug particles are released faster because they present more surface area, so particle size can change how quickly a licked or dissolved product releases its drug.
"The smaller the particle size of the drug faster the release rate of the drug due to the increase in the surface of the drug."A Review of Medicated Confectioneries (2023)
[5] supported
Reduced salivary flow, as in hypo-salivation, lowers the protective effect of saliva against acid.
"under hypo salivation conditions, it may reach values below"Erosive potential of sugar-free hard candies dissolved in water and artificial saliva (2016)
[6] supported
The volume of saliva sampled varies widely, and external influences such as food and drinks add substantial variation.
"Thus, the variation in the sampling volumes and the influence of external factors like food and drinks is huge [28]."Sensors for in situ monitoring of oral and dental health parameters in saliva (2023)
[7] supported
Saliva viscosity varies widely, and stimulating salivary flow dilutes compounds, which complicates sensor development.
"Furthermore, the wide range of saliva viscosity and, therefore, the dilution of compounds due to stimulation of salivary flow is a crucial problem"Sensors for in situ monitoring of oral and dental health parameters in saliva (2023)
[8] supported
Hard candies are consumed over an average period that can reach about 15 minutes, which affects how long saliva is exposed to acid.
"the average consumption time may reach 15 min"Erosive potential of sugar-free hard candies dissolved in water and artificial saliva (2016)
[9] supported
Patients with compromised salivary protection may be at risk of dental erosion even from products with low erosivity.
"In these patients, even products with low erosivity may represent a risk to dental erosion."Erosive potential of sugar-free hard candies dissolved in water and artificial saliva (2016)
[10] supported
A Purdue licking machine needed 364 licks to reach a Tootsie Pop's center, while some of Purdue's volunteers needed 252, so machines and humans gave different counts.
"Purdue found that it took 364 licks for a licking machine that they had built, but 252 licks from some of their volunteers."How Many Licks Does it REALLY Take to Get to the Center of a Tootsie Pop?
[11] supported
The patent describes an evaluation metric based on "tongue MPH" or "orgasms per hour" as a way to score user performance, but it does not report lick counts or explain differences between them.
"a graphical indication of “tongue MPH” or “orgasms per hour”"US20140155690A1 - Touchscreen Cunnilingus Training Simulator - Google Patents
[12] supported
The simulator gives speed-related corrections such as "Faster" or "Slower", so the intended lick speed is adjusted during play rather than fixed.
"Verbal prompts can be explicit instructions such as “Softly suck on the clitoris”, encouragements such as “Oh yes!” or “Ooooh don't stop!”, or corrections such as “Faster” or “Slower”."US20140155690A1 - Touchscreen Cunnilingus Training Simulator - Google Patents
[13] supported
The system is designed to be customizable because every woman is different, allowing the user, partner, or a sex therapist to adjust settings such as speed and intensity.
"Since every woman is different, the system may also be customizable by the user, the user's partner, or a third party such as a sex therapist."US20140155690A1 - Touchscreen Cunnilingus Training Simulator - Google Patents