New studies seek to bolster case for fluoride in Sonoma County’s water supply

[spam1]

You are assuming that fluoride really does reduce tooth decay. Ihttps://www.facebook.com/CleanWaterSonomaMarin

you miss my point entirely. I don't know or don't care if fluoride works or not (I would guess it probably does, and I would guess vaccines work and don't cause autism), but I point out that this is yet another case of government representatives choosing as their role to enforce their own judgment (right or wrong) on the populous as a whole "for the people's good". I think the cases where a law is passed to control or enforce behavior have become much too common. I would prefer, and vote for, representatives who believe that people should be able to make their own choices in things that affect only them.

AND- to those who say "but if you choose poorly, we all have to pay for your health care" then it leaves almost no activity outside the realm of public regulation. It is a small step to regulate one's sex life, personal activities, and already there are cities that think your choice to drink Coke should be restricted and taxed (Davis) , for our own good.

[lilypads]

Mottled fluoride debate
By Phillipe Grandjean, editor of the website,Chemical Brain Drain, Dec 17, 2014

17 December 2014. A meta-analysis on IQ deficits in children exposed to elevated levels of fluoride in drinking water spurred much discussion in the US, mostly in regard to the safety of water fluoridation. The 27 studies reviewed in the study were mainly from China and covered exposures similar to those that occur in areas with fluoridated water and up to 10 times that level. Although children in the high-fluoride areas showed an average IQ 7 points below the controls, the dose-dependence of such deficits is uncertain.

To explore the association further, the team behind the meta-analysis carried out a pilot study in rural Sichuan, China. The results have just been released. The researchers used the best available and feasible approaches to exposure assessment and cognitive testing of 51 children. Their lifetime exposures to fluoride from drinking water covered the full range allowed in the US. Among the findings, children with fluoride-induced mottling of their teeth – even the mildest forms that appears as whitish specks on the enamel – showed lower performance on some neuropsychological tests. This observation runs contrary to popular wisdom that the enamel effects represent a cosmetic problem only and not a sign of toxicity. At least one of five American children has some degree of mottling of their teeth.

The safety of fluoridation for caries prevention is being defended in a recent commentary that claims that the meta-analysis of 27 studies had been “severely criticized”, although this critique is not further explained. As evidence of safety, the authors refer to a New Zealand study that “found that fluoridation is not neurotoxic for either children or adults, and does not have a negative effect on IQ”. This interpretation is rather optimistic, as the statistical confidence limits suggest that a loss of 2-3 IQ pointscould not be excluded by their findings.

Prevention of caries is an important goal, but that does not justify an exaggeration of fluoridation safety. In the past, scientific evidence on other neurotoxicants, such as lead, mercury, and certain pesticides, has been similarly misconstrued by vested interests. Although the link between mottled teeth and brain toxicity still needs to be further characterized, the existence of uncertainty is no excuse for mottling the debate with hyperbole. Prevention of chemical brain drain should be considered at least as important as protection against caries.

https://fluoridealert.org/about/archive-of-fan-bulletins/

[lilypads]

BTW, did anyone else catch the letter to the Editor in the PD a couple of days ago from the retired physician who said that no one had yet mentioned the link between fluoride and thyroid disease. He said in his career he had seen the cases of thyroid disease increase significantly when fluoride was added to the local water supply.

Could you please post the letter from the retired doctor? I missed it.

[rossmen]

unfortunately your point is meaningless considering the dominance of democrats in soco. so discussing the science of adding fluoride to the water supply is the only hope for making an informed decision. pay attention! its how we learn ; )

you miss my point entirely. I don't know or don't care if fluoride works or not (I would guess it probably does, and I would guess vaccines work and don't cause autism), but I point out that this is yet another case of government representatives choosing as their role to enforce their own judgment (right or wrong) on the populous as a whole "for the people's good". I think the cases where a law is passed to control or enforce behavior have become much too common. I would prefer, and vote for, representatives who believe that people should be able to make their own choices in things that affect only them.

AND- to those who say "but if you choose poorly, we all have to pay for your health care" then it leaves almost no activity outside the realm of public regulation. It is a small step to regulate one's sex life, personal activities, and already there are cities that think your choice to drink Coke should be restricted and taxed (Davis) , for our own good.