Move over fluoride, here comes Calgary's clean water!

[HeartsOfFire]

I cannot give serious consideration to graphs that come from a website that shamelessly promotes its agenda in its own URL designator.

[SebC]

So fluoridated countries generally have less tooth decay? Fancy that.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

I cannot give serious consideration to graphs that come from a website that shamelessly promotes its agenda in its own URL designator.

The data is derived from the World Health Organization.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

The data is derived from the World Health Organization.

And suggest that fluoride is effective.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by SebC

So fluoridated countries generally have less tooth decay? Fancy that.

Yes, ..and it also shows that non-fluoridated nations have experienced the same drop in cavity rates.

This means that fluoridated tooth-paste is doing a good job, and that water fluoridation has a negligible effect.

[HeartsOfFire]

And then distributed by a website called 'fluoridealert.'

You are incredibly naïve if you think they provided this information without bias.

To do so would be counter-productive to their goal. I can't help but wonder what other data they intentionally omitted while posting this.

Besides, as it turns out, they didn't even do a good job of posting information helpful to their cause. These graphs show that fluoridated water improves tooth health. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

And then distributed by a website called 'fluoridealert.'

You are incredibly naïve if you think they provided this information without bias.

Yeah tell me about it.

It also says crazy things like:

“Although the prevalence of caries varies between countries, levels everywhere have fallen greatly in the past three decades, and national rates of caries are now universally low. This trend has occurred regardless of the concentration of fluoride in water or the use of fluoridated salt, and it probably reflects use of fluoridated toothpastes and other factors, including perhaps aspects of nutrition.”
SOURCE: Cheng KK, et al. (2007). Adding fluoride to water supplies. British Medical Journal 335(7622):699-702.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Yes, ..and it also shows that non-fluoridated nations have experienced the same drop in cavity rates.

This means that fluoridated tooth-paste is doing a good job, and that water fluoridation has a negligible effect.

At any point in time on the chart, the fluoridated countries are at the bottom of the chart.

[HeartsOfFire]

Originally Posted by KK Cheng et al

“Although the prevalence of caries varies between countries, levels everywhere have fallen greatly in the past three decades, and national rates of caries are now universally low. This trend has occurred regardless of the concentration of fluoride in water or the use of fluoridated salt, and it probably reflects use of fluoridated toothpastes and other factors, including perhaps aspects of nutrition.”
SOURCE: Cheng KK, et al. (2007). Adding fluoride to water supplies. British Medical Journal 335(7622):699-702.

What it fails to prove -- or even correlate -- is that added fluoride in water and/or table salt has a strong enough negative effect to make it not worthwhile to add.

Despite the universally diminished cases of tooth decay, the presence of fluoride in water and/or table salt is nevertheless beneficial. Even if only 10% beneficial, it is still beneficial.

It's like refusing to take Penicillin because it too is bacteria!

[robocop]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

I know I'm not as smart as I think I am, and I'm fine with that. I also know that given your field of study versus mine, you are likely far better versed and educated than I am in the fields that you study. Clearly, on the topic of health and the ingestion of chemicals, I take a more laissez-faire approach whereas you take on a 'healthiest option available,' to the point where you actively try to avoid knowingly ingesting chemicals, and equate the consumption of fluoridated water to drinking poison. That is hyperbolic paranoia, and you are way overboard. It's not nearly as bad as you think it is.

Logic. Reason.

Checkmate.

Well this is where the incorrect assumptions come in to play. I don't equate consumption of fluoridated water to drinking poison, I recognize that given the extremely polarized nature of research there is the possibility that it is equivalent to drinking poison.

I don't believe that my attitude is hyperbolic or paranoid, I intend to make the best informed and most logical decisions possible. There is evidence that suggests that fluoride is a cumulative chemical, meaning that your body may filter some of it but the fluoride that remains does not disappear over time and in fact accumulates and creates increasingly detrimental effects. So while you think the body handles it readily the concern is that the opposite is happening, a chemical known to be poisonous in high doses is accumulating over time (ie. you could slowly be poisoning yourself). Add this to evidence that suggests there is little correlation between the prevention of tooth decay and water fluoride levels.

You can say "but there is evidence that contradicts what you just said regarding empirical studies" and you would be correct. It is easy to find evidence from peer reviewed articles from both sides so in my educated viewpoint the only logical conclusion is that it should be the right of the individual to decide how they handle this.

[HeartsOfFire]

@robocop:

Fluoridated water supplies have been in effect in Calgary for over 20 years, and in some other places for over 30.

People are not suddenly starting to die of fluoride poisoning en masse.

Your fears of gradual toxic build-up are negligible, at best. At worst, completely ridiculous.

I personally guarantee you that at some point in time in all our lives, everyone on this forum will die. That includes me, and you. And I also guarantee that fluoride poisoning will NOT be the leading cause.

[robocop]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

@robocop:

Fluoridated water supplies have been in effect in Calgary for over 20 years, and in some other places for over 30.

People are not suddenly starting to die of fluoride poisoning en masse.

Your fears of gradual toxic build-up are negligible, at best. At worst, completely ridiculous.

I personally guarantee you that at some point in time in all our lives, everyone on this forum will die. That includes me, and you. And I also guarantee that fluoride poisoning will NOT be the leading cause.

while cancer rates and psychological disorders continue to increase there is zero chance fluoridation is having a negative effect on the population? seems as if you create your own conclusions to suit your own reality before giving it any thought or research. Did you really think from an objective point of view because it really doesn't seem like it.

[HeartsOfFire]

I'm skeptical on the whole cancer thing. Is it happening more frequently? Or are we just getting better at detecting it? I postulate that cancer rates have been consistent for centuries, but only in the last fifty years have we begun to attribute it to deaths that were previously unexplainable. But I have no evidence to support that.

I'm also skeptical on the increase of psycological disorders. Especially in the diagnoses of AD(H)D. It's rather convenient to pump up a kid with Ritalin or Prozac (of which the prescribing doctor no doubt gets a cut) instead of telling the parents 'you're doing a crappy job.'

[robocop]

my psychology degree postulates that you have no idea what you are talking about

[driveway]

Originally Posted by robocop

my psychology degree postulates that you have no idea what you are talking about

Okay, but your psychology degree would have taught you that there are factors such as the increase in the number of diagnosable disorders, the increased pressure by pharmaceutical companies on doctors to diagnose disorders and subsequently prescribe medication to treat those disorders and the increased amount of education and communication doctors receive on the latest variations on previously grouped-together spectrum disorders that almost certainly have had a greater impact on the amount of psychological disorders being diagnosed than fluoridated water.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by robocop

tap water = free

Mind telling me how I can get my water for free?

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

As I am alive, clearly the level of fluoride in the water was safe.


.......

Logic. Reason.

Checkmate.

LOL. You are alive, therefore what you consume daily is safe. HAHA. Logic and reason seems to have eluded you.

I'm not saying I think flouridated water is dangerous, although I prefer that it is not added to city water. I think it should be up to the individual if they want to supplement their intake with fluoride.

[stampsx2]

No fluoride in the drinking water? I guess everybody will have to start brushing their teeth.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by HeartsOfFire

I'm skeptical on the whole cancer thing. Is it happening more frequently? Or are we just getting better at detecting it? I postulate that cancer rates have been consistent for centuries, but only in the last fifty years have we begun to attribute it to deaths that were previously unexplainable. But I have no evidence to support that.

I'm also skeptical on the increase of psycological disorders. Especially in the diagnoses of AD(H)D. It's rather convenient to pump up a kid with Ritalin or Prozac (of which the prescribing doctor no doubt gets a cut) instead of telling the parents 'you're doing a crappy job.'

Age-adjusted cancer rates overall are not increasing (Stats Canada has some reports on this - don't have a link offhand), and in fact for most cancers are stable or decreasing. The main reason total cancer cases increase is because people are living longer, and the chance of getting cancer increases the older you are.

[robocop]

Originally Posted by driveway

Okay, but your psychology degree would have taught you that there are factors such as the increase in the number of diagnosable disorders, the increased pressure by pharmaceutical companies on doctors to diagnose disorders and subsequently prescribe medication to treat those disorders and the increased amount of education and communication doctors receive on the latest variations on previously grouped-together spectrum disorders that almost certainly have had a greater impact on the amount of psychological disorders being diagnosed than fluoridated water.

so what does this have to do with a guy bringing in pop-culture psychology that has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand?

[Jake]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Yes, ..and it also shows that non-fluoridated nations have experienced the same drop in cavity rates.

This means that fluoridated tooth-paste is doing a good job, and that water fluoridation has a negligible effect.

I won't bother asking how you reached that conclusion as you are clearly mis-interpreting the graph, but I will offer these other comments:

First, a graph on its own, without an attached write up or any stats is not very compelling evidence, especially given the fact it comes from an anti-fluoride website. In university science students are taught in their first semester which sources are considered acceptable to cite. This is a skill you do not have and would do well to look into. An average first year university student could better support anti-fluoridation than you are now.

Second, you do not know better than dentists across the country. There is an overwhelming majority of dentists that agree on the benefits of fluoride, especially in young children. You are basically saying fluoride has important negative impacts on your health away from the mouth, and fluoride has no benefits in the mouth. If you want to argue the former, fine, but the latter is not really debatable.