So the article seems to imply that fluoride is effective when applied topically and need not be ingested. So isn't fluoride toothpaste enough? Does it really need to be added to the water supply? How many studies have been done on the effects of bathing, cooking, watering plants, ingestion by pets, etc. with fluoridated water?<p>One thing the article doesn't mention is where the fluoride is sourced from. Is it true that the fluoride that goes into the water supply is a waste product from fertilizer production? If this "waste" wasn't being put into the water how much would it cost fertilizer manufacturers to dispose of it? Is there some perverse incentive here?<p><a href="https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/engineering/engineering-shortages.htm" rel="nofollow">https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/engineering/engineering-sho...</a><p>>The three fluoride additives used for water fluoridation are derived principally from phosphate fertilizer production.
My town (~500,000) stopped putting fluoride in the drinking water in Jan 2013.<p><pre><code> According to the Oral Health 2018 [0] report released by the health unit, the percentage of children with tooth decay or requiring urgent care has increased by 51 per cent in 2016-17 compared to 2011-12.
</code></pre>
[0] <a href="https://www.wechu.org/reports/oral-health-2018-report" rel="nofollow">https://www.wechu.org/reports/oral-health-2018-report</a>
I mean fluoride is one of the most interactive elements on the periodic table. It’s pretty clear it interacts with the body in pathogenic ways. That’s part of the reason why it bonds to the enamel of the teeth so well.<p>I don’t think we need to supplement tapwater with fluoride now that toothbrushes and toothpaste are so widely available.<p>You can’t control the dosage since people can drink as much tapwater as they want and still do not know how much they actually are receiving.<p>That being said I highly recommend everybody get a reverse osmosis water filter. Add in some electrolytes and you’re good to go.<p>Edit: Never mind, I was wrong. Fluoride isn't an element. It's somewhat reactive, but not nearly as much as Fluorine.
Fluoride works both topically and systemically to reduce tooth decay and is delivered through water, salt, milk, toothpaste, varnish, rinse depending on age, country of origin, income etc. For children ages 0-8 it is incorporated into the enamel of the teeth growing under the gums. After that, the mechanism is largely "topical" - however, that includes fluoride ions incorporated into the saliva and plaque in the process of ingesting it. Sipping water throughout the day bathes the teeth in fluoride each time and allows there to be a very small but impactful amount of fluoride in the mouth environment. This assists in the remineralizations of teeth enamel after acid attacks. The "topical vs. systemic" debate is a bit of a red herring. Its asking how does it work, not if it works. The evidence is clear that fluoridation does work to prevent tooth decay.<a href="https://fluorideexposed.org/fluoridescience/fluoride-mechanism-of-action" rel="nofollow">https://fluorideexposed.org/fluoridescience/fluoride-mechani...</a> additionally, a recent economic review of fluoridation found that the benefits in terms of reduced cavity rates and related dental costs outweigh the cost of implementing the strategy. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6171335/" rel="nofollow">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6171335/</a>
><i>Many dentists, having seen what life was like before fluoridation, have no interest in returning to the pre-fluoridation era of widespread cavities, abscesses, dentures and people in pain.</i><p>Is that really true? I live in a country without drinking water medication (thank god) and it's not such a horror story as this article makes it sound. I know that dental health was worse in the past and has improved since, but it doesn't seem to be due to water fluoridation but rather other advances in dentistry and personal dental care.
Maybe we should just stop putting gross amounts of sugar in everything. People have no problems getting rid of beef or meats. We should be able to get rid of some of our worst industries.
Environmental case for this stuff is bad because of insane amount of chemicals necessary to grow unnattural (i.e. GMO) products. Those chemicals then run off and poison the environment. Then we need to add more chemicals, (i.e. flouride) to deal with consumption.
Economically sugar/corn-syrup receive an enormous amount of subsidies.
From a human rights perspective sugar farming is terrible (google Fanjuls to learn more).
Obesity was the greatest risk factor besides age for COVID-19, so if as a society we can start mandating the jab, we can mandate some people don't get their "treats".
Once we figure out how to repair the tooth enamel properly, there will be no need for fluoride in dental care. We're still relying on epoxies & other glues.
Fluoride supplementation in water is less of a concern for me than chloramine. All my friends strongly defend the quality of Hetch Hetchy and I just don't get it. Fish can't even live in the water you're drinking. It affects plant growth too. We're showering in this stuff and vaporizing ammonia directly into our lungs.
One alternative to fluorine that has been shown clinically to be equally or more effective is nanohydroxyapatite, which was developed by NASA some time ago to treat astronauts for loss of tooth enamel and bone density. (Some background info here <a href="https://www.oralscience.com/en/ingredients/mhap/" rel="nofollow">https://www.oralscience.com/en/ingredients/mhap/</a><p>The rights were sold to Japan where a leading toothpaste has for decades used nanohydroxyapatite rather than fluoride. The exclusive rights of the Japanese company have expired, so nanohydroxyapatite toothpaste is not also made in Canada and the US. It's more expensive than fluoride toothpaste but if you'd like to avoid these questions, might be worth it.
I don't see in the article how they control for the IQ drop they think occurs (up to 5 points) being the same as the error margin for IQ tests (+/- 5 points).<p>How does that work.. ? It's not like IQ tests are considered that reliable or unbiased.<p>Also looking for studies.. they're observing the IQ drops in children who were exposed to excessive flouride beyond what's supposed to be in water. US levels all fall into the "low exposure" range in these studies.
Hey, my hometown was mentioned. Calgary has been on and off again with Fluoride for decades and the evidence definitely shows an increase in caries when we don't add it.