Fluoridation of Irish water.

corkonion

I posted on this in the Cork forum, but thought it may be of interest here.

Cork County Council, the country's largest local authority ,
has voted for the fluoridation of Irish water to end.
Yesterday's motion was proposed by Clonakilty based
Councillor Christopher O Sullivan, while councillors also received
an open letter from the West Cork Fluoride Free campaign.
The campaigners believe there are links between fluoride ,
and a number of illnesses and diseases.
Over the last two years, six West Cork councils have voted for the
immediate cessation of the fluoridation of the public water supply.
The motion was unanimously passed by all of the councillors present.

I personally resent being forced to consume a chemical that has some very worrying results in regard to brain development.

http://fluoridealert.org/studies/brain03/

Fluoride was added to our water to fight tooth decay decades ago, but the rest of europe get to drink chemical free water with no sign of having any worse dental health than us.

dgerryd

corkonion wrote: »

I posted on this in the Cork forum, but thought it may be of interest here.

Cork County Council, the country's largest local authority ,
has voted for the fluoridation of Irish water to end.
Yesterday's motion was proposed by Clonakilty based
Councillor Christopher O Sullivan, while councillors also received
an open letter from the West Cork Fluoride Free campaign.
The campaigners believe there are links between fluoride ,
and a number of illnesses and diseases.
Over the last two years, six West Cork councils have voted for the
immediate cessation of the fluoridation of the public water supply.
The motion was unanimously passed by all of the councillors present.

I personally resent being forced to consume a chemical that has some very worrying results in regard to brain development.

http://fluoridealert.org/studies/brain03/

Fluoride was added to our water to fight tooth decay decades ago, but the rest of europe get to drink chemical free water with no sign of having any worse dental health than us.

Wow I'm actually surprised I don't understand how it was ever allowed to be in the main drinking water supply in the first place as floride is a toxin a 'poison' with no health benefits :-)

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

corkonion wrote: »

I posted on this in the Cork forum, but thought it may be of interest here.

Cork County Council, the country's largest local authority ,
has voted for the fluoridation of Irish water to end.
Yesterday's motion was proposed by Clonakilty based
Councillor Christopher O Sullivan, while councillors also received
an open letter from the West Cork Fluoride Free campaign.
The campaigners believe there are links between fluoride ,
and a number of illnesses and diseases.
Over the last two years, six West Cork councils have voted for the
immediate cessation of the fluoridation of the public water supply.
The motion was unanimously passed by all of the councillors present.

I personally resent being forced to consume a chemical that has some very worrying results in regard to brain development.

http://fluoridealert.org/studies/brain03/

Fluoride was added to our water to fight tooth decay decades ago, but the rest of europe get to drink chemical free water with no sign of having any worse dental health than us.

Are you really being forced? Or are you just saying that to strengthen your argument?

On your second point, the rest of Europe pay for water.

I don't like the idea of chemicals in the water, guess what, I don't drink it.

fatmammycat

Stefan Fast Invoice wrote: »

Are you really being forced? Or are you just saying that to strengthen your argument?

On your second point, the rest of Europe pay for water.

I don't like the idea of chemicals in the water, guess what, I don't drink it.

People can put filters on their taps if they wish to remove fluoride. Other European countries put fluoride in food and salt. As far as I know ( I am not a scientist) there is really little peer reviewed evidence that minute levels of fluoride is harmful to us and plenty to suggest it is beneficial regarding tooth decay.
Again I am not a scientist, but even a quick study of the people behind the anti-fluoride campaign gives me pause, as do their remarkable claims.

stefanovich

Where's my tinfoil hat?

flyingdoctor72

Even if, for whatever reason, you believe there is nothing wrong with ingesting chemicals everybody should at least have the choice of not doing so if they so wish. However, there really doesn't appear to be any valid argument of ADDING toxic chemicals to our water supply.

Here is some information on fluoride with a list of academic sources (I did see a more in-depth article somewhere but can't find it right now:

http://www.trueactivist.com/15-facts-most-people-dont-know-about-fluoride/

colman1212

Changing from tap water to filtered/bottled water has made an incredible difference to my skin. I don't understand the science behind it, just that it has! Don't seem to get any acne/spots anymore...

jh79

flyingdoctor72 wrote: »

Even if, for whatever reason, you believe there is nothing wrong with ingesting chemicals everybody should at least have the choice of not doing so if they so wish. However, there really doesn't appear to be any valid argument of ADDING toxic chemicals to our water supply.

Here is some information on fluoride with a list of academic sources (I did see a more in-depth article somewhere but can't find it right now:

http://www.trueactivist.com/15-facts-most-people-dont-know-about-fluoride/

Absolutely no evidence of adverse effects associated with water fluoridation. The papers commonly used to mislead people into believing there are health risks generally refer to concentrations way above what we use.

Here is a recent article from the indo:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colette-browne/claims-by-antiflouride-campaigners-just-dont-wash-with-the-facts-30084145.html

Some background on the "girl against fluoride"

http://geoffsshorts.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/girl-against-fluoride-f-minus-for-effort.html

flyingdoctor72

"The papers commonly used to mislead people into believing there are health risks generally refer to concentrations way above what we use."

That's not what these 100 dentists say?

http://homepage.eircom.net/~aud/home.htm

And how can anybody justify giving an infant fluoride for teeth they don't yet have?

Also there is no evidence that adding fluoride to the water supply improves dental health anyway. Tooth decay has fallen since the 60's so it must be because of fluoride in the water? It has also fallen since the 60's in countries who don't add fluoride... therefore improved dental health must be due to the music of The Beatles!!! And to quote some nutter doesn't necessarily make something untrue, a complete imbecile might say "Monday follows Tuesday" and then "Fish are giraffes in disguise" doesn't mean his first statement is untrue

But seriously now, there is lots of contradictory "evidence" to back up both sides of the argument but it should all come down to personal choice in the end, if you want fluoride use it, if not don't, being forced to ingest added chemicals just is not on. Are there really any people still in Ireland who don't brush their teeth? If there is then they should expect bad dental health

SpaceTime

colman1212 wrote: »

Changing from tap water to filtered/bottled water has made an incredible difference to my skin. I don't understand the science behind it, just that it has! Don't seem to get any acne/spots anymore...

To be honest, fluoride's unlikely to have had that impact mostly because it's in such tiny amounts in the water, but if you're washing in filtered water you may be softening it (removing dissolved minerals) and removing chlorine.

Did you perchance increase your water consumption when you switched to bottled/filtered water? or, maybe you're replacing other drinks with water without realising how big an impact it had on your diet?

There's quite a lot of stuff in water, other than fluoride though, so it's really hard to link it directly to your skin issues.

I would guess that most people's largest source of fluoride is probably toothpaste in most countries.

spacetweek

There is no reason to remove fluoride from water and plenty to continue having it. No successfully peer-reviewed research has ever indicated a problem. Some European countries don't add it to water but it is in table salt. Some countries (e.g. Scandinavia) don't need it at all as everyone there has very good tooth brushing discipline (twice a day) but we have problems with this in Ireland. Same in the USA, a small but significant % of the population never or rarely brush so fluoride needs to be delivered some other way. In the case of poorer parts of Europe such as the Balkans, it's not in water or salt, and people don't brush much. Fluoride should be added to water in those places.

Looking at tooth decay rates in Ireland over many decades, you'd need to separate out effects caused by increased tooth brushing from water fluoridation. Even without adding this to water, Ireland would have seen increased tooth quality due to more tooth brushing, but the effects would be less than what we have now.

jh79

flyingdoctor72 wrote: »

"The papers commonly used to mislead people into believing there are health risks generally refer to concentrations way above what we use."

That's not what these 100 dentists say?

http://homepage.eircom.net/~aud/home.htm

And how can anybody justify giving an infant fluoride for teeth they don't yet have?

Also there is no evidence that adding fluoride to the water supply improves dental health anyway. Tooth decay has fallen since the 60's so it must be because of fluoride in the water? It has also fallen since the 60's in countries who don't add fluoride... therefore improved dental health must be due to the music of The Beatles!!! And to quote some nutter doesn't necessarily make something untrue, a complete imbecile might say "Monday follows Tuesday" and then "Fish are giraffes in disguise" doesn't mean his first statement is untrue

But seriously now, there is lots of contradictory "evidence" to back up both sides of the argument but it should all come down to personal choice in the end, if you want fluoride use it, if not don't, being forced to ingest added chemicals just is not on. Are there really any people still in Ireland who don't brush their teeth? If there is then they should expect bad dental health

Plenty of evidence to support the benefits of water fluoridation. HSE website has info on it.

No evidence exists whatsoever that water fluoridation at 0.7 ppm has adverse effects.

flyingdoctor72

I meant no evidence that convinces me as indicated by the quote marks around "evidence".

and "there is lots of contradictory "evidence" to back up both sides of the argument" i.e. "Plenty of evidence to support the benefits of water fluoridation. HSE website has info on it." ... Of course the government never lie

Neglect to brush your teeth and you'll lose them, this we already know - not all toothpastes contain fluoride, I personally know plenty of people who have no fluoride in their routine (and their children who have NEVER in their lives had it) and their teeth are just fine.

As I said earlier, people who are convinced either way on this issue can pull out "evidence" all day long so it appears a pointless exercise to continue to do so as there is so much written about it... and today's already nearly half over - but people should have a choice either way of taking fluoride or not. If the population did need a government nanny to look after their teeth then that would be rather sad and a completely different issue entirely.

jh79

flyingdoctor72 wrote: »

I meant no evidence that convinces me as indicated by the quote marks around "evidence".

and "there is lots of contradictory "evidence" to back up both sides of the argument" i.e. "Plenty of evidence to support the benefits of water fluoridation. HSE website has info on it." ... Of course the government never lie

Neglect to brush your teeth and you'll lose them, this we already know - not all toothpastes contain fluoride, I personally know plenty of people who have no fluoride in their routine (and their children who have NEVER in their lives had it) and their teeth are just fine.

As I said earlier, people who are convinced either way on this issue can pull out "evidence" all day long so it appears a pointless exercise to continue to do so as there is so much written about it... and today's already nearly half over - but people should have a choice either way of taking fluoride or not. If the population did need a government nanny to look after their teeth then that would be rather sad and a completely different issue entirely.

But it should be an informed choice based on facts not some website misleading people by purposely failing to mention the paper they cite is based on fluoride levels far in excess of ours.

SpaceTime

jh79 wrote: »

But it should be an informed choice based on facts not some website misleading people by purposely failing to mention the paper they cite is based on fluoride levels far in excess of ours.

My concern with it is really about informed consent not science or conspiracy theories about what it can do.

I don't like the idea of adding what is essentially a medication as fluoride isn't really a food product or essential mineral to something you can't avoid i.e. water.

I also don't like the fact that it's not regulated as a medicine or food additive and hovers in a bit of a grey area where it appears to be relatively unregulated in an Irish context anyway.

Thirdly, it's also being administered by the same local authorities who also struggle to fill potholes!

So, in my opinion, it should be left up to the individual to buy their own toothpaste and to be aware of the exact concentrations of fluoride in the makeup of that product.

robbok

Water services are regulated

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/environment/water_services/water_quality.html

I really dont understand the anti fluoride campaigners , If you dont want fluoride in your water, dont drink tap water , simple as.
That is a lifestyle choice, so is veganism but most vegans dont try and make us all avoid animal products

Why do they want to enforce this minority view, which is not backed up by ANY credible peer reviewed scientific studies, on the general population ?

from the HSE site

"Water fluoridation is one of the most widely studied public policy initiatives in the world

There has been a vast reduction in decayed, missing and filled teeth in Ireland for children living in areas
supplied by fluoridated drinking water when compared with those residing in non-fluoridated areas.


The effectiveness of water fluoridation in preventing dental decay continues to be endorsed by the World Health Organization, the
Centre for Disease Control and Prevention U.S.A., the U.S. Public Health Service and the U.S. Surgeon General."

Enough said !

dgerryd

This is in no way trying to flare up which is the right side of the coin just my take on it. I'm not sure so don't attack me with text books hurling statistics on how fluoride has changed the way we smile, I would say it's down to good modern tooth brushes/dentists, society, education,

and Ireland emerging from the bog. I don't know if there is or what evidence exists to say that fluoride does anything for your teeth other than that guy on the telly for the sensodine toothpaste ad lol and he's just an actor lying through is teeth for £$€. At the end of the day you don't have to drink it "but" your going to be paying for it soon.

If someone told me that just a trickle of battery acid in my tea every day would get rid of my ear ache's I'd do without cheers. Whatever way you look at it fluoride is a man made hazardous toxin I don't believe for one second that the government give two fu..s about my teeth or anyone else's.

I'm no conspiracy fanatic but I ain't blind either. One of the biggest killers in the world and something everyone nearly has some encounter with in some shape or form is sold to the public on a daily basis for profit :eek:.

Smoking has to be the hardest habit to give up, 3 months down and it's still torture anyways enough ranting here an excerpt from wikipedia on fluoride.

"Fluoride
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fluoride /flʊəraɪd/ is an inorganic anion of fluorine with the chemical formula F−

. It contributes no color to fluoride salts. Fluoride is the main component of fluorite (apart from calcium ions; fluorite is roughly 49% fluoride by mass), and contributes a distinctive bitter taste, but no odor to fluoride salts.

Its salts are mainly mined as a precursor to hydrogen fluoride. As it is classified as a weak base, concentrated fluoride solutions will cause skin irritation.

Fluoride is the simplest unary fluorine anion, the other being the tentatively investigated trifluorate(2 F—F)(1-) anion. Its salts are important chemical reagents and industrial chemicals, mainly used in the production of hydrogen fluoride for fluorocarbons.

Structurally, and to some extent chemically, the fluoride ion resembles the hydroxide ion. Fluoride ions occur on earth in several minerals, particularly fluorite, but are only present in trace quantities in water

Many fluoride minerals are known, but of paramount commercial importance is fluorite.[3] It is composed of calcium fluoride, with small impurities. The soft, colorful mineral is found worldwide and is common.
In seawater, fluoride concentration averages 1.3 parts per million (ppm). For comparison, chloride concentration in seawater is about 19,000 ppm. The low concentration of fluoride reflects the insolubility of the alkaline earth fluorides, e.g., CaF2.

Fluoride is found naturally in low concentration in drinking water and foods. Fresh water supplies generally contain between 0.01–0.3 ppm.[4][5] In some locations, the fresh water contains dangerously high levels of fluoride, leading to serious health problems.

Treora

robbok wrote: »

Enough said !

http://www.mah.se/CAPP/Country-Oral-Health-Profiles/EURO/

Compare Denmark, Sweden and Ireland's DMFT. They replaced medication with education in the early 1980's and saved millions per year in insurance costs from accidental spills.

Now look at page 183

"where public dental awareness is very high and alternative vehicles for fluoride (e.g. toothpaste) are widely available and widely used, a decision not to replace fluoride removed from the d[r]inking water would be of no consequence. "
WHO 2005 - Prof Whelton & O'Mullane

Enough said

youtube!

I thought there was a mega thread on this subject already? Do we need another?

jh79

Treora wrote: »

http://www.mah.se/CAPP/Country-Oral-Health-Profiles/EURO/

Compare Denmark, Sweden and Ireland's DMFT. They replaced medication with education in the early 1980's and saved millions per year in insurance costs from accidental spills.

Now look at page 183

"where public dental awareness is very high and alternative vehicles for fluoride (e.g. toothpaste) are widely available and widely used, a decision not to replace fluoride removed from the d[r]inking water would be of no consequence. "
WHO 2005 - Prof Whelton & O'Mullane

Enough said

If we compare poorly to the Scandinavian countries then our public dental awareness must be poor making fluoridation necessary.

And as you are already aware, seeing as you left some details from your quote, Both Prof Whelton and Mullane are pro fluoridation.
.
Why not quote what Prof Whelton said about Ireland in that report?

jh79

A couple of articles highlighting the flaws in the arguments presented by Waugh and Co.

http://3menmakeatiger.blogspot.co.uk/2014

http://gerbyrne.blogspot.ie/2014/02/...dationist.html

Treora

jh97 my old friend. You have very strong emotions about Sweden getting this one around you. All health and socially fermenting issues are about habitualisation before the age of reason. Tobacco avoidance, healthy eating, dogma absorbsion. But the truth of Sweden will never leave the fluoridation debate, nor will the lack of clinial trial evidence showing any effect by water fluoridation on protecting teeth from cavities. All the surveys you reference are surveys and conflate brushing with drinking. Ultimately ECJ or the EP will decide this and as few in Europe want it, it will fall.

jh79

Treora wrote: »

jh97 my old friend. You have very strong emotions about Sweden getting this one around you. All health and socially fermenting issues are about habitualisation before the age of reason. Tobacco avoidance, healthy eating, dogma absorbsion. But the truth of Sweden will never leave the fluoridation debate, nor will the lack of clinial trial evidence showing any effect by water fluoridation on protecting teeth from cavities. All the surveys you reference are surveys and conflate brushing with drinking. Ultimately ECJ or the EP will decide this and as few in Europe want it, it will fall.

Why not call for fluoridation to continue while the Swedish type program you wish for is put into action with a phasing out of fluoridation once a high enough standard of dental health is achieved? Seem the most logical way forward if dental health is your real concern.

What is your justification for immediate ending of fluoridation given there is no alternative plan in place?

The success of the Swedish model has no bearing on whether fluoridation is effective btw.

JJayoo

Ingesting fluoride has zero benefit for our teeth. So maybe we can leave the fluoride in the tap water and use it as mouthwash, and buy bottled water.

jh79

JJayoo wrote: »

Ingesting fluoride has zero benefit for our teeth. So maybe we can leave the fluoride in the tap water and use it as mouthwash, and buy bottled water.

That's not what the evidence says. Fluoridation has been shown to be effective in numerous studies.

JJayoo

jh79 wrote: »

That's not what the evidence says. Fluoridation has been shown to be effective in numerous studies.

100% false there is zero evidence that ingesting fluoride has any benefit for your teeth. if you say there is evidence that ingesting fluoride into your bloodstream is effective then please show these numerous studies.

I do realise that it may be difficult to show these studies as they don't exist.

Fluoride only has a benefit when topically applied.

goz83

I no longer drink tap water if i can avoid it. I use water coolers with filtered water at my home and office. I am not really on either side, but i would think that any amount of fluoride ingested is not good for us and i fail to see the benefit of it being in our water and then in our bodies. I would prefer it was not added to the public water supply, but wouldn't demand natural levels be filtered out.

Do Coca-Cola use tap water to make their drinks? Or do they filter it? I ask, because i am drinking 7up as i write this and i am just curious if it contains added fluoride. Maybe it might help my tooth from all the sugar i am gulping down with it

fatmammycat

JJayoo wrote: »

100% false there is zero evidence that ingesting fluoride has any benefit for your teeth. if you say there is evidence that ingesting fluoride into your bloodstream is effective then please show these numerous studies.

I do realise that it may be difficult to show these studies as they don't exist.

Fluoride only has a benefit when topically applied.

You mean a study like this- https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/295735/Water_fluoridation_health_monitoring_report__for_England_2014.pdf

JJayoo

fatmammycat wrote: »

You mean a study like this- https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/295735/Water_fluoridation_health_monitoring_report__for_England_2014.pdf

No because that study says nothing about ingesting fluoride into your blood stream, or any dental health benefits. You may as well have posted a study on cats as it would have been equally irrelevant.

I'm assuming jh79 will post some studies that actually speak about how ingested fluoride is good for dental health as he/she stated it was a fact.

But like I said before it may be difficult as such studies don't actually exist.

jh79

JJayoo wrote: »

No because that study says nothing about ingesting fluoride into your blood stream, or any dental health benefits. You may as well have posted a study on cats as it would have been equally irrelevant.

I'm assuming jh79 will post some studies that actually speak about how ingested fluoride is good for dental health as he/she stated it was a fact.

But like I said before it may be difficult as such studies don't actually exist.

Pg 21 to 24 of the report.

JJayoo

jh79 wrote: »

Pg 21 to 24 of the report.

Nope afraid your are incorrect. Zero about ingesting fluoride into the bloodstream.

Topical means when something is applied directly, for example you drink tap water and while the water is in your mouth the fluoride is applied topically.

Ingested means when you swallow the water and the fluoride enters the blood stream.

There is zero reports that demonstrate that Fluoride provides any benefit to dental teeth once it is ingested.

jh79

JJayoo wrote: »

Nope afraid your are incorrect. Zero about ingesting fluoride into the bloodstream.

Topical means when something is applied directly, for example you drink tap water and while the water is in your mouth the fluoride is applied topically.

Ingested means when you swallow the water and the fluoride enters the blood stream.

There is zero reports that demonstrate that Fluoride provides any benefit to dental teeth once it is ingested.

Strange distinction to make what is your point? What difference does it make? You drink fluoridated tap water and your dental health improves.

fatmammycat

jh79 wrote: »

Strange distinction to make what is your point? What difference does it make? You drink fluoridated tap water and your dental health improves.

You're wasting time, it's like arguing with a creationist. They want evidence, then refuse to accept it when provided.

JJayoo

jh79 wrote: »

Strange distinction to make what is your point? What difference does it make? You drink fluoridated tap water and your dental health improves.

You were the one that stated ingesting fluoride had a benefit for dental health and you stated there were "numerous studies" Maybe you shouldn't state things as fact when you make them up.

You seem oblivious to the fact that fluoride only provides a benefit when applied topically.

jh79

JJayoo wrote: »

You were the one that stated ingesting fluoride had a benefit for dental health and you stated there were "numerous studies" Maybe you shouldn't state things as fact when you make them up.

You seem oblivious to the fact that fluoride only provides a benefit when applied topically.

Ok so water fluoridation provides benefits to our dental health. Happy now.

JJayoo

fatmammycat wrote: »

You're wasting time, it's like arguing with a creationist. They want evidence, then refuse to accept it when provided.

The "evidence" you provided was incorrect, I am not disputing anything on the study it's just the study you posted had zero to do with the ingestion of fluoride.

So yes when something is stated as fact I would like actual evidence and not the first google search you can copy and paste.

JJayoo

jh79 wrote: »

Ok so water fluoridation provides benefits to our dental health. Happy now.

No I'm waiting for the "numerous studies" you mentioned, unless you were talking out your backside.....

jh79

JJayoo wrote: »

The "evidence" you provided was incorrect, I am not disputing anything on the study it's just the study you posted had zero to do with the ingestion of fluoride.

So yes when something is stated as fact I would like actual evidence and not the first google search you can copy and paste.

So what point are you trying to make?

JJayoo

JJayoo wrote: »

Ingesting fluoride has zero benefit for our teeth. So maybe we can leave the fluoride in the tap water and use it as mouthwash, and buy bottled water.

This was my initial post. I wasn't making a point just stating a fact.

Then you said there are "numerous studies" which is incorrect and i asked you to provide such studies, which you didn't, because you like making stuff up, just like in the last thread on this topic.

DanWall

fatmammycat wrote: »

People can put filters on their taps if they wish to remove fluoride. Other European countries put fluoride in food and salt. As far as I know ( I am not a scientist) there is really little peer reviewed evidence that minute levels of fluoride is harmful to us and plenty to suggest it is beneficial regarding tooth decay.

I have enquired with several companies and filters cannot remove Fluoride.


Also I would like to reverse the thinking, if you do not want fluoride, "Don't drink the water" If you want fluoride use your Fluoride toothpaste

I think the issue is not whether it is good or bad, it is mass uncontrolled medication without any choice. They will be putting Viagra in to the water next to give Ireland an increased younger population

jh79

JJayoo wrote: »

This was my initial post. I wasn't making a point just stating a fact.

Then you said there are "numerous studies" which is incorrect and i asked you to provide such studies, which you didn't, because you like making stuff up, just like in the last thread on this topic.

So you caught a couple of posters with a trick question , why?

dgerryd

Sorry for disrupting your debate, but can I ask why people keep referring to fluoride as "medication" where did that term come from. ?

sea_monkey

dgerryd wrote: »

Sorry for disrupting your debate, but can I ask why people keep referring to fluoride as "medication" where did that term come from. ?

No idea. It's like getting mad at vegetables which have had dung added to them for extra minerals for health benefits.

dgerryd

LoL Where could I pick up those there dung-vegetables your referring to.

sea_monkey

dgerryd wrote: »

LoL Where could I pick up those there dung-vegetables your referring to.

every single supermarket

robbok

The Guardian stating what we all know

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/04/04/anything-good-in-the-guardian/?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=web&utm_content=most_commented

http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/apr/04/politicians-anti-fluoridation-campaigners-fluoride-water

“Research into the mindsets of anti-vaccination campaigners suggests that they tend to exhibit traits such as conspiratorial thinking, reasoning flaws, a reliance on anecdote over data and low cognitive complexity in thinking patterns.”

“Similar traits are seen in the anti–fluoride movement, with similar mistrust of health interventions. It may not be a coincidence that the current drive against fluoride in Ireland emanates from West Cork, a region of the country with an extremely low vaccine uptake that has been the epicentre of recent measles outbreaks.”

Treora

That was an opinion piece by a non-field specialist.

This is a little science
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/feb/09/medicalresearch.health

ted1

corkonion wrote: »

I posted on this in the Cork forum, but thought it may be of interest here.

Cork County Council, the country's largest local authority ,
has voted for the fluoridation of Irish water to end.
Yesterday's motion was proposed by Clonakilty based
Councillor Christopher O Sullivan, while councillors also received
an open letter from the West Cork Fluoride Free campaign.
The campaigners believe there are links between fluoride ,
and a number of illnesses and diseases.
Over the last two years, six West Cork councils have voted for the
immediate cessation of the fluoridation of the public water supply.
The motion was unanimously passed by all of the councillors present.

I personally resent being forced to consume a chemical that has some very worrying results in regard to brain development.

http://fluoridealert.org/studies/brain03/

Fluoride was added to our water to fight tooth decay decades ago, but the rest of europe get to drink chemical free water with no sign of having any worse dental health than us.

What level of education have you? Need to see what qualifies you to make statements and assess information

ted1

flyingdoctor72 wrote: »

Even if, for whatever reason, you believe there is nothing wrong with ingesting chemicals everybody should at least have the choice of not doing so if they so wish. However, there really doesn't appear to be any valid argument of ADDING toxic chemicals to our water supply.

Here is some information on fluoride with a list of academic sources (I did see a more in-depth article somewhere but can't find it right now:

http://www.trueactivist.com/15-facts-most-people-dont-know-about-fluoride/

Plenty if things you put in your mouth are toxic. But when they are diluted as much as fluoride is they are not harmful.

jh79

Some articles on the effectiveness of fluoridation.

http://www.bfsweb.org/news/New%20Studies%202013/Fluoridation%20news%20-%20Analysis%20of%20post-1990%20studies.pdf

http://www.bfsweb.org/news/New%20Studies%202013/Fluoridation%20News%20-%20Study%20of%2011%20to%2013-year%20olds%20in%20Newcastle%20and%20Manchester.pdf

http://www.bfsweb.org/news/Aus%20and%20NZ/NZ%20survey%20on%20dent%20benefits%202012.pdf

http://www.bfsweb.org/news/Aus%20and%20NZ/Fluoridation%20News%20-%20Australian%20study%20of%20adults.pdf

robbok

Thanks Treora, you dismiss one opinion piece with another opinion piece ?
I love the Bad Science Series in the Guardian but the clue is in the name , it was a somewhat tongue in cheek article and the main point Dr Benacre was making was in his opinion
"The reality is that anyone making ANY confident statement on fluoride speaks way beyond the evidence."
That seems to catch both pro and anti arguments
That is his opinion but it is not in any way scientific