Fluoride water 'causes cancer' in boys

digme

Fluoride in tap water can cause bone cancer in boys, a disturbing new study indicates, although there is no evidence of a link for girls.
New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma - bone cancer - bet-ween the ages of 10 and 19.



The increased cancer risks, identified in a newly available study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health, were found at fluoride exposure levels common in both the US and Britain. It was the first examination of the link between exposure to the chemical at the critical period of a child's development and the age of onset of bone cancer.


Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of fluoridation of your city's water supply immediately.

Everything causes cancer these days ;s

storm2811

Private well.;)

Ahh,so pure.

MrStuffins

Flouride?

Is that why Lance Armstrong has such lovely teeth?

MrStuffins

'Artificial light increases breast cancer risk'

Originally posted by The Daily Mail

Women who sleep with the light on or stay up late at night could be at a greater risk of breast cancer, according to scientists.
Researchers have long suggested that being exposed to too much light at night disrupts crucial hormones and raises the chance of developing breast tumours.

See also...
All you need to know about breast cancer

Women who work night shifts - such as nurses and air stewardesses - are thought to be particularly at risk.
Now, for the first time, scientists have demonstrated that long exposure to artificial light could be cancerous.
The study by the American National Cancer Institute and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences could help explain the rising levels of breast cancers in rich countries, where the risk of developing cancer is five times higher than in underdeveloped countries.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women in the UK, affecting one in nine women at some point in their lives.
Around 41,000 women are diagnosed each year and each month in the UK more than 1,000 die from the disease.
The study by American scientists showed that exposure at night to artificial light stimulated the growth of human breast tumours by suppressing the levels of the key hormone melatonin.

Melatonin is secreted by the pineal gland at night - and helps to regulate a person's sleeping and waking cycles.
Light, however, stops the body from producing it, making the body think that it is daytime.
The researchers proved the theory by grafting human breast cancer tumours on to rats.
Blood samples from women were then pumped through the developing tumours.
The blood had been collected under three different conditions - during the day, in the early hours of the morning and after being exposed to light at night.

Researchers found that the blood taken in darkness slowed the growth of the cancers by 80 per cent.
And the blood taken after exposure to light appeared to stimulate tumour growth.
Dr David Blask, a lead researcher on the study said it was "the first proof that light is indeed a risk factor for cancer."
He added: "Evidence is emerging that disruption of a person's body clock is associated with cancer in humans, and that interference with internal timekeeping can tip the balance in favour of tumour development."

If the link between tumour growth and light is confirmed by more studies, it could result in a change in working patterns.
Lighting manufacturers could also be forced to develop products which are more natural and similar to normal daylight.
Professor George Brianard, of the Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, aded: "Humans evolved on a planet without electric light over thousands of thousands of generations.
"The body is designed to be alert and awake during the daytime hours and to sleep at night. "Now we have a 24-7 society that isn't in harmony with our biological design."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-391267/Artificial-light-increases-breast-cancer-risk.html#ixzz0vwZZKzIT

Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of using lightbulbs of your city's streetlamps immediately.

monkeyfudge

Yeah sure, whatever you say 'General Ripper'

BASHIR

digme wrote: »

The increased cancer risks, identified in a newly available study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health, were found at fluoride exposure levels common in both the US and Britain. It was the first examination of the link between exposure to the chemical at the critical period of a child's development and the age of onset of bone cancer.


Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of fluoridation of your city's water supply immediately.

I dont get this statement, could you give us the link to this OP if ya dont mind

craggles

digme wrote: »

Fluoride in tap water can cause bone cancer in boys, a disturbing new study indicates, although there is no evidence of a link for girls.
New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma - bone cancer - bet-ween the ages of 10 and 19.



The increased cancer risks, identified in a newly available study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health, were found at fluoride exposure levels common in both the US and Britain. It was the first examination of the link between exposure to the chemical at the critical period of a child's development and the age of onset of bone cancer.


Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of fluoridation of your city's water supply immediately.

You can't post complete and utter bollox like this without a source you idiot

MrStuffins

Wealthy background can raise the risk of cancer for teenagers

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1025375/Wealthy-background-raise-risk-cancer-teenagers.html#ixzz0vwdXLHYi

Originally posted by The Daily Mail

Children and teenagers from wealthier families may be more likely to develop cancer, say specialists.
Research suggests that, in contrast to cancers in adults, the number of new cases and deaths in youngsters is more likely to be lower in relatively deprived areas.
Experts said that certain cancers that occur in the young such as skin and brain tumours were most closely associated with affluence - although the reasons for this are not yet clear.


Cancer risk: Teenagers from wealthy backgrounds are more likely to suffer from the illness
Professor Jillian Birch of Cancer Research Uk told a conference in London yesterday: 'Overall, cancer incidence and mortality increase with increasing deprivation. However, different cancers and age groups show different patterns.


'Geographical variations in incidence, trends over time and associations with deprivation and affluence can point to lifestyle or other environmental factors as possible causes.'
Professor Birch added: 'Until recently, very little was known about the detailed patterns of cancer in teenagers and young adults, but my group has carried out a series of studies to rectify this. The most recent studies have looked at geographical variations, time trends and associations with deprivation.


'Results show that in contrast to cancers in older people, incidence and mortality decreases with increasing deprivation in young people.
'This is because the more common types of cancers that occur in young people are associated with affluence, including lymphomas, brain tumours, germ cell tumours and melanoma.


'These cancers also show signifstudyicant regional variations in incidence and are increasing over time.'

Professor Birch is director of the Cancer Research UK Paediatric and Familial Cancer research group, at Manchester University.

She was speaking at the Teenage Cancer Trust's Fifth International Conference on Teenage and Young Adult Cancer Medicine.

Her findings follow a major earlier this year showing that children who attend day care or playgroups are significantly less likely to develop leukaemia than other youngsters.


The protection is thought to arise from exposure to common infections from the first months and years of life which helps switch on the immune system - a key player in the development of childhood leukaemia.

Professor Birch also told the conference that studies by her group had found some cancer rates were rising in younger people.

These include cervical cancer and melanoma skin cancer, which are two potentially preventable forms of the disease.

Regular smears can prevent cervical abnormalities progressing to full-blown cancer.


She said: 'It is important that public health messages about these two mainly preventable cancers are targeted appropriately.'

Simon Davies, chief executive at Teenage Cancer Trust said: 'Cervical cancer and melanoma, two preventable cancers, are increasing in teenagers faster than in other groups. More education is desperately needed so young people can change their behaviour before it's too late.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1025375/Wealthy-background-raise-risk-cancer-teenagers.html#ixzz0vwdDAnbO

Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of using money as currency in your city's stores and businesses immediately.

Wolflikeme

Wonder how long before the Beating cancer causes more cancer articles.

neil_

I can't be bothered to format this post in a suitably mocking fashion, but beds cause cancer

Scream at local city councils blah blah

monkeyfudge

I've heard the sun is one of the top causes of cancer and yet the DCC stands by and doesn't even try to build a large sun blocking device or perhaps firing some manner of star destroying missile into it's core. I don't know what I pay taxes for!

El_Dangeroso

MrStuffins wrote: »

'Artificial light increases breast cancer risk'



Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of using lightbulbs of your city's streetlamps immediately.

Although it's an observational study and can't prove anything, there is a plausible biological mechanism that would explain this association. All hormones interact, so an imbalance in melatonin (a hormone triggered by darkness and inhibited by blue spectrum light as seen in artificial bulbs) would affect estrogen and possibly increase the risk of breast cancer.

But yeah, trying to assertain the cause of cancer from observational studies is incredibly difficult, though it has been done (cigarettes and lung cancer for example).

But yeah, pretty much everything causes cancer. A guy called Bruce Ames began to test different substances for their mutagenicity and found that every substance he tested could cause cells to mutate in certain quantities. We all get cancer multiple times in our lifetime, problems occur when the cancer starts to get a foothold and grow out of control.

I'm against flouridation of water, not because of any proposed health risks but just because if I wanted to supplement flouride I'd like to be able to make that choice for myself rather than the government making a blanket decision for everyone.

MrStuffins

Cancer link to tap water in radon hotspots

Government commissioned research has revealed that people living in radon hot spots could be at increased risk of stomach cancer from tap water.
Radon, a naturally occurring radioactive gas, seeps out of rocks, especially granite, and mainly affects areas such as Devon, Cornwall and the Derbyshire Dales.
It has previously been linked to lung cancer when inhaled and is estimated to cause around 2,500 deaths a year.
But now, according to the new study in west Devon, the gas could also lead to an increased risk of stomach cancer when drunk over long periods.
The tests focused on 116 locations in west Devon with private water supplies and found eight per cent had radon levels above the advisory level.
Researchers found for the first time that the radioactive gas does not disappear into the air when poured from the tap or boiled.
Instead the study ordered by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions found around 20 per cent of the gas remained in the water when drunk.
The 18-month study also found seven per cent had levels of uranium higher than a World Health Organisation guideline level of two micrograms per litre.
Nick Payne, head of environmental services, at West Devon Borough Council, said the report offered vital new evidence.
'Other DETR studies have investigated radon at source but this study is the first in the United Kingdom to study radon levels at the tap,' he explained.
He said homes and businesses, which drew water from private boreholes, springs and wells were particularly affected.
Mr Payne added: 'The results indicate that a larger study needs to be commissioned, encompassing all radon-affected areas.' He called for the government to provide financial assistance to help people take remedial action to remove radon from supplies.
Dr Sarah Harrison, consultant for public health for the South and West Devon Health Authority said there was a small, but definite health risk.
'We feel people need to know about this, but not that they should be worried about it.' She said the study had concluded the radon in water was still less of a health risk than radon in air.
The Food Standards Agency has been informed of the research and said the findings could have consequences for food producers.
It is now planning to conduct a survey of radioactivity in UK bottled waters later this year.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13620/Cancer-link-tap-water-radon-hotspots.html#ixzz0vwiLU2FN

Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of using water in your city's water supply immediately.

My name is URL

If anyone mentions Jim Corr I'll stab them

*stabs self*

Einhard

Hmmm there seems to be a common theme in all these alarmist articles.

I'm trying to put my finger on it here.

*Cough*Daily*Cough*Mail*Cough

MrStuffins

My name is URL wrote: »

If anyone mentions Jim Corr I'll stab them

*stabs self*

Originally Posted by Jim Corr

US controlled techtonic weapons in the mountains of Norway cause earthquakes cancer

.

My name is URL

MrStuffins wrote: »

.

People should really look into it themselves and then decide whether or not they want to consume fluoridated water their entire lives. Even the vaguest of claims against it as a conspiracy don't tacitly discount the dangers which have been scientifically shown to arise from prolonged consumption.

There's plenty of other sources of water these days.. do you need someone to put a toxic chemical into it to ensure that your teeth don't fall out? It's 2010 ffs!

My name is URL

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

I'm against flouridation of water, not because of any proposed health risks but just because if I wanted to supplement flouride I'd like to be able to make that choice for myself rather than the government making a blanket decision for everyone.

There was an interesting case brought against the state some years ago about the fluoridation of water supplies - http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IESC/1965/1.html

From Wiki -

In Ryan v. Attorney General (1965), the Supreme Court of Ireland held that water fluoridation did not infringe the plaintiff's right to bodily integrity. However, the court found that such a right to bodily integrity did exist, despite the fact that it was not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution of Ireland, thus establishing the doctrine of unenumerated rights in Irish constitutional law.

I wonder if it could be tested further in court today..

Copied in its entirety from a post I made earlier on another forum

mike65

http://www.naturalnews.com/001264.html

Sunscreen use actually causes cancer, it doesn't prevent it, says exhaustive scientific researchMonday, July 05, 2004

I've been saying this for years. Now the research is finally coming out to prove it: sunscreen use actually causes cancer, according to comprehensive new research published in the U.K.

There are two primary reasons why sunscreen causes cancer. First, and most importantly, the use of sunscreen blocks the skin from absorbing the sun's rays. That's what it's supposed to do, right? Yes, but in doing so, it also blocks the creation of all-essential vitamin D, the nutrient that the human body desperately needs to prevent as many as 25 chronic diseases. Notably: prostate cancer, breast cancer, osteoporosis, schizophrenia and heart disease.

It turns out that most people living in the Northern hemisphere (which probably includes you) are chronically deficient in vitamin D. By wearing sunscreen, they're depriving their bodies of perhaps the single most important nutrient they need to stay healthy.

The second reason sunscreen causes cancer is because it contains toxic chemicals in the form of artificial fragrance, chemical colors and petroleum products used as fillers and stabilizers. These chemicals are absorbed through the skin where they enter the bloodstream and wreak havoc on the immune system. Artificial fragrances, just by themselves, may contain dozens of carconigenic chemicals that damage the liver, the heart, and even promote systemic cancer.

I always said you stay indoors, rages against suncream propaganists!

WildBoots

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3iuzFGGI30

mike65

We all know Dihydrogen Monoxide is the real threat to water

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAI1JAYj53k

spider guardian

bad teeth probably causes cancer too. let them put fluoride in the water, government does damn all, may as well help in the fight against tooth decay. if it pisses off jim corr it has to be a good thing

zimovain

Alex Jones is all over this at the moment!

MagicMarker

So what you're all saying is, water causes cancer?

My name is URL

spider guardian wrote: »

bad teeth probably causes cancer too. let them put fluoride in the water, government does damn all, may as well help in the fight against tooth decay. if it pisses off jim corr it has to be a good thing

A sad frame of thought.. and all too common really

Do you not brush your own teeth? Do you use fluoride toothpaste? Why do you think it's necessary to consume fluoridated water for your entire life?

My name is URL

oh.. and good luck to all you folk who think that others have a right to feed you poison.. Your willingness to squeal like seals for man-made chemicals can only have a positive effect on the trials currently being undertaken to determine whether or not Lithium should be added to our water reserves..

We wouldn't want you all going off and KILLING YOURSELVES now would we!?!

kelle

bluewolf wrote: »

Everything causes cancer these days ;s

Sure, so does this:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055980678

Parents, I believe we should get these reports, dissolve them in water, garnish then feed them to ourselves intravenously

*Going slightly insane here

bleg

Pfft, why Fluoride. Chlorine is a lethal poison. And they put it on *our* water!!!!

Zillah

digme wrote: »

Fluoride in tap water can cause bone cancer in boys, a disturbing new study indicates, although there is no evidence of a link for girls.
New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma - bone cancer - bet-ween the ages of 10 and 19.



The increased cancer risks, identified in a newly available study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health, were found at fluoride exposure levels common in both the US and Britain. It was the first examination of the link between exposure to the chemical at the critical period of a child's development and the age of onset of bone cancer.


Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of fluoridation of your city's water supply immediately.

I would like to put you, people who refuse vaccines, homeopaths and psychics in a sack and beat the sack with a stick. And I wouldn't worry if one of you got more of the stick than the others.

MrStuffins

My name is URL wrote: »

oh.. and good luck to all you folk who think that others have a right to feed you poison.. Your willingness to squeal like seals for man-made chemicals can only have a positive effect on the trials currently being undertaken to determine whether or not Lithium should be added to our water reserves..

We wouldn't want you all going off and KILLING YOURSELVES now would we!?!

Oh ffs!

Take it to the Conspiracy Theory forum will ya?

My name is URL

MrStuffins wrote: »

Oh ffs!

Take it to the Conspiracy Theory forum will ya?

hurrhurrr.. go and do your own research rather than throwing around stupid generic one-liners in a vain attempt to refute what I have provided sources for

MrStuffins

My name is URL wrote: »

hurrhurrr.. go and do your own research rather than throwing around stupid generic one-liners in a vain attempt to refute what I have provided sources for

Did i refute anything you said?

Have i thrown out any "one-liners" here?

I have in fact posted here and posted sources also. :pac:

I don't know anyone who had died of cancer from drinking tap-water i'm afraid!

El Weirdo

Erm... Won't somebody think of the children?

Mike 1972

The definitive guide to Cancer and its causes cure and prevention :pac:

bytey

In other news ,
cancer causes cancer

Capt'n Midnight

digme wrote: »

Fluoride in tap water can cause bone cancer in boys, a disturbing new study indicates, although there is no evidence of a link for girls.
New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma - bone cancer - bet-ween the ages of 10 and 19.



The increased cancer risks, identified in a newly available study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health, were found at fluoride exposure levels common in both the US and Britain. It was the first examination of the link between exposure to the chemical at the critical period of a child's development and the age of onset of bone cancer.


Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of fluoridation of your city's water supply immediately.

First this story has been going around since 2005 :rolleyes:

Second if the survey is available then link to it.


Blindly parroting stuff you have seen on other web sites at best indicates you are very susceptible to confirmation bias.

http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/safety/osteosarcoma.htm

This paper is based on the analysis of an initial set of cases from a 15-year effort to study fluoride and osteosarcoma by the Harvard School of Dental Medicine and collaborating organizations. The principal investigator for the overall study cautions against over interpreting or generalizing the results of the Bassin analysis, stressing that preliminary analysis of a second set of cases does not appear to replicate the findings (Douglass et al., 2006)

For anyone who isn't a sock puppet please find attached the original paper

K-9

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Blindly parroting stuff you have seen on other web sites at best indicates you are very susceptible to confirmation bias.

I suspect this is what is going on here!

People should make there own mind up and try to approach it from a rational, critical point of view.

Bonito

In boys eh?

*empties tooth paste tube in to glass of water.*

That'll put hairs on yer chest! :cool:

longshanks

makey uppy stuff linked to makey uppy cancer. shizzit jus got real yo

Capt'n Midnight

http://www.vhi.ie/personalise/controller/PrItemDisplay?PRYear=2005&prId=28

Cardiovascular disease kills more Irish men and women of all ages than any other disease. In fact research from the World Health Organisation has found that Ireland has the highest death rate from heart disease in people under 65 in the EU. Coronary heart disease has traditionally been considered a man’s disease but as many as one in five deaths in Irish women are attributable to heart disease.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2010/05May/Pages/clean-teeth-cuts-heart-disease.aspx

When all other possible influences had been taken into account, people who reported poor oral hygiene (who never or rarely brushed their teeth) had a 70% greater risk of cardiovascular disease, compared with those who brushed their teeth twice a day.

OK it's not as simple as saying that not brushing your teeth every day means you have three times the risk of heart disease as someone who brushes morning and evening since people who brush their teeth may also have other healthy habits.

Fluoride might affect one in a million, maybe, it's hard to see the effects amongst the other real dangers.

Heart disease on the other hand kills one in four of us.



Oh yeah ....
Oxygen causes cancer.
There will be more dioxins in the air during the next bank holiday weekend than a whole year from any of the proposed incinerators.

The Daily Mail list of 'Things that give you cancer'.

jordan..

digme wrote: »

Fluoride in tap water can cause bone cancer in boys, a disturbing new study indicates, although there is no evidence of a link for girls.
New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma - bone cancer - bet-ween the ages of 10 and 19.



The increased cancer risks, identified in a newly available study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health, were found at fluoride exposure levels common in both the US and Britain. It was the first examination of the link between exposure to the chemical at the critical period of a child's development and the age of onset of bone cancer.


Parents, this is reason enough to start screaming at the local city councils to stop the practice of fluoridation of your city's water supply immediately.

your wasting your time mate! peoples ignorance is pretty shocking!

Capt'n Midnight

K-9 wrote: »

I suspect this is what is going on here!

People should make there own mind up and try to approach it from a rational, critical point of view.

Professions and trades exist because we need experts who know about stuff we don't ourselves.

Most people would call a plumber if their pipes burst or if they wanted to put in a shower. If you have a serious infection you head for a doctor.


My blood boils when people who don't know about epidemiology spread Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. We've had people DIE in this country of preventable diseases because of the FUD caused by the vaccine scare.


IF it is shown that fluoridation of water prevents heart disease will there be apologies for the unnecessary deaths caused by delaying tactics ?

chasm

I have always had my reservations about water fluoridation, but in regard to dental matters. When i was growing up i recall on many occasions my older relatives discussing the water supply in the village where i grew up. For years the water supply had too much fluoride. Residents over a certain age had fluorosis, quite severe in some cases. As a child it kinda freaked me out, especially when they spoke about, believe it or not, people having green teeth!!

I'm not surprised though, as according to this article the fluoride content in the water was 5.8, which seems very high judging by other articles i have read. This article also states that Typical fluoride mottling occurred in 95% or more of the Mersea and Burnham children, half of it in the moderately severe grade.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1919288/pdf/procrsmed00389-0157.pdf

I also found this article from a 2000 edition of the independant a rather interesting read,
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fluoride-in-our-water-are-we-brushing-with-danger-381516.html

although this bit rather p*ssed me off tbh (bloody politicians!!)
"Despite all the evidence which now exists about the dangers of fluoride to health, in 35 years of fluoridation, no Irish government has ever carried out a public health survey on its effects, even though it is required to under the 1960 Health (Fluoridation of Water Supplies) Act. When asked in a recent interview as to why no such surveys had been carried out, the Minister for Health, Michael Martin said that the population of Ireland was ``too small''.

OutlawPete

Zillah wrote: »

I would like to put you ... in a sack and beat the sack with a stick.

You want to beat the OP (amongst others) with a stick?

For wanting fluoride removed from our tap water ..

Care too enlighten us as to why?

Antamojo

Hmmm, so brushing your teeth gives you cancer? Great...

El_Dangeroso

Can any of the pro-fluoridation people come up with any evidence that there is a justification for mass dietary supplementation through our water supply, given that most people now use flouride toothpaste?

As I said I'm not convinced of a cancer link, but the fact that the government decides that this is something EVERYONE is deficient in to the point of putting it in the water supply is deeply concerning to me.

So, anyone got some evidence that we need our water to be flouridated in this day and age?

Some comparisons of tooth decay in flouridated vs. non-flouridated countries:

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/caries/who-dmft.gif

So why is our government spending money on something that is entirely unnecessary in modern Ireland?

OutlawPete

Temple_Grandin wrote: »

Can any of the pro-fluoridation people come up with any evidence that there is a justification for mass dietary supplementation through our water supply, given that most people now use flouride toothpaste?

Doubt it.

The main reason certain countries stopped the practice of adding fluoride to the public drinking water was due to the irrefutable links to thyroid disorders and osteoporosis.

Ireland is mentioned at the start of this set of videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpPv290z2-Y

bleg

http://cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/CRD_Reports/crdreport18.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19772843

El_Dangeroso

OutlawPete wrote: »

Doubt it.

The main reason certain countries stopped the practice of adding fluoride to the public drinking water was due to the irrefutable links to thyroid disorders and osteoporosis.

Can I get some links on the thyroid disorder? I hadn't seen evidence of that though it is biologically plausible given that flouride competes with absorption with iodine, a substance essential to the thyroid.

bleg wrote: »

http://cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/CRD_Reports/crdreport18.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19772843

Thanks for the links, it does seem that fluoridation does somewhat reduce the incidence of carries, and I knew that, but the problem is the extent. Why is dental decay reducing just as much as non-fluoridated countries as in fluoridated (in some instances more of a severe decline)? Clearly there are far more potent factors involved in incidence of tooth decay.

From the google docs link:

'It is estimtaed that a median of six people need to receive
fluoridated water for one extra person to be caries-free'

So 5 people don't need it at all and are still getting it. Less than 17% of the population are actually getting any benefit at all. I find this a very unconvincing case for mass supplementation, why not add more fluoride to toothpaste and let people decide for themselves. It's not the government's job to be paternalistic and decide en-mass what dietary supplementation the population needs.

Be honest, If I came out with a study that showed there was a strong case for putting a new dietary supplement in the water, would you be for it, or would you think it's up to individuals to decide what to put in their bodies or not?

bleg

If it was as harmless and saved the state millions like fluoride then I would be completely pro it.



Also, you might want to brush up on your statistical analysis.