It's quite simple really. If you are in the minority (0.01%) and crackpot enough to think fluoridated water is causing you harm, then get a filter, or use a rainwater tank, or find your own source of water, or buy bottled water. Fluoridated water is a very effective public health measure (strong evidence for this) and without any real evidence against it's safe use, it's a cost to the rest of society (99.9%) to remove it.
Fluoridated water is a very effective public health measure (strong evidence for this)...
These studies are scientifically flawed. They mean nothing unless a comparative study was done of teeth in Townsville before fluoridation and after fluoridation. Comparing Townsville and Brisbane is not comparing like with like.
Try reading this - just a VERY quick Google search...
http://www.abpac-australia.com/assets/fluorhoaxbox.pdf
and I quote from the document........
Yes, but the onus is still on the pro-fluoride lobby to prove it is safe. They claim it is, but have provided no proof.
Yep.....and if you look through this thread you will find some referenced, but those who believe as you do have their heads firmly buried in the sand and will not read the credible studies. Why do you think that most of Europe is ceasing fluoridation?
There are plenty referenced in this thread and on the "Fire Water" video
A Dentist debunks a common fluoride myth.
(I think l've posted this before)
Doctor Exposes Fluoride as Poison
What, fluoride?
We (Yes, everyone), don't even know what type of Fluoride they are putting in the water?
- Is Sodium fluoride, Fluorosilicic Acid or Sodium Fluorosilicate put in our water?
- Is it made in Australia, imported from Belgium or anywhere else?
- Is it waste from commercial plants (ie; Incitec Pivot, Geelong fertiliser waste product)?
We just don't know anything...
- Is it specifically made for human consumption?
Why should we have to?It's quite simple really. If you are in the minority (0.01%) and crackpot enough to think fluoridated water is causing you harm, then get a filter, or use a rainwater tank, or find your own source of water, or buy bottled water..
Where's the evidence? There is none........ If it was an effective health measure, why are European countries discontinuing use? Why don't people who have drunk fluoridated water all their lives have good teeth? Why is it that a lot of people who have never drunk fluoridated water have perfect teeth?Fluoridated water is a very effective public health measure (strong evidence for this).
There is lots........read some of the articles referenced in this thread for starters.and without any real evidence against it's safe use,.............
No, the cost is in putting the stuff IN the water!.....it's a cost to the rest of society (99.9%) to remove it.
Sweden
In 1952, Norrköping in Sweden became one of the first cities in Europe to fluoridate its water supply. It was declared illegal by the Swedish Supreme Administrative Court in 1961, re-legalized in 1962 and finally prohibited by the parliament in 1971, after considerable debate.
The parliament majority said that there were other and better ways of reducing tooth decay than water fluoridation. Four cities received permission to fluoridate tap water when it was legal.
An official commission was formed, which published its final report in 1981. They recommended other ways of reducing tooth decay (improving food and oral hygiene habits) instead of fluoridating tap water. They also found that many people found fluoridation to impinge upon personal liberty/freedom of choice, and that the long-term effects of fluoridation were not sufficiently known. They also lacked a good study on the effects of fluoridation on formula-fed infants.
I followed the legislation through the Qld Parliament and they had certain rather loose regulations... but at the end of the day if the process is not stringently checked by independent people, history shows that inevitably, private water authorities in particular, will take short cuts and source cheaper products where contaminates will be a more serious problem.
On May 2, 2009 an accident occurred at the North Pine Dam treatment plant where 300,000 litres of contaminated water was pumped into up to 4000 Brisbane homes in the northern suburbs of Brendale and Warner for three hours. The water contained 30 to 31 mg/L of fluoride instead of the maximum allowable 1.5 mg/L. Anna Bligh expressed her concerns stating "This is unacceptable and I, like other Queenslanders, have questions about it, and I'm not happy,".
...swallowing fluoridated water does provide some topical action...
Yes they are. How do you know that Townsville's teeth were not better than Brisbane's BEFORE Townsville's water was fluoridated? Where is the scientific method in comparing two things which are different unless you do a 'before' and 'after' comparison?1. The studies are NOT scientifically flawed.......
Yes they are. How do you know that Townsville's teeth were not better than Brisbane's BEFORE Townsville's water was fluoridated? Where is the scientific method in comparing two things which are different unless you do a 'before' and 'after' comparison?
1. You have wrongly assumed that I got those statistics from Spencer, Davies and Stewart. So this Townsville/Brisbane thing is a strawman argument. Take the time to investigate the article before going off on a tangent.
I have received a reply from the NSW Government Health.
Enjoy!
A belated response to this...
Thanks Danny
Since Dr Wright is so convinced that a S6 poison in the water supply is perfectly safe, you should reply and ask Dr Clive Wright to provide his response under Oath or attestation, upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury.
....then watch him squirm - they'll never put their money where their mouth is.
Please point out where I have made that assumption.
You should stick to the facts, but as you have no valid argument you are trying to obfuscate the matter by making silly accusations. I suspect that you have not read very many studies or articles on the efficacy or otherwise of fluoride, or its dangers to health, but only those which support your view.
The assertion that the previously mentioned studies are flawed has been made by many reputable scientists, doctors and dentists. Read some of the material.
There is nothing more to say to you on this matter, so you may have the last word if you wish - I won't respond to you.
I was drinking at the Gascoyne Junction hotel in the early 80's when I happen to run into the government dentist and his nurse.
Asked him about fluoride as I knew it was a poison.
Thought I’d share my experience on this.
Both my parents have suffered much tooth decay during their lives. My father is a doctor and, based on his reading of medical literature, he had his children take a daily fluoride tablet from a young age. This only stopped when fluoride was added to the water supply.
I am now in my fifties and have never had a cavity. My siblings dental health is similar. Our general health is also excellent.
I haven’t read any reports on the effectiveness of fluoride in preventing tooth decay or the possible negative effects of prolonged fluoride consumption. I don’t need to. I have experienced first hand the benefit of fluoride and have suffered no negative effects over the long term.
I have not read any published journal articles which are damning of fluoride.
That's my main issue. It's far less effective than good dental hygene. It certainly doesn't provide adequate tooth protection alone, in the absence of good diet and dental hygene.
It seems you are a medical professional, so I'd like to put a couple of questions to you.
I presume you except that above a certain level fluoride, even from natural sources, is toxic and can cause serious medical issues?
Why do you think fluoridation of water supplies is more effective in catching the minority who have poor dental hygene than providing or reinstating better public dental services?
Do you see any correlation between school dental services (and the lack of), availability of prompt public dental services and tooth decay?
Because I have excellent health!Thank you for sharing too Ferret... but I'm curious about a few things:
How you know you have no negative side effects?
Because my parents shared the same diet and dental hygiene practices. The only difference was they didn't get fluoride when they were young.How do you know you dental health was attributed to fluoride and not good diet and dental hygene?
Because good diet and dental hygiene alone were not enough to prevent tooth decay in previous generations that grew up without fluoride.You say your father was a doctor, but had "suffered much tooth decay". I'm curious how a doctor, well versed in good diet and hygene (assuming he practiced what he was tought) could suffer much tooth decay. Did he (or you) investigate what caused this, eg some disease or genetic defect etc?
Thought I’d share my experience on this.
I am now in my fifties and have never had a cavity. My siblings dental health is similar. Our general health is also excellent.
I haven’t read any reports on the effectiveness of fluoride in preventing tooth decay or the possible negative effects of prolonged fluoride consumption. I don’t need to. I have experienced first hand the benefit of fluoride and have suffered no negative effects over the long term.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?