The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > To fluoridate or not to fluoridate > Comments

To fluoridate or not to fluoridate : Comments

By Anne Matthews-Frederick, published 23/10/2008

With the benefit of hindsight some places are moving to defluoridate their water while South East Queensland pushes ahead.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Readers may wish to learn about the unintended consequences of water fluoridation. My 2005 research paper, "Water Fluoridation and Crime in America" was published in the international peer-reviewed scientific journal Fluoride, and it suggests that America is paying an extremely high (and unknown) price for its policy of water fluoridation.

Using a database for the year 2000 of about 80 million Americans living in 327 cities having populations of over 75,000 each, and comparing statistics for major crimes between fluoridated and unfluoridated places, it was found that sodium silicofluoride was associated with crime levels which were elevated by 37.6%; that hydrofluorosilicic acid was associated with crime levels which were elevated by 46.8%; and that sodium fluoride was associated with an astounding 84.9% increase in major crime levels!

The paper is available online at: www.fluorideresearch.org/381/files/38111-22.pdf

Thank you! Comments may be addressed to jayseavey1618@earthlink.net
Posted by Jay Seavey, Friday, 24 October 2008 4:13:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jay - did you control for the average wealth of the residents and the age of the city? It seems pretty obvious to me that older cities might be a) poorer and b) fluoridated, whereas newer cities which attract more mobile elites are likely to start out unfluoridated and -- thanks to liberal political agitation -- stay that way.
Posted by Jon J, Friday, 24 October 2008 6:43:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Jon J:

My study did not control for average wealth or city age. It examined 327 U.S. cities of all ages, from coast to coast, which included more than a quarter of the US population. The sheer size of the database tended to minimize the need for controls which would be useful if a smaller or less representative sample had been selected.

It is not at all obvious to me that older cities are more likely to be poor, and, hence, fluoridated; or that liberal politics leads to lower levels of fluoridation. Are Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, and San Francisco poor? You'd have to study them precinct by precinct, but at a glance, they don't appear poor. All are relatively old, liberal, centers of refined and advanced culture - and fluoridated.

In the U.S., support for fluoridation comes from both liberals and conservatives, and from both Democrats and Republicans. If anti-fluoridationists come from any particular part of the political or socio-economic spectrum, the common denominator among them has eluded my attention in the course of several years' study. New Jersey sticks out as a place you might expect to be highly fluoridated, but it isn't; but it also has a very high concentration of pharmaceutical firms. Perhaps a modest understanding of high school chemistry is a common denominator among anti-fluoridationists.

Best wishes,
Jay
Posted by Jay Seavey, Friday, 24 October 2008 7:57:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is a simple test to see if you are affected by fluoride.
1. Blood test for fluoride levels before December 2008.
2. Test again in 12 months
Posted by WWG, Friday, 24 October 2008 9:19:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The first few writers (above) who support fluoridation because they observed one or two children with no tooth decay, are extraordinary in their blind faith and lack of critical thinking.
I come from Geelong, Victoria, never fluoridated (though government is threatening it now). There are many many children here with perfect teeth, and many with bad teeth. Just like in Melbourne, fluoridated for 30 years. How do the children get good teeth in a non-fluoridated town. The same as anywhere: decent food, regular cleaning, access to proper dental care.
Another writer says that countries with no fluoridation have poor teeth. Absolutely wrong. WHO figures show national average tooth decay for 12 year olds. Netherlands regularly turns up as the best in the world. Netherlands was briefly fluoridated in late 60s to early 70s, then quit fluoridation dues to (a) a medical study that showed up too many side-effects (b) their parliament determined that it violated citizens human rights.
Nowhere in continental Europe practices fluoridation and many of those countries enjoy the best dental health of anywhere in the world.
Tasmania shows the worst figures for 12 year old tooth decay of Australian states - yet it is the most heavily fluoridated state, and started before other states. Fluoridation is failing, it is unnecessary, and it is toxic, at least for some consumers.
Health damage from total fluoride intake, from so many hidden sources, is now a silent epidemic in Australia.
Posted by Ironer, Friday, 24 October 2008 9:46:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Deja Vu. Robert McCray President of the ADAQ at the time said 'Dentists support water fluoridation for altruistic reasons.'

What are these altruistic motives?

Water fluoridation of 75% of Australia's population has failed to save the teeth of the economically disadvantaged. The queues for free dental care in states that have all these magical benefits of fluoridated water are longer than in Queensland.

There is a shortage of dentists and it has been obvious for at least a decade. Only 20% work in free clinics. Health Departments want kids with the most need to see the dentist but where will they find dentists willing to move from private practise to free clinic practise?

Two major reasons for cavities is not brushing teeth and not being able to see a dentist at the right time - see Courier Mail Oct 12, 2008. 'Dentists now warn a generation of kids will grow up facing rotting teeth, extractions and gum disease.'

Fluoridation is a costly failure because it has not solved the problem of poor parenting, too few dentist, and too few dentists wanting to leave private practice and the ever increasing cost of visiting your private dentist.
Posted by WWG, Friday, 24 October 2008 10:16:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy