Put another way, Florida supports the right of informed consent with regard to fluoride treatment. As a thyroid cancer survivor I decline that treatment due to fluoride competing with iodine for receptors and causing goiters and tumors as a result. The only reason I can decline is that I'm using well water rather than a public system. Now people in Florida can all choose. I'm pro choice on abortion too for the same reason: Your body your choice.
Without comment on the question of health benefits or harms, I'm curious whether you've had the well water you use tested. Fluoride concentrations in bore-well water varies quite widely, and concentrations higher than fluoridated tap water not uncommon. There are several areas here (in Aus) where fluoride is removed to reach the recommended concentration of 0.5-1.1 ppm. This obviously varies based on location.
why would you want this? brush your teeth or swish with high concentration fluoride mouthwash. there's actually no benefit of ingesting fluoridated water. any benefit is simply incidental since it must touch your teeth down the hatch. don't take my word for it - go read the papers yourself, they all say as much. Or to put it another way, would pumping fluoride to your stomach help your teeth? I hope you know the answer.
literally every toothpaste in the united states explicitly says to spit, not swallow. there's a reason for that.
“It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids, without the knowledge of the individual, certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.”
it probably don't make a big difference even in your case.
in the water system quantities and peer reviewed studies dosages, the psychological impacts are more real than iodine absorption.
flouride is not added today for teeth health (distributing mouth wash would do a better job) but it helps keep the water good for drinking, together with stuff like chlorine, which change by region.
... the real reason here is: it's as divisive and harder to reach an informed conclusion either way, just like abortion. oh American politics.
Adding fluoride to water is a strange topic people get very worked up about. The levels of added fluoride are very low, it's been well studied at this point. Some places in the world need to filter out naturally occurring fluoride, which is one of the reasons that not everywhere adds it.
In NZ we appear to be moving in the opposite direction where central govt is now going to mandate the addition of fluoride where it was previously a local decision.
The levels of added fluoride are very low, it's been well studied at this point.
If you want to steel man the argument you should point out that the maximum allowed fluoride levels in US are quite a bit higher than in, for example the EU (on the order of 3 times higher), and that some recent studies have indicated some potential health risks for young children who consume a lot of water around the very top end of what the US allows.
Of course the correct response to this is to overhaul the recommendations and lower the maximum allowed levels, not to issue state wide bans.
Bans are more effective. There’s always some local hero in the water supply org who thinks he knows what’s best for everyone and modifies the fluoride amount to his liking. For example there was someone in Virginia a few years ago who lowered the fluoride to sensible levels and was fired for it.
> Adding fluoride to water is a strange topic people get very worked up about
Yes. It's weird, it seems to be given a special level of paranoia. And it's a longstanding one, the paranoid general in Dr Strangelove was obsessed with fluoridation.
Lots of substances have arguments over safe legal levels, with varying levels of scientific evidence. This seems to have a crusade, and I wonder who started it.
The recent NIH meta-study indicated there may be neurotoxic effects at concentrations within an order of magnitude of the recommended drinking water level (perhaps even at just 2x the recommendation), I wouldn't call that "very low".
The best research I've seen on this, from NZ, suggests the neurocognitive effect in typical fluoridation programs is about as close to zero as you can get.
I admit I think people were stigmatized for raising concerns about it before, and find it sort of weird it was added without more safety data, but by the same token I think the most rigorous evidence suggests its pretty safe at the typical concentrations of most fluoridation programs.
If some areas had sufficient levels of that multivitamin in the water naturally and it produced a benefit, then it would make sense to add similar levels of that multivitamin to the water supplies that lacked it.
Before you jump to reactions, remember that there isn't consensus worldwide on what the best approach to this is. For example most countries in the EU also don't fluorinate water, but it's instead in toothpaste or table salt or etc.
To play devil’s advocate, salt and milk aren’t pumped into your house by the government. You can also buy iodine-free salt and vitamin d-free milk if you choose.
The reflexive, shallow negativity in these comment sections surprises me.
There are legitimately bad things happening.
Your complaints about those things become diluted when you complain about things like this (or looking for environmental causes of autism, or shutting down demonstrably wasteful programs).
Sometimes the liberal side of these discussions can be so conservative.
I don't think this is, among the recent posts about US, the one for which you should have such a reaction... but maybe I'm missing something important here.
Do European countries use fluoride in their water?
Varies a lot from country to country, but over all it is done to a much lower degree than in the US.
However the big difference is that there isn't a ban on it. There are scientific guidelines published by the EU and then it is up to each country/state to decide if they want to add it or not based on local considerations.
The chief chemical added to tap water is chlorine, to kill off all of the organisms that live in the water. Clostridium difficile isn't exactly something you want to get with your drinking water, unless you really, really love your diarrhea.
After a few years on a well, it becomes clear how much chlorine. Opening a tap on tap water smells like a swimming pool. You can smell it clear across the room.
Poor people don't drink tap water, due to lack of trust in the media among others.[1] The comments here that insinuate otherwise is also an effect of that same media,[2] on the same spectrum that led them to support school closures.
This whole topic is just a symptom of a more general disease. Defund CPB (and hence PBS and NPR) before we lose any more to this idiocy.
Put another way, Florida supports the right of informed consent with regard to fluoride treatment. As a thyroid cancer survivor I decline that treatment due to fluoride competing with iodine for receptors and causing goiters and tumors as a result. The only reason I can decline is that I'm using well water rather than a public system. Now people in Florida can all choose. I'm pro choice on abortion too for the same reason: Your body your choice.
Without comment on the question of health benefits or harms, I'm curious whether you've had the well water you use tested. Fluoride concentrations in bore-well water varies quite widely, and concentrations higher than fluoridated tap water not uncommon. There are several areas here (in Aus) where fluoride is removed to reach the recommended concentration of 0.5-1.1 ppm. This obviously varies based on location.
What are the options for adding fluoride back to water for a home?
why would you want this? brush your teeth or swish with high concentration fluoride mouthwash. there's actually no benefit of ingesting fluoridated water. any benefit is simply incidental since it must touch your teeth down the hatch. don't take my word for it - go read the papers yourself, they all say as much. Or to put it another way, would pumping fluoride to your stomach help your teeth? I hope you know the answer.
literally every toothpaste in the united states explicitly says to spit, not swallow. there's a reason for that.
17 replies →
“It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids, without the knowledge of the individual, certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.”
it probably don't make a big difference even in your case.
in the water system quantities and peer reviewed studies dosages, the psychological impacts are more real than iodine absorption.
flouride is not added today for teeth health (distributing mouth wash would do a better job) but it helps keep the water good for drinking, together with stuff like chlorine, which change by region.
... the real reason here is: it's as divisive and harder to reach an informed conclusion either way, just like abortion. oh American politics.
there is not a consensus on fluoride in drinking water. see the intro here (this particular paper concludes fluoride is overall good):
https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/711915
[dead]
Adding fluoride to water is a strange topic people get very worked up about. The levels of added fluoride are very low, it's been well studied at this point. Some places in the world need to filter out naturally occurring fluoride, which is one of the reasons that not everywhere adds it.
In NZ we appear to be moving in the opposite direction where central govt is now going to mandate the addition of fluoride where it was previously a local decision.
The levels of added fluoride are very low, it's been well studied at this point.
If you want to steel man the argument you should point out that the maximum allowed fluoride levels in US are quite a bit higher than in, for example the EU (on the order of 3 times higher), and that some recent studies have indicated some potential health risks for young children who consume a lot of water around the very top end of what the US allows.
Of course the correct response to this is to overhaul the recommendations and lower the maximum allowed levels, not to issue state wide bans.
Bans are more effective. There’s always some local hero in the water supply org who thinks he knows what’s best for everyone and modifies the fluoride amount to his liking. For example there was someone in Virginia a few years ago who lowered the fluoride to sensible levels and was fired for it.
2 replies →
> Adding fluoride to water is a strange topic people get very worked up about
Yes. It's weird, it seems to be given a special level of paranoia. And it's a longstanding one, the paranoid general in Dr Strangelove was obsessed with fluoridation.
Lots of substances have arguments over safe legal levels, with varying levels of scientific evidence. This seems to have a crusade, and I wonder who started it.
The recent NIH meta-study indicated there may be neurotoxic effects at concentrations within an order of magnitude of the recommended drinking water level (perhaps even at just 2x the recommendation), I wouldn't call that "very low".
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6923889/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S003335062...
The best research I've seen on this, from NZ, suggests the neurocognitive effect in typical fluoridation programs is about as close to zero as you can get.
I admit I think people were stigmatized for raising concerns about it before, and find it sort of weird it was added without more safety data, but by the same token I think the most rigorous evidence suggests its pretty safe at the typical concentrations of most fluoridation programs.
I love the responses of people on the left on this issue. Can’t wait for the eventual group amnesia when the scientific consensus changes.
2 replies →
would you agree with a multivitamin being dissolved and added to the water? why or why not?
If some areas had sufficient levels of that multivitamin in the water naturally and it produced a benefit, then it would make sense to add similar levels of that multivitamin to the water supplies that lacked it.
that would be great. maybe some electrolytes too.
1 reply →
it would be nice if i could add it myself to my kitchen tap water, without wasting it when i shower
If I was a dentist, I'd be moving to Florida...
Before you jump to reactions, remember that there isn't consensus worldwide on what the best approach to this is. For example most countries in the EU also don't fluorinate water, but it's instead in toothpaste or table salt or etc.
[flagged]
That last sentence doesn't say anything about America, you might want to consider what makes you so touchy on this subject.
1 reply →
> There isn't a worldwide consensus on genital mutilation and slavery
Oh come the fuck on. There's a pretty fucking large gap between water fluoridation and both of those.
4 replies →
"Forced medication" I assure you that they'll be banning iodine in salt and vitamin d in milk next.
To play devil’s advocate, salt and milk aren’t pumped into your house by the government. You can also buy iodine-free salt and vitamin d-free milk if you choose.
You can buy bottled water, or a filter and many people have wells.
46 replies →
The reflexive, shallow negativity in these comment sections surprises me.
There are legitimately bad things happening.
Your complaints about those things become diluted when you complain about things like this (or looking for environmental causes of autism, or shutting down demonstrably wasteful programs).
Sometimes the liberal side of these discussions can be so conservative.
repeat after me:
topical fluoride application on the teeth is better than drinking fluoridated water.
we're in a post truth era where literal fact is downvoted lol.
[flagged]
I don't think this is, among the recent posts about US, the one for which you should have such a reaction... but maybe I'm missing something important here.
[dead]
Do European countries use fluoride in their water?
While I agree that it's a shit show right now in the US, this article maybe isn't the leading edge of that.
Do European countries use fluoride in their water?
Varies a lot from country to country, but over all it is done to a much lower degree than in the US.
However the big difference is that there isn't a ban on it. There are scientific guidelines published by the EU and then it is up to each country/state to decide if they want to add it or not based on local considerations.
In Germany: no The toothpaste has already enough fluoride and the healthcare system isn't completly broken.
[flagged]
[flagged]
The chief chemical added to tap water is chlorine, to kill off all of the organisms that live in the water. Clostridium difficile isn't exactly something you want to get with your drinking water, unless you really, really love your diarrhea.
After a few years on a well, it becomes clear how much chlorine. Opening a tap on tap water smells like a swimming pool. You can smell it clear across the room.
Not that it means it's unsafe to drink
1 reply →
Drinking tap water without chemicals added to them sounds a lot more scary.
That’s right.
My grandma won’t get on a plane because being strapped into a metal tube going 500mph at 35,000 feet in the sky sounds scary.
Everything is chemicals.
It’s a good thing that water isn’t a chemical.
Poor people don't drink tap water, due to lack of trust in the media among others.[1] The comments here that insinuate otherwise is also an effect of that same media,[2] on the same spectrum that led them to support school closures.
This whole topic is just a symptom of a more general disease. Defund CPB (and hence PBS and NPR) before we lose any more to this idiocy.
[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7474465/
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2000/05/26/us/epidemic-of-oral-disea...