Florida's fluoride frenzy make my teeth pain

Before Florida convicts a generation of small children with lazy teeth to a life with lazy teeth, can we step back and look behind the curtain with hysteria about fluoridated water?

The move recently met near the house when the Hillsborough County Commission narrowly defeated a move of the Republican Commissioner Joshua Wostal to remove fluoride from the district's drinking water supply. Municipalities in the United States have added fluoride to their water since 1945, which attribute dentists and public health care specialists to reduce cavities and improve general health in adults.

But Wostal cited a September decision by a federal judge in California, which found that the fluoridation at the level recommended by the federal system was “an inappropriate risk of injury” per liter, and ordered the environmental protection authority to “take up official measures”. Wostal said that the “new legal decisions” justified the removal of fluoride, since the determination “was based on a lot of empirical data from scientists and medical specialists who had an extremely high bar”.

First, there is only one decision – a rather subdued one that is in the appeal. And it is wrong to suspect science behind it that it fulfills “an extremely high bar”. This misinformation leads the municipalities across the state to take the knee jerk reaction of the removal of fluoride out of their water. Before others make this mistake, we look at what the judge found and what the studies actually said.

The problem in court was not whether excessive fluoride was a risk of public health. Everyone agreed that too much fluoride was dangerous on a certain level. The question is: which level is okay? As the judge decided: “This finding does not certainly conclude that fluoridated water is harmful to public health.” In fact, distinguish the court between differences A danger and a risk. While the judge led the EPA to answer, he did not state what the agency's answer should look like. In January, the American Dental Association, which wrote in connection with 12 other groups, described the court judgment as a “fundamental misunderstanding” of science, which surrounds fluoridated water. Later this month, the EPA appealed.

Now consider the science behind the judge's decision. It was based on a federal review of dozens of studies that were published in August by the National Toxicology program on the connection between higher fluoride levels and lower IQs for children. Of these 74 studies, 52 (or more than two thirds) with low quality were classified with a high risk of distortion. All studies have been carried out outside the United States in 10 countries, including China, Iran and Pakistan. The review only revealed a connection between the lower IQ and fluoride level “with moderate trust” at more than 1.5 milligrams per liter, twice as high as the US standard.

It is important that the review found that “insufficient data determines whether the low fluoride level of 0.7 mg/l is currently recommended for the US community water supply. There was also no evidence that fluoride exposure had a disadvantageous effect on the knowledge of adults. “The report came to the conclusion that” more research is necessary “in order to determine all health risks associated with low fluoride exposure. The review stated that its purpose” should not judge the advantages of fluoride “.

Here the core is in clearer English: a judge issues a secured judgment without instructions or timing, based on suspicious studies that examined the fluoridation at the double US level. Medical experts have not only accused the decision, but also the underlying science, with the dental association describing research and conclusions of the federal review as “very unorthodox”. The Federal Study admitted that it had no final answers, a precautionary flag for political decision -makers. And the entire case is still being negotiated. This is the chosen cake of the cake dough in Hillsborough and elsewhere to end fluoridated water.

If you want to check the security of fluoride, fine. But that's not the case in this frenzy. Wostal's application at the Hillsborough Commission meeting on February 5 was not to stop a workshop or convene experts or to ask the latest scientific knowledge. He wanted Set the fluoridation of the water supply of the district “immediately”. The Republican Commissioners Donna Cameron Cepeda and Christine Miller supported the move, who died thanks to the Republicans Ken Hagan and Chris Boles and the Democrat Harry Cohen.

The responsible adults prevailed in the Hillsborough Commission, but this topic lives and gains dynamics nationwide. While more than 70% of the Floridians received fluoridated water in community water systems in community water systems, this cover has decreased since November because at least 15 water systems in Florida have stopped fluoridation. The facts and the court files do not support this irresponsible rush. If politicians do not do their homework, the average Floridians should certainly.