If democrats proposed this idea everyone would love it. Fuck trump but removing fluoride from the water is a good idea .
flouride
Submitted 1 year ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/2899d87d-e2c8-4577-b753-ada80242cccf.png
Comments
Icecreamface@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
kalleboo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
My barometer is when it’s something that pretty much only the U.S. is obsessed with doing, then it’s probably a dumb thing caused by lobbyists or something.
ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Democrats would love it. Republicans would suddenly discover that flouride is the only thing standing between our children and the gay agenda.
Icecreamface@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
Hahahaha exactly
WolfLink@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
The fluoride is intentionally added to the water to improve tooth health.
ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
but what about my precious bodily fluids?!?
leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
I don’t avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence.
mxcory@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
“Have you ever seen a commie drink a glass of water?”
cikano@lemmy.world 1 year ago
But what about our precious bodily fluids?
leftzero@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
I don’t avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence.
insomniac_lemon@lemmy.cafe 1 year ago
It could likely be replaced with hydroxyapatite instead (it also can be used to remove lead and other things from water, which makes searching about being added to municipal water difficult). Good for not only teeth, also bones.
I also wonder if adding other vitamins would make more sense (just enough to stop deficiencies) if we’re talking about health outcomes, though the first idea I had with vitamin C came up with results of that messing with the chlorine in the water.
finderscult@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
Let’s just not add things to water except to ensure it stays as close to safe from infectious disease as possible. Water is water, it shouldn’t be more than that. Even if what you add is safe for humans, what about the ten billion other uses tap water has that affects the environment.
People shouldn’t have to buy filters if they just want water instead of whatever some random group thinks the population needs instead of just water
GhiLA@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
throws Coors light
“That’s just what they want you to think!”
Come up with a rebuttal to this that an ignorant right-winger would believe.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Lemminologist here:
the fluoride levels vary because that’s how numbers do in reality
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
The fluoride added to water gets it up to 0.7mg/liter.
That ends up to be 2 or 3 drops in a 55 gallon drums worth of water. Not much.
Fluoride is a natural substance and is found in many areas drinking water already. Many areas in much higher concentrations than 0.7mg/liter, so realistically people all over the world have drank fluoridated water for thousands of years.
You have to well over double the 0.7 before any health issues may appear and the first to appear is at about triple the concentration in kids under 8 years old who drink it for years getting spots on their teeth. The spots are only superficial.
Going into concentrations even higher than that CAN cause health issues when drank for longer periods of time. All of those cases being from naturally occurring fluoride, which actually effects somewhere north of 20% of the world’s population.
Which makes the argument that fluoride in our water keeps us passive as being extra stupid, since water sourced around Columbia (the country) is far higher than .07mg/liter and Columbia seems to be caught in violence and turmoil and instability quite a bit over the decades.
BussyCat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Just because a concentration is low doesn’t mean it’s safe. Water with 0.7 mg/L of Po-210 is lethal.
You can put an amount of it in a 55 gallon drum that is not visible
It’s a natural substance
Fluoride is in fact safe at the amounts that the FDA regulates but saying it’s a small concentration or that it’s natural are not the reasons it’s safe. It’s the hundreds of peer reviewed research articles that show that it’s safe
chiliedogg@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Its presence in groundwater is how we discovered it’s good for teeth.
In fact, there used to be so much in some areas,it actually stained the teeth. In Colorado Springs a dentist noticed that the children were developing brown stains on their teeth. In researching it, it was discovered that the “Colorado Brown Stain” was caused by excessive fluoride in the drinking water. But it also lead to the discovery that regions with natural fluoride present but in lower levels than Colorado Springs didn’t have stained teeth, but did have lower levels of tooth decay.
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Yep. In fact, 21% of the world’s natural drinking water used falls within the recommended range for fluoride, while over another 20% is higher and in some countries actually does cause some non-superficial side effects and problems. Those don’t pop up until in concentrations at least 3 times higher than recommended.
Reyali@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Small note: the country name is spelled “Colombia,” and spelling it correctly means you don’t need to specify which one!
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Fair enough!
HexadecimalSky@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I am still concerned about fluoride, but for different reasons. The federal government says there is too much natural fluoride in our water so we must import water to dilute it. The federal government doesn’t trust us with police officers, or politicians, but surely the public water company isn’t corrupt or incompetent…surely.
But hey, our teeth are really white and no ones died from flouride, far more likely to die from sudden lead.
RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Having worked for a municipal water system, no, they are not incompetent when engineers are at the helm. Corruption I saw was related to giving small incidental work to friends, some weird politics sometimes, but that was about it.
More importantly: everyone understood our job wasn’t to make money, we were foundational to our city’s livelihood & health, that of our neighbors, our mother’s and brothers. Quality was job 1, and I really do mean that. Could we have moved faster and for less money? Maybe. But I’m glad we picked doing the job right over doing it fast.
Rookwood@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Fluoridated water doesn’t seem to make a difference on cavities. It does have neurological effects. It’s simply not acutely fatal. It’s already in our toothpaste. We don’t need it in our municipal water supply and the majority of developed countries don’t.
gofsckyourself@lemmy.world 1 year ago
This is a disingenuous take. This is a cherry-picked article that does not come to the conclusion you draw here. You also state “It does have neurological effects” but leave out the most important piece of information for that to be true: high doses.
Why should anyone trust what you say when you’re twisting the information to suit your narrative?
Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Only 3% of Quebec’s population has access to fluoridated water and we have way more dental issues than any other province in Canada.
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
Your link is more or less an opinion piece from a geneticist, so this isn’t even her field of study.
All her health issues she points out are for fluoride concentrations over triple the amount that tap water is brought up to.
The reason it’s usage spread across the country was because while the entire country had access to things such as fluoridated toothpaste, counties and cities that started fluoridation of their water supplies consistently had fewer cavities than areas that didn’t fluoridate the water. This alone outlines the glaringly obvious flaw in her argument.
Further still, while the US adds fluoride to the tap water in a concentration to reach 0.5mg to 0.7mg per liter of water (a couple drops per 50 gallons), natural drinking water for over 20% of the world is in concentrations well over that (to be clear, being well over that can cause health issues. Too much of anything can cause health issues.)
In other words, there is no evidence that this low concentration of fluoride causes health issues. There is loads of direct evidence that it reduces cavities. Plus, this woman from your opinion piece is talking out of her field. Not to mention that 21% of the world’s drinking water supply naturally already falls within the recommended range of what the US takes theirs up to. It’s just that most of the US water supply naturally falls below that amount.
finderscult@lemmy.ml 1 year ago
No, the reason fluoridation in water is widespread is because fluoride is produced far more than there is market to sell it otherwise.
Greyghoster@aussie.zone 1 year ago
Interesting. The article doesn’t actually say that fluoridation in water supplies is dangerous but that some researchers are questioning. Generally code for lack of scientific evidence. It also finds that early studies may have had a flawed basis (pretty much all early studies have been found wanting by later scientists) but doesn’t refute the results.The study mentioned in the article talks about high levels of fluoridation which I assume is in lab tests however these levels are not the case in water supplies.
The correct way forward is more actual science based studies.
Ramblingman@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The bad part about Rfk jr is he probably mixes in some science with quackery. I honestly assumed all his ideas are insane. That’s what’s so hard about being discerning right now, you have to be on one side or the other.
heraplem@leminal.space 1 year ago
Counterpoint: I live in an area without fluoridated water, and I’m told that dentists can reliably identify people who didn’t grow up here by the state of their teeth.
ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 year ago
Anecdote in scientific debate? Wild
sleen@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
I appreciate that you put some reputable sources, rather than relying on a random tweet/post.
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
It’s an opinion piece by a geneticist (so not a chemist or biologist or a field that could be related) and she ignores all the direct evidence that every city and county that added fluoride started having fewer cavities than neighboring areas that hadn’t yet added it.
She then further points out that it only causes health issues in much higher concentrations than what the US was getting our water supply up to. You know, like literally anything that you get too much of is bad for you. You can literally die from drinking too much plain water. Too much of anything will kill you.
Ahrotahntee@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
Keep in mind that they listed Canada as having non-flouride water, presumably based on the sole criteria that it’s not a national requirement. The split between communities with and without flouride in their water varies wildly by province.
thesmokingman@programming.dev 1 year ago
I want someone who knows about these things to respond to this 2012 metastudy that ties naturally fluoridated groundwater to neurological problems. I have used this the past decade to say “well the science is unclear;” I found it back then (2013 at the latest) when I was trying to disprove a crank and really questioned my shit. There was a(n unrelated?) follow up later that questioned the benefits. Since this is very far from my area of expertise, I’m not championing these; I just want to understand why they’re wrong or at least don’t matter in the discourse.
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
You want some fancy rebuttal to a single linked study that the article states was a bunch of partials thrown together, that came from a country famously known for half-assing and cutting corners to get ahead? The country that was caught mixing lead into ground Cinnamon to sell it for a higher weight? The one where buildings sit half done or the cement falls apart by the time it’s together? The ones who lay sod over cement in order to pass the amount of vegetation present on new construction?
That’s the article you could and and latch onto in order to believe? Are you even aware that fluoride occurs naturally in water and that about 40% of all the drinking water across the globe already has around the amount the US gets theirs up to, or a larger amount(some places so large they do actually cause health issues)? It’s literally been drank for thousands of years.
But you trust an incomplete study from China more than anything else? Why?
thesmokingman@programming.dev 1 year ago
I’m was just hoping for a solid rebuttal, not necessarily a fancy one! If you’re able to explain why the criticisms you mention mean that specific study is bad, that would be great! I’m assuming you’re not from China and mistakenly think wherever you’re from doesn’t suffer from similar issues, meaning we can only trust you as much as the article.
It would be great to have some citations for that so I can point to things when I get into these discussions! That was part of what I asked for. You seem really passionate about this so you must have that available to help me out. Thanks!
I’m not sure you read my post if you think I trust any of the studies I linked more than anything else. It might be good to reread it!
macarthur_park@lemmy.world 1 year ago
There’s a follow up meta study from 2020.:
In conclusion, based on the totality of currently available scientific evidence, the present review does not support the presumption that fluoride should be assessed as a human developmental neurotoxicant at the current exposure levels in Europe.
SuperIce@lemmy.world 1 year ago
A study in Canada was published in 2019 looking at the differences between 2 neighboring cities where on stopped fluoridating water in 2011. They saw that saw a significant increase in cavities in children in the city that stopped fluoridating vs the other. This is despite the fact the the city without fluoridation actually has somewhat higher adherence to brushing, flossing, and going to the dentist. No difference was seen yet in permanent teeth, but that’s because the study would need more time to see effects there.
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/…/cdoe.12685
Of course, we still should do more studies on fluoride neurotoxicity. Most studies look at levels of fluoride at 1.5mg/L or higher, which is more than double the recommended level by the US (0.7 mg/L). There is a hard limit in the US of 4mg/L, but the EPA strongly recommends a limit of 2mg/L. This only really matters for locations with very high levels of fluoride in the groundwater, and is thus quite rare. The EU’s limit is 1.5mg/L.
Chuymatt@beehaw.org 1 year ago
The Takeaway I’m getting from both of these studies being talked about Is that things are very unclear. The Cochrane group is very well regarded for conducting Meta studies and finding flaws in previously held understandings. The term high fluoridation is mentioned many times, and it’s unclear what that is meaning.
Vitamin A is an incredibly important molecule to many biological processes in the human body, but we do not want to supplement it, aggressively, as it can become toxic. Fluoride is noted to be beneficial for enamel hardening. No one is recommending taking large amounts of it. The second link you have points out the important questions, what is the actual danger, and who is in danger the most?
tehmics@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I also came across the same study while looking to disprove a conspiracy nut. We should really do more research on the effects of fluoride.
ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 1 year ago
The Harvard geneticists little opinion piece she wrote completely ignores all the direct evidence that was gathered back then, about how cavities always decreased in fluoridated areas when compared to neighboring cities that hadn’t yet done so.
Also, yeah, it’s bad for you in large doses. Literally anything is bad for you in large enough doses.
thesmokingman@programming.dev 1 year ago
It looks like someone else linked one of these studies in a different comment while I was writing my own. I don’t feel as crazy now. I don’t care one way or another; I just want to make sure I can respond correctly! I wonder if the emphasis on fluoridated water is itself linked to industry capture?
RQG@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Toxicologist here. I think that take is dishonest or dumb.
Taking a lethal dose is almost never the concern with any substance in our drinking water.
Hormones, heavy metals, persistent organic chemicals, ammonia are all in our drinking water. But for all of them we can’t drink enough water to die from a high dose.
Some of them still have a large effect on our bodies.
It’s about the longterm effects. Which longterm studies to learn about. That makes them harder to study.
Still doesn’t mit flouride does anything bad longerm. But the argument is bad.
refalo@programming.dev 1 year ago
never the concern
It is when you’re responding to people who think 5G is turning the frogs gay and activating hidden vaccine microchips.
observes_depths@aussie.zone 1 year ago
This. How can we be completely certain that something isn’t damaging over the long term. I’m not anti fluoride, but healthy debate and scepticism is a good thing, especially when we’re all forced to consume a substance with the only alternative being dehydration and death. People need to be free to make their own choices.
Pulptastic@midwest.social 1 year ago
We probably have enough A/B data now to make some inferences yeah? Compare countries with fluoridated water to countries without.
jrubal1462@mander.xyz 1 year ago
You can get even more granular than that. CDC maintains a list of water systems and whether or not they add fluoride. CDC My Water System. To give you an idea of how granular that is, there are 78 different water systems in my county alone. For most of my life I assumed we had fluoridated water but apparently only 1/78 of our water systems are. I only checked when we had kids and I needed to know whether or not I needed to give them Fluoride Drops.
refalo@programming.dev 1 year ago
yes and some of that data is already in other comments here
FreshLight@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Yeah, it seems to me like he got the right idea and wanted to convince people by making an extreme statement…
RQG@lemmy.world 1 year ago
That might well be the case. I’m not sure if it is helpful to use those half truths which are simpler to convince certain people. Or if it weakens the point because it is in the end not really correct.
mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Also, isn’t it recommended to not give infants fluorided water, hence why you can buy it in virtually every grocery store?
blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Pretty much anything you can think of is recommended by someone, because different people have conflicting views. The key is to choose whose recommendations are based on the best reasoning & evidence aligning with your goals.
Rutty@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Gingerlegs@lemmy.world 1 year ago
the people that need to hear this will never believe you.
_bcron_@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Now say something that bros can really understand, like “fluoride affects zinc and magnesium absorption”. Just don’t tell them how it interacts
solarvector@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
It’s not about toxicity, it’s about mind control! Fluoride makes you passive. But you know this since you’re a tool of the government pushing poison.
Just bleach your teeth like normal people! You know, with the bleach under the kitchen sink.
(Don’t actually do this)
walden@sub.wetshaving.social 1 year ago
Toxicologist, toxicity, minuscule, fluoridated – your big doctor words are just trying to trick us!
Im_old@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The question is: does it make sense to buy toothpaste with fluoride then or can I buy one without? Just because my kids don’t like the peppermint ones and other flavours are most of the times without fluoride
AeonFelis@lemmy.world 1 year ago
So, once again, DHMO is the chemical we need to fear.
BreadOven@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Fun fact. Literally everyone who has died, ever, has had DHMO in some form. You’re even exposed in the womb!
Hamartia@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Any chemical that can exist as a solid, a liquid and a gas at the same time isn’t safe to put into our bodies!
bradinutah@thelemmy.club 1 year ago
The stuff also known as hydric acid. People just don’t talk enough about how corrosive it is. Plus, it gets in the air and gets in your lungs!
BussyCat@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s 10 million times more acidic than drain cleaner!!! And the government is trying to force you to drink it by forcing it to be used in municipal drinking fountains
TehWorld@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s so pervasive that they have found it in the bodies of every single child worldwide.
valkyre09@lemmy.world 1 year ago
There was an incident involving it on April 14th 1912 that took over 1500 lives.