Live data from Hacker News

Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

bbc.com

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#461

I think it's worth reminding people of Occam's Razor, and the point of it is: a simple explanation is often better than a complicated one. The US has had water fluoridation for 65 years, affecting 346 million people. That's a pretty big god damn sample size and long amount of time in which to observe effects. If we still have no proof of significant negative health effects, it's probably not bad for you . That said:…

> The US has had water fluoridation for 65 years, affecting 346 million people. That's a pretty big god damn sample size and long amount of time in which to observe effects. If we still have no proof of significant negative health effects, it's probably not bad for you.

The problem is there will have been a lot of confounders.

E.g. despite huge sample sizes, isolating the cause of the obesity crisis is too hard because so many different things changed at once.

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#462
post #6

What is the best evidence in favor of this?

2012: https://fluoridealert.org/content/50-reasons/

Highly recommend visiting the link for details about each point an references (it is not that long), here is a summary, don't comment if you haven't visited the link:

1) Fluoride is the only chemical added to water for the purpose of medical treatment. 2) Fluoridation is unethical. 3) The dose cannot be controlled. 4) The fluoride goes to everyone regardless of age, health or vulnerability. 5) People now receive fluoride from many other sources besides water. 6) Fluoride is not an essential nutrient. 7) The level in mothers’ milk is very low. 9) No health agency in fluoridated countries is monitoring fluoride exposure or side effects. 10) There has never been a single randomized controlled trial to demonstrate fluoridation’s effectiveness or safety. 11) Benefit is topical not systemic. 12) Fluoridation is not necessary. 13) Fluoridation’s role in the decline of tooth decay is in serious doubt. 14) NIH-funded study on individual fluoride ingestion and tooth decay found no significant correlation. 15) Tooth decay is high in low-income communities that have been fluoridated for years. 16) Tooth decay does not go up when fluoridation is stopped. 17) Tooth decay was coming down before fluoridation started. 18) The studies that launched fluoridation were methodologically flawed. 19) Children are being over-exposed to fluoride. 20) The highest doses of fluoride are going to bottle-fed babies. 21) Dental fluorosis may be an indicator of wider systemic damage. 22) Fluoride may damage the brain. 23) Fluoride may lower IQ. 24) Fluoride may cause non-IQ neurotoxic effects. 25) Fluoride affects the pineal gland. 26) Fluoride affects thyroid function. 27) Fluoride causes arthritic symptoms. 28) Fluoride damages bone. 29) Fluoride may increase hip fractures in the elderly. 30) People with impaired kidney function are particularly vulnerable to bone damage. 31) Fluoride may cause bone cancer (osteosarcoma). 32) Proponents have failed to refute the Bassin-Osteosarcoma study. 33) Fluoride may cause reproductive problems. 34) Some individuals are highly sensitive to low levels of fluoride as shown by case studies and double blind studies. 35) Other subsets of population are more vulnerable to fluoride’s toxicity. 36) There is no margin of safety for several health effects. 37) Low-income families penalized by fluoridation. 38) Black and Hispanic children are more vulnerable to fluoride’s toxicity. 39) Minorities are not being warned about their vulnerabilities to fluoride. 40) Tooth decay reflects low-income not low-fluoride intake. 41) The chemicals used to fluoridate water are not pharmaceutical grade. 42) The silicon fluorides have not been tested comprehensively. 43) The silicon fluorides may increase lead uptake into children’s blood. 44) Fluoride may leach lead from pipes, brass fittings and soldered joints. 45) Key health studies have not been done. 46) Endorsements do not represent scientific evidence. 47) Review panels hand-picked to deliver a pro-fluoridation result. 48) Many scientists oppose fluoridation. 49) Proponents usually refuse to defend fluoridation in open debate. 50) Proponents use very dubious tactics to promote fluoridation.

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not following closely, but is this pseudoscience? https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/fluoride-childrens-health-gran... https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/assessments/noncancer/...

Fluoride is known to be problematic at high concentrations (hell, everything is). The problems of fluoride really start to come into play at concentrations of around 10-20mg/L, and some of the areas being studied are running well in excess of 100mg/L of fluoride. The EPA limit for fluoride is 4mg/L. There's an argument to be made that it should be lowered to 2mg/L. When fluoride is added to drinking water, the target…

Seems to cause problems at lower levels than that:

> The NTP monograph concluded, with moderate confidence, that higher levels of fluoride exposure, such as drinking water containing more than 1.5 milligrams of fluoride per liter, are associated with lower IQ in children.

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/assessments/noncancer/...

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#464
2012: https://fluoridealert.org/content/50-reasons/

Highly recommend visiting the link for details about each point and references (it is not that long), here is a summary, don't comment if you haven't visited the link:

1) Fluoride is the only chemical added to water for the purpose of medical treatment. 2) Fluoridation is unethical. 3) The dose cannot be controlled. 4) The fluoride goes to everyone regardless of age, health or vulnerability. 5) People now receive fluoride from many other sources besides water. 6) Fluoride is not an essential nutrient. 7) The level in mothers’ milk is very low. 9) No health agency in fluoridated countries is monitoring fluoride exposure or side effects. 10) There has never been a single randomized controlled trial to demonstrate fluoridation’s effectiveness or safety. 11) Benefit is topical not systemic. 12) Fluoridation is not necessary. 13) Fluoridation’s role in the decline of tooth decay is in serious doubt. 14) NIH-funded study on individual fluoride ingestion and tooth decay found no significant correlation. 15) Tooth decay is high in low-income communities that have been fluoridated for years. 16) Tooth decay does not go up when fluoridation is stopped. 17) Tooth decay was coming down before fluoridation started. 18) The studies that launched fluoridation were methodologically flawed. 19) Children are being over-exposed to fluoride. 20) The highest doses of fluoride are going to bottle-fed babies. 21) Dental fluorosis may be an indicator of wider systemic damage. 22) Fluoride may damage the brain. 23) Fluoride may lower IQ. 24) Fluoride may cause non-IQ neurotoxic effects. 25) Fluoride affects the pineal gland. 26) Fluoride affects thyroid function. 27) Fluoride causes arthritic symptoms. 28) Fluoride damages bone. 29) Fluoride may increase hip fractures in the elderly. 30) People with impaired kidney function are particularly vulnerable to bone damage. 31) Fluoride may cause bone cancer (osteosarcoma). 32) Proponents have failed to refute the Bassin-Osteosarcoma study. 33) Fluoride may cause reproductive problems. 34) Some individuals are highly sensitive to low levels of fluoride as shown by case studies and double blind studies. 35) Other subsets of population are more vulnerable to fluoride’s toxicity. 36) There is no margin of safety for several health effects. 37) Low-income families penalized by fluoridation. 38) Black and Hispanic children are more vulnerable to fluoride’s toxicity. 39) Minorities are not being warned about their vulnerabilities to fluoride. 40) Tooth decay reflects low-income not low-fluoride intake. 41) The chemicals used to fluoridate water are not pharmaceutical grade. 42) The silicon fluorides have not been tested comprehensively. 43) The silicon fluorides may increase lead uptake into children’s blood. 44) Fluoride may leach lead from pipes, brass fittings and soldered joints. 45) Key health studies have not been done. 46) Endorsements do not represent scientific evidence. 47) Review panels hand-picked to deliver a pro-fluoridation result. 48) Many scientists oppose fluoridation. 49) Proponents usually refuse to defend fluoridation in open debate. 50) Proponents use very dubious tactics to promote fluoridation.

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#465
post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada does the opposite of America even if it hurts Canada - it’s a part of its identity. Redefining freedom as “forcing something on people for their own good” is not how anyone actually defines freedom. It’s like saying children have the most freedom because their parents force them to do things that will benefit them.

"freedom from", you will not be given a prevention from some horrible disease. You can buy it if you can afford it, but a significant portion of the population can't, and some of them will not be able to enjoy life because of it. "freedom to", a prevention will be provided. You can always decide to take alternatives, if you can afford it. A significant portion of the population can't. They will be able to enjoy life.…

How free a country is can be determined by this question.

Would you choose to be a randomly chosen citizen? You could be anyone in that country with all the rights, privileges - or lack thereof - that that random person has.

I think I'd rather be a random Canadian with healthcare and education than a random American.

It's an interesting thought experiment.

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? There's literally tons of evidence. Do you think fluoride doesn't actually reduce cavities?

You can’t win. Freedom, IQ, precious bodily fluids. There’s no end to the nonsense. My city started fluoridating a few years ago. The crazy was off the chart, they’re still active. NYC has fluoridated for 60 years, you’d think someone would have figured out that the entire city is dumber.

> you’d think someone would have figured out that

Maybe that’s why they haven’t?

But being serious if it’s relatively low and the negative effects only occur during pregnancy it’s not that easy to measure it.

Obviously there is no conclusive evidence (even if the studies from China seem somewhat credible) but IMHO even if the likelihood of this being true is e.g. only 5-10%, risk of a population wide loss of 1-2 IQ points seems like a massively too high price to pay just to slightly reduce cavity rates.

Also dismissing all credible (albeit weak) scientific evidence out of hand just because crazy people hold similar beliefs is a about as stupid as what they are doing..

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#467
post #6

What is the best evidence in favor of this?

There isn’t any. The very little research showing any effects on cognitive abilities are experiments using very high fluoride levels - nowhere near the levels in water. Like most conservative “stances”, it’s a farce.

This stance is a bit confusing...

When it comes to things like radioactivity we assume a linear no threshhold model (e.g. that lower concentrations still have effects, just our measuring tools aren't good enough to detect it) and spend billions as a result. Why wouldn't we do the same for flouride?

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#468
post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're misattributing: the U.S. has a perfect white teeth culture that doesn't exist elsewhere. Many people outside of the U.S. have healthier but uglier teeth. Fluoride isn't the reason for good/bad teeth inside/outside of the U.S, it's cultural. Many places outside of the U.S. do put fluoride in their water (nationally or regionally) and have "bad" teeth (e.g: England).

People in the U.S. don't have perfect white teeth, they have are cosmetic procedures on their teeth equivalent to liposuction, silicone, botox, hair plugs and/or laminated face.

I think that's exactly what the GP meant when they said "perfect white teeth culture".

Perfect white teeth doesn't mean they're healthy.

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#469

I initially dismissed it as the same category of stupid as anti-vax beliefs, but it turns out that there are a decent amount of good studies showing a link between fluoride in water and (slightly) lower IQ when pregnant mothers ingest the fluoride. Note that there is no significant effect after birth. The idea is to remove fluoride from water and advise pregnant women to use fluoride-free toothpaste. Everyone else ca…

Agree, my biggest issue is often where they source the fluoride and whether they test it. We found out in my (liberal) hometown that they were actually sourcing some derivative which has no human studies. Given that everyone gets enough in toothpaste I just don’t see the reason to keep doing it, too much can go wrong. It’s kind of a strange mass medication that I’m not sure the government needs to be involved in.

What was the derivative?

Re: Utah becomes first US state to ban fluoride in its water

#470

People who want to remove fluoride from the water should visit countries where fluoride is not added and look at people's teeth. I live in France and it's just so obvious that people grew up without fluoride — even celebrities try to talk without showing their teeth when they're on TV! I'm all for getting consent in most cases, but sometimes you'd have to be an idiot not to take the obvious win. It's like we were del…

> I live in France and it's just so obvious that people grew up without fluoride

And yet France does not have a dental health crisis so it's just for cosmetic reasons we don't need fluoride

Post reply on HN