Replying to Avatar SLCW

Maybe. High sugar and carbohydrates definitely contribute to tooth decay. But flouride isn't a substitute for brushing and it never has been. It's a longterm treatment that empirically reduces tooth decay in the receiving population. And as far as I know, it's safe, and has not produced unwanted side effects of a statistically significant nature.

If there was a clear and present danger posed by water treatment, I'd understand the desire to get rid of it. But objectively weighing the pros and cons does not, to my knowledge, justify ending the longterm water treatment programs. The real benefits seem to outweigh the hypothetical risks.
Avatar
Matt 1y ago

There is no set standard for fluoride dosing in water, so it isn't possible for you to even know whether it causes harm or not. This is one of the reasons many of the studies have been inconclusive. We should first explore alternatives before just dumping shit into water.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
SLCW 1y ago

Ok, assuming you are correct in what you claim, excuses for why we don't have evidence supporting your position is not evidence for your position. That's just faulty reasoning, and making epistemological leaps for the sake of arriving at a conclusion you prefer.