A U.S. government report expected to stir debate concluded that fluoride in drinking water at twice the recommended limit is linked with lower IQ in children.

The report, based on an analysis of previously published research, marks the first time a federal agency has determined — “with moderate confidence” — that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. While the report was not designed to evaluate the health effects of fluoride in drinking water alone, it is a striking acknowledgment of a potential neurological risk from high levels of fluoride.

Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.

“I think this (report) is crucial in our understanding” of this risk, said Ashley Malin, a University of Florida researcher who has studied the affect of higher fluoride levels in pregnant women on their children. She called it the most rigorously conducted report of its kind.

140 points

It’s almost like “the dose makes the poison”.

permalink
report
reply
120 points

Levels at twice the limit do bad things? Who would have thought.

permalink
report
reply
7 points
*

Maybe

Sometimes

permalink
report
parent
reply
-98 points
*

at twice the limit do bad things?

i call water fluoridation bullshit, i don’t care what anyone says. of all things, why force everyone to consume this toxic chemical, especially when there’s no way to know how much an individual is drinking, and also especially since the dose inevitably gets fucked up.

The Cochrane report also concluded that early scientific investigations on water fluoridation (most were conducted before 1975) were deeply flawed. “We had concerns about the methods used, or the reporting of the results, in … 97 percent of the studies,” the authors noted. One problem: The early studies didn’t take into account the subsequent widespread use of fluoride-containing toothpastes and other dental fluoride supplements, which also prevent cavities. This may explain why countries that do not fluoridate their water have also seen big drops in cavity rates (see chart).

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazine/magazine_article/fluoridated-drinking-water/

i find it MUCH more likely that fluoride, as a toxic waste industrial by product was just sold to the public as a “miracle” cure for cavities, so that corporations could sell it to the taxpayer, rather than pay to have it disposed of

https://origins.osu.edu/article/toxic-treatment-fluorides-transformation-industrial-waste-public-health-miracle?language_content_entity=en

it’s the same shit as the “recycling solution” to plastic waste that was sold to us by…plastics manufacturers. which also turned out to be complete bullshit

edit: since no one’s offering a substantial defense of mandatory fluoridation without consent, i’m going to bed. enjoy your drain bamage

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Fluoride does strengthen teeth. However, this study shows that maybe dentists should be administering it (A dentist handed me a mouthwash with it, and literally I had a choice of a daily one or a weekly one, and since it’s mouth wash, you’re supposed to spit it out. So clearly it can be applied to the teeth without needed to be ingested at all)

permalink
report
parent
reply
-25 points
*

without needed to be ingested at all

that’s the point-- lots of things are beneficial–why force a chemical that can so easily be overconsumed on everyone without asking if they want it? people think their teeth are going to fall out if they don’t drink fluoride. fine–why not sell it as a product that people can choose to purchase if they want it, instead of dumping it in the water supply?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

You can do a whole house RO system if you really care, but you need to be mindful that it can have serious downsides if the RO water sits in the pipes for too long while you are away from your house (Bad bacteria).

RO removes everything- the minerals that help your mouth healthy, the chlorine or chloramine inhibiting bacterial growth in your pipes, heavy metals and microplastics and PFAS that could be in the water (though this is null and void if your housepipes are plastic or lead or treated with PFAS)

…generally, unless you are living with extremely dangerous water, or you have massive aquariums that need more than a kiddie pool of water a week, you don’t need RO systems.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

I mean, the best public health alternative to water fluoridation would be to impose limits to how much sugar is allowed in foods and force changes in marketing, since sugar consumption is one of the biggest causes of dental problems

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

i agree with this, and funny enough, i’ve heard people complain about soda machines being removed from schools because, of course, “they’re taking away my kid’s FREEDOM to drink cokes all day!!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Downvoted for the truth

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

people can’t stand the thought that maybe they’ve been misled their entire life

permalink
report
parent
reply
82 points

Maybe that’s why there’s a limit that’s lower than the danger point?

permalink
report
reply
44 points

And also why water fluoridation is done at a level far below the limit. Lots of things that are good for you at one dosage level are bad for you at a much higher dosage level.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

Including, funnily enough, water!

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

I don’t think this is conclusive without either a mechanism or an analysis that definitively shows there’s no other water contaminants in these poorly regulated areas

permalink
report
reply
25 points

Considering they specifically say “with moderate confidence” I don’t think they think it’s conclusive either

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

Fluoride is naturally in the water in my area. Most toothpaste also has fluoride added into it. Guess I’m destined to be a lemon. Just don’t taste me after brushing.

permalink
report
reply
23 points

Fluoride is naturally in most water sources. As long as your water is within limits, you’re fine using fluoride toothpaste.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

You’re not eating your toothpaste are you?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

What?

It said paste!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points

Fluoride in toothpaste is fine because you spit it out.

Adding it to drinking water is the problematic issue.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

Having it at unsafe levels in drinking water.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

A child would have to eat something like 10 entire tubes of toothpaste for fluoride to become toxic. Kids are gonna be fine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Even if you swallowed your toothpaste, you’d be fine because the amount of fluoride is so insignificant.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 10K

    Posts

  • 197K

    Comments