If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Lancet)   Those crazy people who are afraid of fluoride might have been right all along   (thelancet.com) divider line 130
    More: Scary, fluorides, developmental toxicity, systematic review, cognitive impairment, chemical industries  
•       •       •

13279 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Mar 2014 at 1:40 PM (41 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-07 04:57:21 PM  

Reverend J: Woooooo...a review article, with one mention of fluoride, in a table, and no reference....


The fluoride reference actually doesn't propose a causative relationship, it's another meta-study that just notes that people in high-fluoride (10+ mg/L) areas correlate to something like a 0.1 to 0.4 SD drop in the 95% confidence interval (which is a pretty broad interval by meta-study standards... not their fault, as they mention the levels of Fl they're talking about are extremely uncommon, but that's still shaky).

We're talking about people exposed to an order of magnitude higher dosage than is legal to drink in even the most forgiving of US states, an fairly small observed decrease of an infamously unreliable/shaky metric, no real control of educational variances, and the base data being Chinese studies (which are often discarded out-of-hand by scientific journals, some of the included ones in the meta study raise a lot of red flags, though, again, you kinda have to work with what you can get when you're talking about finding populations with 10mg/L of Fl, rather uncommon).

So, yeah.  When TFA mentions high Fl- exposure, it's talking about something entirely different from water system fluoridation and it's also talking about a speculative review that hasn't been experimentally verified... by which i mean experimental verification has found it  doesn't actually happen.  The study itself just says it's raising a potential flag for another study to maybe have something to look at... those studies were done, and it was found that there wasn't an issue.  Welcome to science, everybody.  The fact that a study says something, and the study is valid, doesn't mean the something is actually necessarily the case.
 
2014-03-07 05:10:41 PM  
Yeah. And monkeys might also fly out of my butt.
 
2014-03-07 05:13:40 PM  

ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha: Another study about fluoride in China?

A meta-analysis of 27 cross-sectional studies of children exposed to fluoride in drinking water, mainly from China, suggests an average IQ decrement of about seven points in children exposed to raised fluoride concentrations.44

What do I win?


Have you ever read about it? In China, fluoride occurs naturally in high does in the water. These fluoride people are so nutty that try think the Chinese government poisons the water intentionally with those high doses.
 
2014-03-07 05:19:31 PM  

McDougal: simkatu: TFA says nothing about fluoridated water.

From TFA: "A meta-analysis of 27 cross-sectional studies of children exposed to fluoride in drinking water, mainly from China, suggests an average IQ decrement of about seven points in children exposed to raised fluoride concentrations. "


That is not fluoridated water.  That is water that is naturally containing large amounts of fluoride that isn't properly treated to remove the excess contaminant.   Fluoridated water in the U.S. is done in amounts many orders of magnitude smaller, amounts that have been demonstrated to be safe. We have known for a long time that very high doses of fluoride are bad. We have also known for a very long time that the amounts of fluoride that are used in US drinking supplies are very safe and actually improves the health of the population.
 
2014-03-07 05:21:43 PM  
yea those crazy people such as just about all of the EU that has banned it's use in drinking water.
 
2014-03-07 05:23:20 PM  
I'm a dentist. This topic has been studied to death over decades and decades. And the research still comes to the same conclusion. In appropriate doses, fluoride stops dental caries and is safe. Don't believe me or the hundreds upon hundreds of studies done by scientists the world over? Maybe you'd believe the people who have naturally occurring fluoride in their water supply? (that's how dentistry first made the link between fluoride and caries) Nah, you'd go on believing whatever half-cocked cockamamie conspiracy suits your fancy. And that's your right. But don't you go messin' with my farkin' water supply.
 
2014-03-07 05:33:26 PM  
This seems more like a lit review than an actual research article (they are just looking at existing research), and something strikes me as pretty lazy about an 8 page lit review, even if it does have 100+ references.  The fact that concentrations/dosage aren't listed anywhere strikes me as pretty lousy writing as well.

Also, according to TFA lead was determined to be a neurotoxin in 2006??? What?  People have known that for decades.
 
2014-03-07 05:42:10 PM  

fredmcmurray: In appropriate doses, fluoride stops dental caries and is safe.


What's an appropriate amount of water to drink? You may only drink a couple glasses, but guys fighting wildfires drink several gallons a day. Medicating water with anything toxic is as dumb an idea as they come.
 
2014-03-07 05:56:05 PM  

Jim_Callahan: Reverend J: Woooooo...a review article, with one mention of fluoride, in a table, and no reference....

The fluoride reference actually doesn't propose a causative relationship, it's another meta-study that just notes that people in high-fluoride (10+ mg/L) areas correlate to something like a 0.1 to 0.4 SD drop in the 95% confidence interval (which is a pretty broad interval by meta-study standards... not their fault, as they mention the levels of Fl they're talking about are extremely uncommon, but that's still shaky).

We're talking about people exposed to an order of magnitude higher dosage than is legal to drink in even the most forgiving of US states, an fairly small observed decrease of an infamously unreliable/shaky metric, no real control of educational variances, and the base data being Chinese studies (which are often discarded out-of-hand by scientific journals, some of the included ones in the meta study raise a lot of red flags, though, again, you kinda have to work with what you can get when you're talking about finding populations with 10mg/L of Fl, rather uncommon).

So, yeah.  When TFA mentions high Fl- exposure, it's talking about something entirely different from water system fluoridation and it's also talking about a speculative review that hasn't been experimentally verified... by which i mean experimental verification has found it  doesn't actually happen.  The study itself just says it's raising a potential flag for another study to maybe have something to look at... those studies were done, and it was found that there wasn't an issue.  Welcome to science, everybody.  The fact that a study says something, and the study is valid, doesn't mean the something is actually necessarily the case.


Thank you.

Normally, I'd sit this one out and enjoy my popcorn, but, yeah, that's exactly the point of the study. The misinterpretation or misapplication of a study's results to reinforce bias is a real issue - it's always nice to see a rational explanation & clarification.

Now, to sit back and watch the "THEY'RE ADULTERATING THE WATER!" chuckleheads come out in force and froth...
 
2014-03-07 06:00:29 PM  

Triumph: fredmcmurray: In appropriate doses, fluoride stops dental caries and is safe.

What's an appropriate amount of water to drink? You may only drink a couple glasses, but guys fighting wildfires drink several gallons a day. Medicating water with anything toxic is as dumb an idea as they come.


Thankfully for the saner of us, these things are handled quite well, and such variations are more than accounted for, and idiots like you aren't in charge.  Noticeable negative effects start appearing in the percentage range.  Tooth treatment happens in the parts-per-million range.
 
2014-03-07 06:02:26 PM  

meat0918: Russ1642: meat0918: Interesting.

At what concentrations and exposures?

If it is shown that current levels of exposure cause problems, we can address that.

Well someone would have to read past the abstract then. Ain't nobody got time fo dat.

They actually would have to read the study this study cited, which I admittedly didn't because I assumed that while I have access to this one, I do not have access to the other.

Thankfully, others in this thread have access, and we know the answer is in the neighborhood of 11.5mg/L, where US municipal water supplies are on the order of 0.7mg/L to 1.2mg/L(about 10 times lower than the amount in the studied areas of China), with the upper limit established by the EPA at 4.0 mg/L


Thanks.
 
2014-03-07 06:13:35 PM  

walktoanarcade: FTFA: "Since 2006, epidemiological studies have documented six additional developmental neurotoxicants-manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers."


I doubt brushing your teeth with it causes harm, but drinking it in your water all the time is stupid.


And I am convinced that it lowers IQ. It must. There has to be something literally in the water.

/judge away


Well I already have you tagged as a moron from some previous posting...

Repeating bad science on fluoride does not make it true.
 
2014-03-07 06:17:11 PM  

Necronic: This seems more like a lit review than an actual research article (they are just looking at existing research), and something strikes me as pretty lazy about an 8 page lit review, even if it does have 100+ references.  The fact that concentrations/dosage aren't listed anywhere strikes me as pretty lousy writing as well.

Also, according to TFA lead was determined to be a neurotoxin in 2006??? What?  People have known that for decades.


At least in regard to fluoride, the lead author of this "review" only cites one source - his own widely criticized previous article. He of course takes it at face value.
 
2014-03-07 06:21:00 PM  

hardinparamedic: meat0918: hardinparamedic: Something tells me that Subby was googling for trollbait and found this, and since 95% of FARkers don't have access to a medical journal clearing house, or aren't willing to pay 15 bucks to read the full article, they can make it support what they like.

The Lancet allows you to view this one for free!!!!!

[img.fark.net image 850x736]

Negative, Sir.

I'll try logging into my hospital's intranet and see if I can access it through our ScienceDirect account. But it wont let you view full text.


I'm on the network of a major US university, and I get the same message when I click Full Text. However, clicking PDF brings up the full PDF.
 
2014-03-07 06:25:29 PM  

ikanreed: Thankfully for the saner of us, these things are handled quite well, and such variations are more than accounted for, and idiots like you aren't in charge


What else is on your list for medicating the water supply Dr. Sane? Aspirin maybe? A little prozac?
 
2014-03-07 06:31:09 PM  

Triumph: ikanreed: Thankfully for the saner of us, these things are handled quite well, and such variations are more than accounted for, and idiots like you aren't in charge

What else is on your list for medicating the water supply Dr. Sane? Aspirin maybe? A little prozac?


That is actually the only valid criticism I find regarding fluoride in the water.

Is it really within the governments purview to medicate the population?

For vaccines, I say yes, with medical exceptions the only out.

Fluoridation... I'm less sure of.
 
2014-03-07 06:31:18 PM  

Enigmamf: hardinparamedic: meat0918: hardinparamedic: Something tells me that Subby was googling for trollbait and found this, and since 95% of FARkers don't have access to a medical journal clearing house, or aren't willing to pay 15 bucks to read the full article, they can make it support what they like.

The Lancet allows you to view this one for free!!!!!

[img.fark.net image 850x736]

Negative, Sir.

I'll try logging into my hospital's intranet and see if I can access it through our ScienceDirect account. But it wont let you view full text.

I'm on the network of a major US university, and I get the same message when I click Full Text. However, clicking PDF brings up the full PDF.


The PDF is apparently available for anyone to download, but you can probably get the full text as a webpage by logging in. Might be a simple mistake with permissions or browser cookies, unless it was intentional.
 
2014-03-07 06:32:03 PM  

Triumph: ikanreed: Thankfully for the saner of us, these things are handled quite well, and such variations are more than accounted for, and idiots like you aren't in charge

What else is on your list for medicating the water supply Dr. Sane? Aspirin maybe? A little prozac?


Yes, because those would be dealing with a matter of public health, right?  You think that because things are done for reasons, we also want to do things for no reason?
 
2014-03-07 06:38:29 PM  

fredmcmurray: I'm a dentist. This topic has been studied to death over decades and decades. And the research still comes to the same conclusion. In appropriate doses, fluoride stops dental caries and is safe. Don't believe me or the hundreds upon hundreds of studies done by scientists the world over? Maybe you'd believe the people who have naturally occurring fluoride in their water supply? (that's how dentistry first made the link between fluoride and caries) Nah, you'd go on believing whatever half-cocked cockamamie conspiracy suits your fancy. And that's your right. But don't you go messin' with my farkin' water supply.


Question: How come dentists can't just call cavities "cavities"? Why do you have to go and call them things like "caries"?
 
2014-03-07 06:40:28 PM  

Katolu: skantea: At this point in history, if you don't realize that big business does not care about you as an individual then you deserve to be one of the 40% projected to get cancer.  It's not a conspiracy, it's just money focused (greedy?) people passing the blame from the top down.  In the end LEGALLY it will always be your fault you're sick.

So 3.2 BILLION people on the planet are going to get cancer?


Scientists don't count non-westerners.  But I'm sure you don't care either way.
 
2014-03-07 07:03:43 PM  

12monkeys: fredmcmurray: I'm a dentist. This topic has been studied to death over decades and decades. And the research still comes to the same conclusion. In appropriate doses, fluoride stops dental caries and is safe. Don't believe me or the hundreds upon hundreds of studies done by scientists the world over? Maybe you'd believe the people who have naturally occurring fluoride in their water supply? (that's how dentistry first made the link between fluoride and caries) Nah, you'd go on believing whatever half-cocked cockamamie conspiracy suits your fancy. And that's your right. But don't you go messin' with my farkin' water supply.

Question: How come dentists can't just call cavities "cavities"? Why do you have to go and call them things like "caries"?


Doctors love that Latin.
 
2014-03-07 08:07:49 PM  

fredmcmurray: I'm a dentist. This topic has been studied to death over decades and decades. And the research still comes to the same conclusion. In appropriate doses, fluoride stops dental caries and is safe. Don't believe me or the hundreds upon hundreds of studies done by scientists the world over? Maybe you'd believe the people who have naturally occurring fluoride in their water supply? (that's how dentistry first made the link between fluoride and caries) Nah, you'd go on believing whatever half-cocked cockamamie conspiracy suits your fancy. And that's your right. But don't you go messin' with my farkin' water supply.


The man says as he vouches for messin' with everybody else's farkin' water supply.

Add it to your own water if you want to medicate your teeth, let the rest of us have our relatively normal H2O.

/And fark all the chlorline too, for that matter
//It dries out my hair, yo
 
2014-03-07 09:03:15 PM  

tonygotskilz: What scares me the most is that apparently they at least the article insists that they don't test chemicals for developmental neurotoxicity already.


1. There are way too many chemicals to actually do that.

2. There are severe ethical dilemmas concerning testing drugs or chemicals on babies or pregnant women due to the lack of ability to give consent.  Animal models can be used, but conclusions found in animal models are only sometimes applicable to humans.  That would be particularly true for neural development, which is an area where humans in some ways are particularly different from other mammals.
 
2014-03-07 09:03:34 PM  
The real danger is the dihydrogen monoxide. It's an industrial solvent and a fire retardant. WHAT IS IT DOING IN OUR CHILDREN'S DRINKING WATER?!?
 
2014-03-07 09:14:17 PM  

socoloco: Being right doesn't mean anyone will believe you.


Even the shiat your dentist gives you says very clearly "do not swallow. If swallowed, contact the poison control center."

And yes, I read that off my prescription fluoride my dentist gave me last week.

OTOH, I'm pretty sure the levels in water supplies are just a teensy bit lower than the levels in a tube of the prescription stuff. Still, I'm pretty sure they were fluoridating water long before every kid on the planet was being diagnosed with ADD/ADHD for, you know, being a normal kid. I bet the crazies' microwaves and smart meters beamed signals into their heads telling them all about how the gub'mint is using fluoridated water to poison them.
 
2014-03-07 10:23:15 PM  

meat0918: 12monkeys: fredmcmurray: I'm a dentist. This topic has been studied to death over decades and decades. And the research still comes to the same conclusion. In appropriate doses, fluoride stops dental caries and is safe. Don't believe me or the hundreds upon hundreds of studies done by scientists the world over? Maybe you'd believe the people who have naturally occurring fluoride in their water supply? (that's how dentistry first made the link between fluoride and caries) Nah, you'd go on believing whatever half-cocked cockamamie conspiracy suits your fancy. And that's your right. But don't you go messin' with my farkin' water supply.

Question: How come dentists can't just call cavities "cavities"? Why do you have to go and call them things like "caries"?

Doctors love that Latin.


The word "cavity" originates from Latin, but its literal definition is an empty space. The word "caries" refers to decay and rotting, so I'm guessing this would be the more accurate terminology for the dental condition.

/not a dentist
 
2014-03-07 11:00:29 PM  
Fluoride was used by the Nazis for the concentration camp prisoners.  Seems this natural element is very good at keeping human beings
in a sheep-like state.   Maybe anyone here has ever wondered how those prisoners seemed so subdued and in a state of fatalism, even
as they stood in neat, orderly lines as they were being executed with a gunshot to the back of the head.

Fluoride never leaves the human body, and in fact, it accumulates in the bones.  Insomnia in late life is a symptom of this condition.

Here is another fact:  human bodies are easily found even when buried several feet deep in the earth, because the fluoride is detectable.

Chlorine in the drinking water is the bigger problem in my book.  That is no different from drinking bleach.

This is why i personally drink only well water.  Sure there is arsenic, lead and other elements present, but it is better than being a damn sheep.
 
2014-03-07 11:10:32 PM  

jsmilky: Fluoride was used by the Nazis for the concentration camp prisoners.  Seems this natural element is very good at keeping human beings
in a sheep-like state.   Maybe anyone here has ever wondered how those prisoners seemed so subdued and in a state of fatalism, even
as they stood in neat, orderly lines as they were being executed with a gunshot to the back of the head.

Fluoride never leaves the human body, and in fact, it accumulates in the bones.  Insomnia in late life is a symptom of this condition.

Here is another fact:  human bodies are easily found even when buried several feet deep in the earth, because the fluoride is detectable.

Chlorine in the drinking water is the bigger problem in my book.  That is no different from drinking bleach.

This is why i personally drink only well water.  Sure there is arsenic, lead and other elements present, but it is better than being a damn sheep.


Any more room under that bridge?
 
2014-03-07 11:51:32 PM  

FormlessOne: Jim_Callahan: Reverend J: Woooooo...a review article, with one mention of fluoride, in a table, and no reference....

The fluoride reference actually doesn't propose a causative relationship, it's another meta-study that just notes that people in high-fluoride (10+ mg/L) areas correlate to something like a 0.1 to 0.4 SD drop in the 95% confidence interval (which is a pretty broad interval by meta-study standards... not their fault, as they mention the levels of Fl they're talking about are extremely uncommon, but that's still shaky).

We're talking about people exposed to an order of magnitude higher dosage than is legal to drink in even the most forgiving of US states, an fairly small observed decrease of an infamously unreliable/shaky metric, no real control of educational variances, and the base data being Chinese studies (which are often discarded out-of-hand by scientific journals, some of the included ones in the meta study raise a lot of red flags, though, again, you kinda have to work with what you can get when you're talking about finding populations with 10mg/L of Fl, rather uncommon).

So, yeah.  When TFA mentions high Fl- exposure, it's talking about something entirely different from water system fluoridation and it's also talking about a speculative review that hasn't been experimentally verified... by which i mean experimental verification has found it  doesn't actually happen.  The study itself just says it's raising a potential flag for another study to maybe have something to look at... those studies were done, and it was found that there wasn't an issue.  Welcome to science, everybody.  The fact that a study says something, and the study is valid, doesn't mean the something is actually necessarily the case.

Thank you.

Normally, I'd sit this one out and enjoy my popcorn, but, yeah, that's exactly the point of the study. The misinterpretation or misapplication of a study's results to reinforce bias is a real issue - it's always nice to see a ration ...


They need to make a visit to historic Mineral Wells Texas, and it's water with trace amounts of lithium, no wait they may want to avoid that naturally occurring fluoride in the water too
 
2014-03-07 11:53:29 PM  

Triumph: ikanreed: Thankfully for the saner of us, these things are handled quite well, and such variations are more than accounted for, and idiots like you aren't in charge

What else is on your list for medicating the water supply Dr. Sane? Aspirin maybe? A little prozac?


How about water that comes out of the ground pre medicated?


http://drinkcrazywater.com/cw/
 
Displayed 30 of 130 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report