This post has been removed from the Science channel by channel owner rembar. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

"Talk to your dentist and your health care provider about fluoridation." This is actually good advice.

As for the ADA:
http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/topics/fluoride.asp
"For over five decades, the American Dental Association has continuously endorsed the fluoridation of community water supplies and the use of fluoride-containing products as safe and effective measures for preventing tooth decay."

This is a better video than the other crap, but it still doesn't belong in Science. At least it's not only second-handedly spreading scientific misinformation, but it's still mild propaganda and misrepresents the CDC's stance, among other things.

http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/
"Community water fluoridation is safe and effective in preventing tooth decay, and has been identified by CDC as one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century."

*requeue

Re-queueing this video for one more try; last queued Wednesday, January 30th, 2008 6:30am PST - requeue requested by submitter qruel.

rembar finds it convienent to leave out some pretty important information from both the ADA and CDC. the CDC acknowledges fluoride's effectiveness is TOPICAL and not systemic, this view is also held by a lot of others researchers and has been confirmed in other studies. In addition the ADA recommends NO fluoridated water for babies. Those seem like pretty important facts that one should consider.

"[F]luoride's predominant effect is POSTERUPTIVE and TOPICAL."

SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2001). Recommendations for Using Fluoride to Prevent and Control Dental Caries in the United States. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 50(RR14): 1-42.

for references to other studies which state the same thing please visit this link.

http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/caries/topical-systemic.html#refs

While MycroftHomlz is certainly entitled to downvote any video based on content, It's ashame he doesn't enlighten us with his views on what he feels is inaccurate about this video to warrant a downvote. Too bad he doesn't live up to the high standards of his bio.

alright, well. now that we've gotten the whole sugarless gum thing out of the way? i wanna' know what 4 out of 5 dentists have to say about this, y'know?

if most of 'em agree it's a topical effect, doesn't it seem just a little dumb to put it in the water unnecessarily?

i don't know. not sold, one way or the other. not my biggest concern, either, but i'm fine with having other people take it seriously and find out.

and yeah, half the time? i think it's something people are either attracted to, or repulsed by, merely because of the semi-conspiracy landscape that it has taken on, and not the exceedingly simple health issue, that it should be.

I'm sure "most" dentist have no clue about the actual research that goes on regarding the harmful effects of fluoride ingestion. They look to the ADA and other government agencies to draw their opinions from.

these links might help to further illuminate my views of the nuances and "grey areas" on the issue of Fluoridation and it's not "all" about the science as there's lots of politics, conflicts of interests and industry collusion. There are indeed two sides to this issue.

Voices of Opposition have been Suppressed since early days of Fluoridation

Suppression of Scientific Dissent on Fluoride's Risks and Benefits

The Politics of Fluoridation

fluoride RAWR! LOLZ. CORPORATE MIND CONTROL PWNS AMERICAN PUBLIC.

^quite funny. no one is talking corporate mind control.

In a statement first released August 9, 2007, over 1,500 professionals urge Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks. (http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html)

Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.

Signer Dr. Arvid Carlsson, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, says, “Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It's really obsolete.”

An Online Action Petition to Congress in support of the Professionals' Statement is available on FAN's web site, www.fluorideaction.org/congress .

“The NRC report dramatically changed scientific understanding of fluoride's health risks," says Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network. "Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath as to why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” he added.

The Professionals’ Statement also references:

-- The new American Dental Association policy recommending infant formula NOT be prepared with fluoridated water.
-- The CDC’s concession that the predominant benefit of fluoride is topical not systemic.
-- CDC data showing that dental fluorosis, caused by fluoride over-exposure, now impacts one third of American children.
-- Major research indicating little difference in decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.
-- A Harvard study indicating a possible link between fluoridation and bone cancer.
-- The silicofluoride chemicals used for fluoridation are contaminated industrial waste and have never been FDA- approved for human ingestion.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a DC watchdog, revealed that a Harvard professor concealed the fluoridation/bone cancer connection for three years. EWG President Ken Cook states, “It is time for the US to recognize that fluoridation has serious risks that far outweigh any minor benefits, and unlike many other environmental issues, it's as easy to end as turning off a valve at the water plant.”

Further, researchers reporting in the Oct 6 2007 British Medical Journal indicate that fluoridation, touted as a safe cavity preventive, never was proven safe or effective and may be unethical. (1)

In New York State, Cobeskill stopped 54 years of fluoridation in 2007, the Central Bridge Water District stopped fluoridation in 2006, Homer in 2005, Canton in 2003. Oneida rejected fluoridation in 2002. Ithaca rejected fluoridation in 2002. Johnstown rejected it in 1999. Before that several towns in Nassau County stopped fluoridation. Suffolk County rejected fluoridation in the 1990's.

On October 2, 2007 Juneau Alaska voters rejected fluoridation despite the American Dental Association's $150,000 political campaign to return fluoride into the water supply after the legislative body voted it out.

Many communities rejected or stopped fluoridation over the years. See: http://www.fluoridealert.org/communities.htm


SOURCE: Fluoride Action Network http://www.FluorideAction.Net


References:

(1) “Adding fluoride to water supplies,” British Medical Journal, KK Cheng, Iain Chalmers, Trevor A. Sheldon, October 6, 2007

Most non-english-speaking developed countries have already stopped or banned water fluoridation. This includes Japan, Germany, Sweden, Netherlands, the former Czechoslovakia, the former USSR, and France. The only benefit of fluoride is a TOPICAL effect on the TOOTH ENAMEL. There are other effective and safer ways of preventing tooth decay. The harms of fluoride are systemic. Humans have no nutritional need for fluoride. There have been proper placebo-controlled trials on rats with fluoridated drinking water demonstrating many kinds of harms including behavioral abnormalities and visible changes to CNS structure. There have been many correlational studies showing that areas with 2-3ppm fluoride in drinking water have lower average IQs than similar areas with 0.3ppm fluoride. Typical amounts used in government mandated drinking water fluoridation are 0.7-1.3ppm. Fluoride is known to cause selective reduction in the number of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. sourcesmore sourcesNRC report