• madjo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    125 months ago

    For what’s it worth, in my country (Netherlands), we don’t add fluoride to our tap water anymore since the early 70s. We just have it in our toothpaste (though you can also get fluoride free toothpaste for those who don’t want it).

    Sure there’s still traces of fluoride in our water, as it appears in nature. But it’s not artificially added by our water companies.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      Most places that do add it to the water supply match the levels of places where flouride occurs naturally

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    35 months ago

    fluoridation has nothing to with any teeth-related issues, it was all about the US industry having a way to dispose of fluoride, a byproduct of many industrial activities. You can’t just dump fluoride on a river as it has several adverse side-effects, but it you can convince everyone it is good for their health then it’s okay to dump it on the water supply.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      No… just no

      If that was true there are a lot of other things they could dump in the water

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      85 months ago

      lmao. rofl even. Fluoride is incredibly expensive AND useful, if you run an industry you wanna make sure you absolutely recover it from byproducts and reuse it, not to mention that with how low the levels in tap water are, it wouldn’t be even a good way of disposing a lot of it

  • RQG
    link
    fedilink
    English
    289
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Toxicologist here. I think that take is dishonest or dumb.

    Taking a lethal dose is almost never the concern with any substance in our drinking water.

    Hormones, heavy metals, persistent organic chemicals, ammonia are all in our drinking water. But for all of them we can’t drink enough water to die from a high dose.

    Some of them still have a large effect on our bodies.

    It’s about the longterm effects. Which we need longterm studies to learn about. That makes them harder to study.

    Still doesn’t mean flouride does anything bad longerm. But the argument is bad.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 months ago

      Also, isn’t it recommended to not give infants fluorided water, hence why you can buy it in virtually every grocery store?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        85 months ago

        Pretty much anything you can think of is recommended by someone, because different people have conflicting views. The key is to choose whose recommendations are based on the best reasoning & evidence aligning with your goals.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      We probably have enough A/B data now to make some inferences yeah? Compare countries with fluoridated water to countries without.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        You can get even more granular than that. CDC maintains a list of water systems and whether or not they add fluoride. CDC My Water System. To give you an idea of how granular that is, there are 78 different water systems in my county alone. For most of my life I assumed we had fluoridated water but apparently only 1/78 of our water systems are. I only checked when we had kids and I needed to know whether or not I needed to give them Fluoride Drops.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      65 months ago

      never the concern

      It is when you’re responding to people who think 5G is turning the frogs gay and activating hidden vaccine microchips.

    • FreshLight
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      Yeah, it seems to me like he got the right idea and wanted to convince people by making an extreme statement…

      • RQG
        link
        fedilink
        English
        65 months ago

        That might well be the case. I’m not sure if it is helpful to use those half truths which are simpler to convince certain people. Or if it weakens the point because it is in the end not really correct.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Fluoride does have long term effects though once you consider fluoride exposure through all sources like diet, which is mostly due to fluoride from water ending up in farmland. Tradesmen alone regularly exceed the upper limits due to high water consumption in hotter seasons

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        25 months ago

        lead poisoning becomes evident pretty early though doesn’t it? (With respect to kids)

        I would think that the ratio of persistent exposure to unsafe level has got to be easily higher in cases like Flint than any fluoride-in-the-water usage. Just speculation on my part.

        What measures are taken to avoid screwing up the dosage, anyone know? Maybe predilute so that an oops requires multiple buckets instead of vials?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Are you sure fluoride doesn’t? It does accumulate in the soil, building up in crops. Considering fluoride exposure from all sources, many people are above upper safe limits, even from tea drinking alone

          I don’t think fluoride should be added to water as it just pollutes the environment, where 99.99% of water isn’t coming in contact with teeth

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            375 months ago

            It doesn’t. This is high-school chemistry.

            Fluoride only “accumulates” up to the peak concentration of the environment (no further) on places where it is removed from contact with that environment.

            You can only accumulate fluoride in the soil if you keep adding it and there is almost no rain to wash it away.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              8
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Like how crops are irrigated with town water, and in many areas with lowering rainfall? Accumulates in fruit, vegetables, leaves too

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                185 months ago

                Yes, irrigation with the minimum possible amount of water is known to destroy land for millennia at this point. But sodium will be a problem way before you notice any change in fluoride.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        135 months ago

        Yup, same with PFAS and forever chemicals. Maybe I’m ignorant because I’m not a doctor, but I don’t know if this line of thinking holds water - pun not intended.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1135 months ago

        You just made me mad by helping me realize that the Trump bros are going to break water by removing fluoride long before they fix water by removing lead.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      235 months ago

      It’s so funny I was just having a similar conversation about neurotoxic venomous animals in another thread. Lethality is an obviously concerning threshold, but there are substances out there that can easily destroy your quality of life and livelihood that never reach the concern of being lethal.

      I think for mostly rational people concerned about fluoride in their water is that it was a public health decision made with little to no actual science proving it’s safety or efficacy when it was first decided that they were going to add it to the public water supply. The proposed benefits of it weren’t even supported by scientific evidence, it was just supposed that exposure to sodium fluoride could potentially reduce tooth decay for some.

      Personally, I’ve suffered from the cosmetic damage of dental fluorosis, and I’m not necessarily thrilled about fluoride. But I have way more issues with public mandates founded on pseudoscience than I am with sodium fluoride. Especially now that we can see evidence that for some people fluoride can be especially beneficial.

      So what was wrong with giving people the option of using fluoride toothpaste or mouthwashes… Why did it have to go into the public water supply?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          105 months ago

          Yeah that proves my point entirely.

          In 1945 they fluoridated the first public water supply.

          In 1979 the first published research began to appear to show how fluoride might be able to remineralize dental enamel.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            85 months ago

            In 1945, Grand Rapids became the first city in the world to fluoridate its drinking water.The Grand Rapids water fluoridation study was originally sponsored by the U.S. Surgeon General, but was taken over by the NIDR shortly after the Institute’s inception in 1948. During the 15-year project, researchers monitored the rate of tooth decay among Grand Rapids’ almost 30,000 schoolchildren. After just 11 years, Dean- who was now director of the NIDR-announced an amazing finding. The caries rate among Grand Rapids children born after fluoride was added to the water supply dropped more than 60 percent. This finding, considering the thousands of participants in the study, amounted to a giant scientific breakthrough that promised to revolutionize dental care, making tooth decay for the first time in history a preventable disease for most people.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              55 months ago

              Yeah, I guess that somehow totes proves his point. Super easy to see the world wrong when they have the reading comprehension of a 6th grader.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                45 months ago

                So the person above may think they’re so clever, or whoever fed them that factoid may think that. Notice the claim is remineralization. Maybe that’s true, it may be that a study first showed that in 1975 and that’s not contradicted by your link but that is a non sequitur. It’s not what we’re talking about, it’s not a good faith argument.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        25 months ago

        In our area, the only water supply WITH Fluoride serves an area with a median HOUSEHOLD income of less than $40k with more than 25% living below the poverty line. For communities like these the fluoride is critical because there will be a lot of children that don’t have access to fluoride supplements, or regular care from a pediatric (or regular) dentist.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      This. How can we be completely certain that something isn’t damaging over the long term. I’m not anti fluoride, but healthy debate and scepticism is a good thing, especially when we’re all forced to consume a substance with the only alternative being dehydration and death. People need to be free to make their own choices.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      Also “because I’m an expert and I say so” is a good way to convince someone to let you poison them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    155 months ago

    I believe the objection to fluoride is that it is a tranquilizer that keeps us from achieving glory through violent uprising… or sweet sweet dentist profits.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      That toxic byproduct of fertilizer production is not going to dump itself in our water supply am I riiight?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            35 months ago

            If that’s actually your idea of a valid source, and you’re not just trolling…I feel so sorry for you.

            That article is just not correct. I can’t even begin to point out all the flaws in it.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              25 months ago

              Everything is accurate and sourced so don’t bother blowing smoke up my ass anymore.

              The only flaw here is someone who doesn’t know what they are talking about about trying the defend a stupid practice.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                25 months ago

                Hmmm. The author of the article has a PhD in environmental history, so a social science. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it’s not actual hard science. Where people research and develop novel things.

                I don’t want to blow smoke anywhere near any asses. But does that article site one primary literature source? They’re all articles or if it’s an actual paper, it’s an opinion piece. I’m not going through all of them because it reads like some crazy uncle on a conspiracy theory rant.

                Are you a scientist? I know what I’m talking about, although I’m afraid you’re not.

                https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-99688-w

                There’s an actual journal article (I know it’s only Nature scientific reports, but it’s a valid reference). I know it doesn’t explicitly state it’s not toxic, but:

                “Thus, based on the evidence available on the topic, it is not possible to state neither any association or the lack of an association between F exposure and any neurological disorder.”

                Taken straight from their conclusion.

                Obviously there’s many more sources, and again, I’m happy to provide you with some of you’d like to enhance your knowledge on the subject.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  15 months ago

                  Fluoride is safe topically and ineffective when introduced to our water supply. It is not some giant conspiracy, just a practice that is no longer necessary and unsafe because the industrial waste fluoride that is used is contaminated. Please save me the appeal to authority nonsense.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Okay fluoride gang (of which I may be a member)…

    A study about the affects of fluoride in municipal water on plants: MSU study

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    945 months ago

    Oh yeah? And what if someone ignores that, simply lies and says it’s toxic? I’m convinced!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      355 months ago

      And both of these people telling me about fluoride in water are both experts in their field. One an expert toxicologist, and the other an expert liar. Now I don’t know what to believe.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      295 months ago

      The stuff also known as hydric acid. People just don’t talk enough about how corrosive it is. Plus, it gets in the air and gets in your lungs!

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            125 months ago

            Its a common component of all cancer cells, and trace amounts have been found in the blood of dead lab rats.

          • SkaveRat
            link
            fedilink
            English
            45 months ago

            terrorists will drink vast amounts of it every day before an attack

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        75 months ago

        It’s so pervasive that they have found it in the bodies of every single child worldwide.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        75 months ago

        It’s 10 million times more acidic than drain cleaner!!! And the government is trying to force you to drink it by forcing it to be used in municipal drinking fountains

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      25 months ago

      Any chemical that can exist as a solid, a liquid and a gas at the same time isn’t safe to put into our bodies!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      Fun fact. Literally everyone who has died, ever, has had DHMO in some form. You’re even exposed in the womb!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    685 months ago

    It’s not about toxicity, it’s about mind control! Fluoride makes you passive. But you know this since you’re a tool of the government pushing poison.

    Just bleach your teeth like normal people! You know, with the bleach under the kitchen sink.

    (Don’t actually do this)

    • Raymond Shannon
      link
      fedilink
      English
      275 months ago

      Like the ol’ General said / s

      We can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

      Fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face.

    • Lemminary
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      The real Chads use raw organic free-range non-GMO pesticide-free lemon juice with baking soda. It’ll leave your teeth as white as they’ll be sensitive! Keep it crunchy. You’re welcome.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      I’ve heard it works much better and actually reverses the mind control if you first mix the bleach with ammonia.

      (Also, please, don’t actually do this, some people still die every year from this)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      And that’s why you should only drink grain alcohol and pure, natural rain water. To preserve the essence of your precious bodily fluids.

      </s>

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    95 months ago

    The question to me is - do we even have to fluoridate water and is this really the best approach?

    For example, most European countries do not commonly use fluoride in their water supply, and everyone’s just fine! No extra cavities, no special health risks. People commonly drink tap water and do not care about potential for any adverse effects, because it’s just that - clean water. And for any teeth-related issues, you already have your toothpaste providing more than enough fluorine.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      It depends if you believe in the apocryphal story behind fluoridation. This is a story that justifies the state and it’s right of medical intervention into your life with the need of your informed consent.

      These types of stories are designed to justify the right to act of an entity/egregor using the least objectionnable scenario possible. Once this precedent is established it can built upon to justify other actions in other scenarios. All the other unobjectionnable things done to you or in your name

    • Robust Mirror
      link
      fedilink
      English
      355 months ago

      https://static.spokanecity.org/documents/citycouncil/interest-items/2020/09/city-council-information-on-fluoride-2020-09-08.pdf

      • Water fluoridation reaches over 13 million Europeans through programs in England, Ireland, Poland, Serbia and Spain

      • Children in deprived areas benefit most from water fluoridation according to 2018 English health agency report

      • Over 70 million Europeans receive fluoridated salt through programs in Austria, France, Germany, Switzerland and other countries. Salt fluoridation is recommended when water fluoridation is not feasible

      • European Academy of Pediatric Dentistry endorses water fluoridation as “core component of oral health policy”

      • Fluoridated milk programs have operated in Bulgaria, England, Hungary, Russia and Scotland

      • Several European countries provide free or subsidized fluoride treatments through national healthcare:

        • Sweden: free dental care through age 23
        • Denmark: free dental care until age 18
        • Finland: public dental clinic access for all legal residents
      • Scandinavian schools offer fluoride varnish, tablets and rinse programs

      • Some regions in Europe have naturally fluoridated water, such as parts of Italy. Italian health officials support water fluoridation but don’t implement additional programs due to naturally optimal fluoride levels in some areas

      https://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/about/statement-on-the-evidence-supporting-the-safety-and-effectiveness-of-community-water-fluoridation.html

      • Evidence shows that water fluoridation prevents tooth decay by providing frequent and consistent contact with low levels of fluoride, ultimately reducing tooth decay by about 25% in children and adults.

      • evidence shows that schoolchildren living in communities where water is fluoridated have, on average, 2.25 fewer decayed teeth compared to similar children not living in fluoridated communities.

      • A study to compare costs associated with community water fluoridation with treatment savings achieved through reduced tooth decay, which included 172 public water systems, each serving populations of 1,000 individuals or more, found that 1 year of exposure to fluoridated water yielded an average savings of $60 per person when the lifetime costs of maintaining a restoration were included.

      • Analyses of Medicaid claims data in 3 other states (Louisiana, New York, and Texas), have also found that children living in fluoridated communities have lower caries related treatment costs than do similar children living in non-fluoridated communities; the difference in annual per child treatment costs ranged from $28 to $67.

      https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9544072/

      • community water fluoridation continues to decrease cavities by 25% at the population level.

      • Even with fluoridated products such as toothpaste and mouth rinses, this public health practice can reduce an additional 25% of tooth decay in children and adults

      • In 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan became the first U.S. city to fluoridate its public water supply. Five years later, Grand Rapids schoolchildren were found to have significantly fewer cavities than children from the control community of Muskegon, and additional water districts, including Muskegon began fluoridating and seeing similar results

      • Studies have shown that populations from lower socioeconomic groups within fluoridated communities have less tooth decay when compared to peers in nonfluoridated communities

      • The cost of a lifetime of water fluoridation for one person is less than the cost of one filling

      More info: https://www.ada.org/resources/community-initiatives/fluoride-in-water