Anti-fluoride nutballs

[alex_antonin]

Here in Portland, the issue of putting fluoride in water has come up. Which came as a shock to me; I've lived in so many cities, and they all did fluoride in the water, that I naturally assumed that every city in the Western world was already doing it. After all, it's proven to be a safe and cheap means of preventing tooth decay, and the only

Comments

[sesmo]

Ah yes, fluoride, the stuff that they tell you not to let your kids use in toothpaste, because they might swallow it. And if they do eat toothpaste, they tell you to call poison control. I can't imagine why people might thing it's not good for you.

Oh right, it's because there is such a thing as fluoride poisoning. http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM199401133300203

[katsiss]

I think it's funny how people are going crazy about the yard signs

[katsiss]

D'oh comment placement fail

[dandelion]

"Ah yes, fluoride, the stuff that they tell you not to let your kids use in toothpaste, because they might swallow it."
Hang on, that's not quite accurate. Children aren't supposed to swallow fluoridated toothpaste, but almost all children's toothpaste does contain fluoride, and non-fluoridated toothpaste is unusual, so it's not exactly "the stuff they tell you not to let your kids use". The American Dental Association only warn against fluoridated toothpaste under age 2, and that's because of water fluoridation. Countries without water fluoridation don't stop even under-twos using fluoride toothpaste (the British Dental Association says "All children up to three years old should use a toothpaste with a fluoride level of at least 1000ppm (parts per million). After three years old they should use a toothpaste that contains 1350ppm to 1500ppm.").

I think it's probably also unfair to equate the harms of swallowing toothpaste (fluoride 1000-1500ppm, up to 5000ppm) with fluoridated drinking water (fluoride 0.7-1ppm).

[shanny_w]

My aunt drives across town to get nasty fluoridated water from my grandpas... she's also a complete nutcase.

[mandragora1]

Oh dear, how wrong can you be. You naturally assumed that every city in the Western world was putting fluoride in water because you've lived in so many cities. Were all of those in the US, perhaps?

Clearly it would surprise you to learn that the vast majority of European countries don't add fluoride to water, then. Only 10% of the population in the UK have added-fluoride water, for example and that percentage is high compared to many other European countries.

This is an example of how carrying out, oh, I don't know, maybe 30 seconds worth of research would have saved you from looking rather, well, stupid...

[boyzici]

Hasn't that already been addressed when he/she said 'I naturally assumed...' Which to me reads as them having come to realise this isn't the case.

[mandragora1]

But the OP is decrying the anti-fluoride in water people as being stupid, presumably on the basis that everyone else does it so why are the people in Portland being so stupid?!

Whereas the reality is that it's only a small minority of cities that fluoride their water. Suggesting that the people of Portland may not actually be stupid for not wanting it. Because if putting fluoride in water is so great, why isn't everyone doing it?

[lied_ohne_worte]

Come now, we all know that US = the Western World.

[velum_cado]

LOLOL Oh, this post so deliciously ironic.

[pyraterose]

MTE...

[babybeluga2003]

Even if fluoride did absolutely nothing but good, this still isn't really "stupid" to me. People naturally want choice in what they consume, and by requiring an additive to the water supply, something everyone draws from, people are being deprived of that choice unless they live off-grid, never go to restaurants, never land in the hospital, etc. My city adds fluoride and I'm good to sit tight, but if the issue every came up I'd vote against it too, because I want to be able to make that choice about what goes into my body instead of having it mandated.

[redbird]

I'd like a choice on what goes into my body, too. Can we start with voting on the use of all those pesticides, industrial chemicals, and antibiotics that get into the water supply? And then we'll outlaw fossil fuel emissions, so children stop having to breathe chemicals that cause asthma and cancer.

In terms of public health and epidemiology, fluoride in the water supply and folic acid in grain are net goods. Adding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and soot to the air we all have to breathe-even if we do live off-grid-is a net harm.

Getting upset about fluoridation has a straining at gnats and swallowing camels aspect, at best. (At best because I suspect some of those no votes are coming from people who still think fluoridation is a Soviet plot.)