← Back to context

Comment by defrost

21 days ago

The main problem with your wall of links from a professional medical PoV is it utterly lacks any context.

The very famous meta studies with all the negative correlations get all the bad associations with flouride from regions where water naturally has extremely high (relative to most other parts of the world) levels of fluoride in addition to high levels of many other uncommon concentrations.

Some of these regions also have additional problems with industry waste.

Put simply, negative correlations about unattended children in swimming pools cannot be extrapolated to infer negative correlations about young children and sippy cups of water.

Again, it was in response to an (mis)unanswered question for that specific information. I don't get what the issue is.

  • It’s basically coping responses from people who are starting to realize they have been loudly wrong for years. It’s a fairly human response I suppose. They’ll get over it eventually after they go through the stages of grief or whatever.

    • > coping responses

      No? What is a coping response? I asked the commenter to provide context to their links that supposedly show evidence for what the initial question was (does fluoride at the concentrations in drinking water cause harm), which they definitely do not show evidence for.

      5 replies →