Comment 25914

By JimSchultz (registered) | Posted July 12, 2008 at 20:14:18

Fluoridation has never been about real science but it is about industrial lobby and special interest groups. The grand claims are very far from reality. Proof by bias design is quite easy if only one result is accepted for grants. The York Review 2000 discovered of the thousands of claimed proofs not one was of high quality but all of bias design and poor quality. So poor they could not prove safety or benefit. They did state that fluoridation tripled dental fluorosis damage from 15% to 48% with 12.5% being ugly enough for cosmetic repair. The most current review Pizzo 2007 showed 51% with dental fluorosis and no increrease in cavities when fluoridation ends. Also no narrowing of the dental gap between rich and poor which the health department claims. The NIDR huge study in 1986-87 showed no difference in cavities between fluoridated and non fluoridated so they delayed release for 3 years and only reported on small subsets not the overall no difference. has a long analysis of the true results not the for the public lies. Studies in Canada and New Zealand have proven this but to admit this end the persons job immediately. Same just happened in Australia. Ingested fluoride damages teeth and has no benefit but topical reminerizes but not at 1ppm. It is nothing but a con job that damages kids teeth and give the rest chronic cumulative toxin issues as the NRC 2006 showed but is ignored for policy. is a excellent site with lots of very current data and videos by researchers. Let this be about science not political power. Kids need dentists.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools