It reads like the sort of detective yarn beloved by BBC viewers, except that instead of the one-hour format, this story took nearly 50 years to unravel. Chapter one began in 1901, when young East Coast dental school graduate Frederick McKay moved to Colorado Springs, Colorado, and was shocked by the prevalence of what became known as Colorado Brown Stain disorder: grotesque stains on the teeth of 90 percent of children born there. Trying to figure out what was causing the problem, he enlisted the aid of G.V. Black, a noted dental researcher. The pair soon noted the teeth of people who had moved there as adults were unaffected and stained teeth were exceptionally resistant to decay.
Chapter two saw McKay and others narrowing the cause down to water supplies. In particular, when (on McKay’s advice) the town of Oakley, Idaho, changed its supply from one spring to another, the mottling on new teeth of children disappeared. Fast forward to chemists at the Alcoa Corporation testing water samples using advanced photospectrographic analyses. They found high levels of the element fluorine in water from those communities which reported mottling in their children’s teeth.
Our final chapter has Trendley Dean, director of the dental hygiene unit at the National Institute of Health, as its protagonist. Starting in 1931, Dean established that at levels of up to 1 part per million in drinking water, fluoride (a fluorine compound, usually sodium fluoride) didn’t cause mottling but helped prevent decay by slowing the demineralization of tooth enamel. It also promoted remineralization of the enamel. In 1944, he persuaded the City Commission of Grand Rapids, Michigan, to add fluoride to its public water supply. After just 11 years, Dean announced that the decay rate among Grand Rapids children born after fluoride was added to the water supply dropped more than 60 percent. And thus was brought into existence what’s been called the single most effective public health measure to inhibit tooth decay.
Today, the World Health Organization endorses fluoridation of water supplies that lack adequate fluoride levels, while the U.S. Centers for Disease Control lists it as one of the 10 greatest health achievements of the 20th century. Two months ago, Public Health England issued an in-depth report that concluded that 5 year olds in fluoridated areas were much less likely to experience tooth decay than in non-fluoridated areas. Importantly, children from relatively non-affluent areas benefited the most. This is relevant to the situation in the U.S. since — unlike most European countries, where a filling typically costs under $100 (in Hungary, it’s about $10!) — dentist visits are expensive and we don’t teach dental care in schools, so water fluoridation is often the prime source of fluoride for kids.
Like vaccinating and fortifying milk with vitamin D, adding fluoride to water supplies to prevent dental decay is controversial in the U.S., pitting “common good” against “individual rights.” During the Cold War, conspiracy theorists even saw fluoridation as a communist plot designed to undermine the health of Americans. More recently, it has been claimed to cause, among other conditions, Down’s syndrome, kidney stones and bladder cancer. None of these claims has stood up to scrutiny.
If you live in Arcata or Eureka, your city tap water contains 0.4 to 0.7 parts per million of fluoride. Your kids’ teeth thank you.
Barry Evans (barryevans9@yahoo.com) has just waded through a small library of pro- and con-fluoridation documents. Until more evidence is presented to the contrary, he’s firmly on the pro side.
Related Stories
This article appears in A Caregiver’s Final Act.
Fluoridation began with the mistaken belief that ingested fluoride was essential to build decay-resistent teeth. Unfortunately, science disproved all that. Fluoride ingestion does not reduce tooth decay, is not a nutrient and is not essential for healthy teeth. Consuming a fluoride free diet does not cause tooth decay. Instead of spreading less tooth decay across the US, fluoridation has spread dental fluorosis. Tooth decay crises are occurring in all fluoridated cities, states, and countries http://www.FluorideNews.Blogspot.com while fluoride overdose has become the new epidemic http://www.FluorideDangers.Blogspot.com
Tooth decay rates have gone down since fluoridation began; but there’s no proof it was the fluoride in the water. At the same time, foods were fortified with vitamin D (which prevents tooth decay), dental care became more affordable, oral hygiene awareness increased, nutrition improved, antibiotics were more widely used, etc.
There is absolutely no evidence that fluoridation is safe for everyone over their lifetimes. In fact, there are over 300 studies, 50+ of them human, showing fluoride gets into the brain where it doesn’t belong. Fluoride is a drug with adverse side effects which shouldn’t be force-fed to every American via the water supply and foods made with that water over their lifetime with dose based on thirst and not age, health, weight and need. and prescribed by your local lobbied-politician.
Politics, not science, keeps fluoridation afloat.
Wow, Nyscof, aka the Media Relations Director for the New York antifluoridationist faction, FAN, unleashes in her comment so much false information that it is difficult to find anything of any accuracy there…..which is typical of comments fom antifluoridationists.
Interestingly enough, nyscof fails to mention the recent findings of the NTP study which her FAN instigated. This was a study by the highly respected National Toxicology Program, for which FAN provided its… over 300 studies, 50+ of them human, showing fluoride gets into the brain where it doesn’t belong….and which FAN stated that NTP was approaching with integrity. FAN blustered that this was a brain study that could end fluoridation.
So, what did this NTP study find?……
……At these exposure levels, we observed no exposure-related differences in motor, sensory, or learning and memory performance on running wheel, open-field activity, light/dark place preference, elevated plus maze, pre-pulse startle inhibition, passive avoidance, hot-plate latency, Morris water maze acquisition, probe test, reversal learning, and Y-maze. Serum triiodothyronine (T3), thyroxine (T4), and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels were not altered as a function of 10 or 20 ppm F in the drinking water. No exposure-related pathology was observed in the heart, liver, kidney, testes, seminal vesicles, or epididymides. Mild inflammation in the prostate gland was observed at 20 ppm F. No evidence of neuronal death or glial activation was observed in the hippocampus at 20 ppm F………
In other words, absolutely nothing to support the ridiculous claims of FAN and other antifluoridationists. All of those 300 + studies purported by FAN to show this or that, submitted to NTP by FAN, and…….nothing. The NTP study completely rebuked FANs claims, as is generally the case with any credible science.
I guess its no surprise that the results of this NTP study which FAN claimed it would closely monitor, have been met with deafening silence from FAN and its blind followers. The results of this study were so definitive that there is no way FAN could even attempt to spin or misrepresent them in its usual manner……..thus silence is its only recourse.
Any more need be said about nyscofs nonsense?
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Water Fluoridation is not a safe practice:
1. A request for the release of studies conducted in Canada or anywhere in the world that prove HFSA is safe for consumption or effective in preventing dental caries was sent to Health Canadas Access to Information and Privacy Division.
Their response May 26, 2014: After a thorough search for the requested information, no records were located which respond to your request.
2. A request for references to research was sent to Public Health England in March 2018. The request was:
“Please provide me with the abstracts and author details of Randomised Controlled
Trials and Cohort Studies which have been undertaken which have conclusively
shown that the practice of water fluoridation when using hexafluorosilicic acid and
disodium fluorosilicate is safe for humans. Please do not send me information
relating to Systemic Reviews or information from the other levels of the Evidence
Pyramid as used by the NHS in 2013 in its publication
https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/…
/tis-guide-finding-the-evidence-07nov.pdf
The brief reply was “Public Health England does not hold the requested information.”
There are myriads of research reports which question the safety of ingesting fluoride. There are very many research reports which prove that swallowing fluoride is not safe. It appears that there is no robust research which proves that swallowing fluoride is safe. The mantra “safe and effective” has been repeated ad nauseum over 70 years until we have been brain-washed into accepting that it’s safe and effective. “Tell a lie often enough and …..”. WF practice is considered as being folk-lore amongst those of us with enquiring minds.
Joy Warren and Nys Cof, like other fluoridation opponents (FOs), provide absolutely nothing but meaningless yarns instead of evidence that would prove their paranoid opinions regarding fluoridation are valid. That is to be expected because scientific evidence that proves their claims legitimate does not exist.
The actual scientific evidence to prove fluoridation is safe and effective can be found in studies like NTP study discussed by Dr. Slott and the Water Fluoridation health monitoring report for England 2018 which concluded:
The chances of having teeth removed in hospital because of decay were much lower in areas with water fluoridation schemes.
The report also found that:
Five-year-olds in areas with water fluoridation schemes were much less likely to experience tooth decay, and less likely to experience more severe decay than in areas without schemes
Children from all areas benefited from fluoridation, but children from relatively deprived areas benefited the most
Taken alongside the existing wider research, PHE results do not provide convincing evidence of higher rates of hip fracture, Downs syndrome, kidney stones, bladder cancer, or osteosarcoma (a cancer of the bone) due to fluoridation schemes.
The actual scientific evidence, available to anyone except FOs who have effectively blocked it from consideration, is the reason over 100 national and international science and health organizations (and their thousands of members) continue to recognize the public health benefit of fluoridation as a safe and effective method to reduce dental decay and associated health problems.
These organizations include the World Health Organization, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, the American Association for Health Education, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American College of Physicians, the American College of Preventive Medicine, the American Council on Science and Health, the American Dental Association, the American Pharmacists Association, the American Public Health Association, the American Water Works Association, the Association for Academic Health Centers, the Association of American Medical Colleges, the Australian Department of Health, the Australias National Health and Medical Research Council, the British Fluoridation Society, the Canadian Dental Association, the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Nurses Association, the Canadian Paediatric Society, the Canadian Public Health Association, the Irish Expert Body on Fluorides and Health, the Institute of Medicine, the International Association for Dental Research, the U.S. Public Health Service, and about seventy other recognized science and health organizations.
~> Search on ada fluoridation facts compendium and I like my teeth what do water fluoridation supporters say?
For excellent recent summaries of the evidence that supports community fluoridation search on and read:
~> The 2016 World Health Organization report, Fluoride and Oral Health
~> Australias National Health and Medical Research Council 2016 Fluoridation Report
~> Open Parachute Fluoride
~> CDC Community Water Fluoridation
~> I Like My Teeth Fluoridation
~> ADA Water Fluoridation
~> Fluoridation Claims by the Opposition Refuted – Dr. Johnny Johnson
And now we have another antifluoridationist, Joy Warren, chiming in with nonsense. Heres the fallacy of her arguments:
Antifluoridationists concoct ridiculous claims that fluoridation is somehow not safe, based on misrepresented science which they cannot produce, unsubstantiated claims they lazily glean from antifluoridationist websites, and false statements for which they can provide no evidence of support, then demand studies to disprove their claims. The fact that it is not, in any manner, the responsibility of anyone to disprove unsubstantiated claims of antifluoridationists does not deter these activists in the least from continuing to intentionally seek to mislead the public about this very valuable public health initiative. In the 73 years of this initiative, hundreds of millions having chronically consumed optimally fluoridated water during this time, there have been no proven adverse effects….zero. There can be no more convincing demonstration of the safety of such an initiative than that. Pie-in-the-sky claims by antifluoridationists do not negate this fact.
Heres a challenge to Joy:
Produce these myriads [sic] of research reports which [you claim] question the safety of ingesting fluoride. There are very many research reports which prove that swallowing fluoride is not safe……you claim to exist somewhere in the universe. Ill glady explain to you the fallacy of any you may copy/paste from the New York antifluoridationist faction, FAN, or from any other of your dubious sources.
Yes, Joy, unfortunately, as you say…..Tell a lie often enough and …..”. You and other antifluoridationists are clear demonstration of this. The volume of abject lies constantly put forth by antifluoridationists is staggering. Inquiring minds seek accurate information from respected sources. They do not just mindlessly regurgitate nonsense spoon-fed to them from dubious sources without attempting to verify the validity of any of it.
Steven D. Slott, DDS
“If teeth are the only reason why you like fluoride, you better come up with a different reason. Fluoride hurts teeth, bones, brain, nerves, etc.” – Michael Taras, DMD, FAGD (2015)
Fluoride is an inflammatory drug, enzyme poison, endocrine disruptor and adjuvant (substance that intensifies the immune response.) Even low concentrations in the water can and do cause or worsen symptoms of thyroid, kidney, inflammatory & immune system disease.
Thousands of doctors, dentists & scientists who have done their homework have reversed their previously pro-F beliefs based on the evidence of harm. Over a dozen professional organizations have also spoken out in public opposition of fluoridation. In 2017, the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (a non-profit of scientists & medical professionals whose mission is improving public health & reducing exposure to toxins) issued a position paper AGAINST ANY fluoride use based on evidence of harm to people and environment. They included over 500 citations. Visit IAOMT dot ORG to download it.
If you don’t believe the science that the only possible benefit is from topical use (toothpaste), you can buy a gallon of f-drinking water for a buck. But those with medical reason to avoid it, including those with eczema & psoriasis, shouldn’t be forced to bathe in this toxin. We can’t even go to a neighbor’s house for a meal or buy a cup of coffee at the store without damaging our health because food prepared in fluoridated water is contaminated.
“The use of the public drinking water system to dose any substance to achieve a medical result is criminal. The US EPA only refers to fluoride as a contaminant… it is a regulated toxin…. The only recognition of fluoride at the FDA is that it is a unregulated drug.” – safe water advocates Robert Bowcock PE with Erin Brockovich, April 2018 in Dallas
“The continued increase in fluorosis rates in the U.S. indicates that additional measures need to be implemented to reduce its prevalence.” – Wiener RC, et al. (2018). Dental Fluorosis over Time: A comparison of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data from 2001-2002 and 2011-2012. Journal of Dental Hygiene. 92 no. 1 23-29
“Disparities in pit and fissure caries among children and adolescent by race/ethnicity, nativity and socioeconomic status has widened over time…” – Akilesh Shreekrishna et al. in NHANES 2011-2014 and 1999-2004 Pit/Fissure Caries Prevalence Trends and Disparities presented at annual meeting of American Association of Pediatric Dentists (AAPD)
Those early dentists couldn’t have got it more wrong. Per most recent government figures released to the public, dental fluorosis is afflicting over half our teens with one in five teens having brown stains and even pitting on at least two brittle fluoride damaged teeth. These teeth will require costly veneers & crowns in young adulthood. Moreover, our kids have more cavities – especially the poor who also have the highest incidence of brown stain from fluoride overdose during childhood. Heck – even our dental emergency room visits up by almost half since the CDC congratulated itself on fluoridating about 75% of the US population. Fluoridation ain’t working folks, it’s hurting.
Karen Spencer, below, is another antifluoridationist who clearly exhibits the pseudo-science which opponents claim supports their position…….i.e. nothing but unsubstantiated personal opinions, absurd claims for which tbey can provide no valid evidence to support, and dependence on dubious sources such as the outlier, fringe group, IAOMT of Canada.
Spencer is another close affiliate of the New York antifluoridationist faction, FAN, whose deafening silence on the recent NTP study instigated by her FAN, speaks volumes.
All one has to do is read comments by these misguided activists to quickly realize the danger of relying upon the opinions of uninformed antifluoridationists when making decisions on a very valuable public health issue such as water fluoridation.
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Barry, over the years your “Field Notes” have degenerated into something more along the lines of “Wikipedia Notes”, and your manner has become very sectarian. Your articles amount to little more than name calling over hot button issues. Click bait. As far as your audience is concerned, you are what you write. Congrats, you’ve become a real troll of the worst variety, and are not the friendly, open minded wayfarer I once thought. Go easy on the fluoride, it’s poison and will make you dumb, ya know?
Art, if you are implying that there is anything false or misleading in Barrys article, then you are grossly mistaken, and obviously have not bothered to review the facts before you post.
What Barry has here is a well researched article based on well-documented facts. If you disagree then please produce valid evidence to support your claims.
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Sure, Steven. As “valid evidence to support my claim” I present Barry’s entire history of Field Notes articles, available to you at any time with a mere finger’s touch of your own personal internet gizmo. They demonstrate a clear decline in purpose and personality, from one of inquisitive wanderlust to one of condescending tripe. Whereas Barry might once have been on his feet for wisdom, I now picture him an old man flirting with coffee shop baristas while staring at a computer screen all day. Good for him. Keep drinking that poison, Steve, I’ll stick to brushing and flossing. I will most certainly not take so much as a minute out of my day to support a society geared around adding poison to everybody’s water, rather than countless chemical-free means to the same end.
So, Art, in other words, you have no evidence to support your implication that Barrys article on fluoridation is in any manner false and misleading. Exactly the point. When you make such baseless comments about his writing here, there is no reason to attach credence to any of your other claims.
Perhaps the issue is your lack of knowledge and understanding of the issues, not with the validity of Barrys articles.
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Steven, neither you nor Barry provide any evidence whatsoever to dispute the facts of the matter. Your responses continue to ignore volumes of uncontested science. Your feeble attempts to turn the conversation around are so baseless as to only prove what you’re so desperately afraid of. You and Barry have been duped into supporting contaminating our water with neurotoxins.
Not really fair, Barry. Your sexy picture will undoubtedly distract Art making it considerably more difficult for him to maintain the high intelligence level of his comments…..
Steven D. Slott, DDS
The anti-fluoride enthusiasts remind me of vaccination opponents: an abundance of passionate references to sciencey-sounding evidence, but short on peer-reviewed science.
Its unclear to what study you refer in Lancet, Barry, but there is no risk of hip fracture associated with optimally fluoridated water.
From a 2013 study by Nsman, et al:
“Overall, we found no association between chronic fluoride exposure and the occurrence of hip fracture. The risk estimates did not change in analyses restricted to only low-trauma osteoporotic hip fractures. Chronic fluoride exposure from drinking water does not seem to have any important effects on the risk of hip fracture, in the investigated exposure range.”
—–Estimated Drinking Water Fluoride Exposure and Risk of Hip Fracture
A Cohort Study
P. Nsman, J. Ekstrand, F. Granath, A. Ekbom, C.M. Fored
Journal of Dental Research
2013 Nov;92(11):1029-34. doi: 10.1177/0022034513506443. Epub 2013 Oct 1.
013.
Accepted August 30, 2013.
http://jdr.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/09/26/0022034513506443.full
Additionally, Dr. Hardy Limeback, a former dental educator and researcher at the Univ of Toronto and well-known outspoken fluoridation opponent, co-authored a 2010 paper which contradicts his own claims of adverse effects on bone from fluoridated water:
….Many decades of epidemiological studies have shown minimal evidence of any effects of fluoride administration on bone, and it is therefore very unlikely that municipally fluoridated water affects adults with healthy bone. In this study, no effects of fluoride on mineralization (by BSE) and no substantive negative effects of fluoride administration on bone mechanical properties were observed…..
The Long-term Effects of Water Fluoridation on the Human Skeleton
Chachra, D, Limeback, Hardy, Willett, Thomas, Grynpas
Journal of Dental Research, vol. 89
2010/11/01
DO – 10.1177/0022034510376070
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Im not familiar with those campaigns, Barry. Antifluoridationists do their best to stir up as many communities as they can such that that its like playing whack-a-mole in dealing with them. They hit the public and decision-makers with an onslaugt of their usual misinformation and false claims, generally sourced from FAN, hoping something will stick. What we do as the American Fluoridation Society is to provide accurate, evidence-based information to communities under attack from these activists. We have made much progress toward taking back the internet from them, and enabling communities to push back against the misinformation. While their arguments are always the same, verbatim, its still an ongoing battle to counter integrity-challenged people who have no compunction about spreading false information far and wide.
Fact-based articles such as yours go a long way toward overcoming the nonsense and enlightening the public.
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Fluoride is a neurotoxin and you’re foolish for promoting it be added to drinking water. Of all the issues you could take time out of your day to beat your chests about…
From your own…
“…Many decades of epidemiological studies have shown minimal evidence of any effects of fluoride administration on bone, and it is therefore very unlikely that municipally fluoridated water affects adults with healthy bone. In this study, no effects of fluoride on mineralization (by BSE) and no substantive negative effects of fluoride administration on bone mechanical properties were observed….
Translates to: Fluoride DOES have a very negative effect. The author does his best to spin the lingo, but “minimal evidence” and “no substantive negative effects” glosses over the very evidence and negative effects, and that’s at “proper” levels in a limited study that was pursuant to positive review. You blathering boobs are like volunteer lobbyists for cigarette companies over their safe and non addictive products.
Art….sigh……
Hardy Limeback is one of the most well-known, outspoken fluoridation opponents anywhere. Thats the point. When a paper he co-authored concludes, as conclusively as will any credible scientific paper conclude, that there is no concern with bone fracture associated with community fluoridated water, then you can be be assured that there has been no spin applied. Limeback would undoubtedly find your comment comical that he has applied spin favorable to fluoridation.
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Fluoride is a neurotoxin and you’re a fool to promote ingesting any amount of it.
National Toxicology Program:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12640-018-9870-x
FAN was thrilled that it was being done, saying that it would spell the end of water fluoridation. Since its publication, the CWF opposition has been as quiet as a church mouse.
Results: no neurotoxic effects or any effects on 9 areas that were being evaluated. Nada.
Science: credibly conducted, evidence-based, peer-reviewed, and published in credibly recognized scientific journals. The facts are the facts, for better or worse.
Johnny Johnson, Jr, DMD, MS
President, American Fluoridation Society
…..as are aspirin, caffeine, and aspartame. Gonna give up that neurotoxic cup of coffee in the morning, Art?
Steven D. Slott, DDS
I appreciate your article Barry.
It is unfortunate that many individuals do not invest the time and effort to thoroughly, critically and accurately evaluate a significant quantity of available scientific evidence on community water fluoridation. Below are five recent studies/reviews in addition to the 2018 National Toxicology Program study referenced by Dr. Johnson that have addressed the safety and effectiveness of fluoridation. These references are completely ignored by fluoridation opponents — as is all research that cant be adjusted to fit within their pre-ordained conclusions that fluoridation is ineffective and harmful.
This evidence, and over 70 years of similar data, is the reason over 100 national and international science and health organizations (and their thousands of members) continue to recognize the benefits of fluoridation, why there are no recognized science/health organizations that recognize the anti-F opinions as legitimate, and why fluoridation opponents must distort the evidence to try and scare and scam the public into believing their propaganda is true.
~> http://ilikemyteeth.org/fluoridation/why-fluoride/
~> http://ada.org/en/public-programs/advocating-for-the-public/fluoride-and-fluoridation/fluoridation-facts/fluoridation-facts-compendium
References:
The 2018 Water Fluoridation: Health Monitoring Report for England:
> Five-year-olds in areas with water fluoridation schemes were much less likely to experience tooth decay, and less likely to experience more severe decay than in areas without schemes.
> The chances of having a tooth/teeth removed in hospital because of decay were also much lower in areas with water fluoridation schemes.
> Children from both affluent and deprived areas benefitted from fluoridation, but children from relatively deprived areas benefitted the most.
> Dental fluorosis, at a level that may effect the appearance of teeth, was observed in 10% of children/young people examined in 2 fluoridated cities2. However, there was no difference between children and young people surveyed in fluoridated and nonfluoridated cities when asked about their opinion on the appearance of their teeth, taking into account concerns which have resulted from any cause (eg poor alignment, decay, trauma or fluorosis).
~> https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/water-fluoridation-health-monitoring-report-for-england-2018
The 2018 Food Safety Authority of Ireland Fluoride Report:
The study concludes that, based on scientific evidence, there is no safety concern for children and adults living in Ireland from exposure to fluoride through intake of foods and beverages.
~> https://www.fsai.ie/news_centre/tds_fluoride_30042018.html
~> http://www.fsai.ie/publications/fluoride_study_2014-2016
The 2016 World Health Organization report,: Fluoride and Oral Health:
> Studies from many different countries over the past 60 years are remarkably consistent in demonstrating substantial reductions in caries prevalence as a result of water uoridation. One hundred and thirteen studies into the effectiveness of articial water uoridation in 23 countries conducted before 1990, recorded a modal percent caries reduction of 40 to 50% in primary teeth and 50 to 60% in permanent.
> More recently, systematic reviews summarizing these extensive databases have conrmed that water uoridation substantially reduces the prevalence and incidence of dental caries in primary and permanent teeth. Although percent caries reductions recorded have been slightly lower in 59 post-1990 studies compared with the pre-1990 studies, the reductions are still substantial.
> The question of possible adverse general health effects caused by exposure to uorides taken in optimal concentrations throughout life has been the object of thorough medical investigations which have failed to show any impairment of general health.
~> http://who.int/oral_health/publications/2016_fluoride_oral_health.pdf
The 2016 Australias National Health and Medical Research Council Fluoridation Report:
The evidence shows that water fluoridation helps to reduce tooth decay in children and adults. There is no reliable evidence that water fluoridation at current Australian levels causes health problems.
~> https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines-publications/eh43-0
The 2017 Swedish report, Effects of Fluoride in the Drinking Water:
Fluoridation of the drinking water is a public policy whose aim is to improve dental health. Although the evidence is clear that fluoride is good for dental health, concerns have been raised regarding potential negative effects on cognitive development. We study the effects of fluoride exposure through the drinking water throughout life on cognitive and non-cognitive ability, math test scores and labor market outcomes in a large-scale setting. Taking all together, we investigate and confirm the long-established positive relationship between fluoride and dental health. Second, we find precisely estimated zero-effects on cognitive ability, non-cognitive ability and math test scores for fluoride levels in Swedish drinking water. Third, we find that fluoride improves later labor market outcomes, which indicates that good dental health is a positive factor on the labor market.
~> https://www.ifau.se/globalassets/pdf/se/2017/wp2017-20-the-effects-of-fluoride-in-the-drinking-water.pdf
Would you force me to ingest alcohol, Barry? “Randy Johnson” Steven Scott and yourself would put neurotoxic poison in my body against my will, even despite countless alternatives to your same desired end.
Wow, Art, you have people putting stuff into your body against your will? Do they kidnap and tie you down, or what? This is really concerning. You probably should report this to the proper authorities as soon as you can get away. However, this bizarre situation of yours, as upsetting as Im sure it must be for you, is of no relevance to water fluoridation.
I certainly hope you get your problem resolved. In the meantime on this forum, lets stick to that which is relevant to the topic. Okay?
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Beginning to see how lobbyists work in this golden era, Barry? It’s all about that top spot. Steven Scott aka “Ramdy Johnson” would put neurotoxic poison in my body against my will, even despite countless alternatives.
Still got somebody putting stuff into your body, Art? Gee, you really should notify the authorities.
Steven D. Slott, DDS
Steven Scott, DDS, would put neurotoxic poison in my body against my will, even despite countless alternatives.