Comment 27523

By Ted Mitchell (registered) | Posted November 27, 2008 at 17:05:12

It seems nobody has been brave enough to concede the point about hypocrisy. Let's put fluoride in perspective.

As of now, the US has suffered over 307,000 traffic deaths since 9/11. That's 103 Sept 11ths and counting (from FARS average mortality 2001-7 data). 9/11 still weighs heavily on our minds. Traffic deaths do not. This is an example of the emotional hindbrain dominating rational thinking, facts be damned.

That's a bit off topic, but it illustrates the irrationality behind fluoride opposition.

Compare fluoride with PM air pollution. http://www.clinsci.org/cs/115/cs1150175.... Their estimate is for 800,000 worldwide annual deaths. Where's the emotional outrage there, it's certainly justifiable. Does fluoride kill 800,000 annually? Do you think?

Thanks to Sally's post. The BMJ responses are basically crap e-comments. However, there is a section of edited comments on this meta-analysis that is worth reading. http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/322/...

In medical studies, claiming the year 2000 is "Way out of date" is imho, "way out of line"

But the 2006 NRC report is worth reading, it is a fairly balanced approach to potential adverse effects. But in my quick reading of it they don't seem to indict fluoridation at low levels. Some of the studies reviewed do leave some unanswered questions such as the effect on the IQ of Chinese children in a couple of small studies. http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record... (the full book is available online)

I take the risks of fluoride seriously, it's just that when you look at things in perspective and try to be as objective as possible, the story of fluoride causing harm is a bit of a snooze.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds