Has anybody examined the fluoride report by the National Toxicology Program? It apparently shows that only 0.7 mg/L (a typical amount in developed countries) is likely to correspond to an IQ loss of 3 points in children. This seems substantial.
I haven’t looked at that report in particular, but I VERY quickly looked into fluoride 6 months ago for my own decision-making purposes, and I wound up feeling like (1) a bunch of the studies are confounded by the fact that polluted areas have more fluoride, and people with more income / education / etc. [which are IQ correlates] are better at avoiding living in polluted areas and drinking the water, (2) getting fluoride out of my tap water is sufficiently annoying / weird that I don’t immediately want to bother in the absence of stronger beliefs (e.g. normal activated carbon filters don’t get the fluoride out), (3) I should brush with normal toothpaste then rinse with water, then use fluoride mouthwash right before bed (and NOT rinse with water afterwards, but do try extra hard to spit out as much of it as possible), (4) use fluoride-free toothpaste for the kids until they’re good at spitting it out (we were already doing this, I think it’s standard practice), but then switch.
I’m very open to (1) being wrong and any of (2-4) being the wrong call. FWIW, where I live, the tap water is 0.7mg/L.
I happened upon a X thread where cremieuxrecueil describes a particular study that concludes fluoridation is fine, then Scott Alexander replies that the literature is complicated and prenatal exposure seems at least plausibly bad, and then cremeiuxrecueil replies that the rest of the literature is worse but agrees that bad prenatal effects are still possible. Also, a couple other people including gwern chimed in to agree that the study cremieuxrecueil likes is indeed the best study in the literature.
Oh god damn it. I did wonder how in the world such reactive molecule could be harmless. I owe my hippie mom an apology, and I’ll thank my stars each time I deal with my relatively cavity-ridden teeth. I need every IQ point I can get to keep up with you youngsters :)
“Many European countries have rejected water fluoridation, including: Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Scotland, Iceland, and Italy.”
Has anybody examined the fluoride report by the National Toxicology Program? It apparently shows that only 0.7 mg/L (a typical amount in developed countries) is likely to correspond to an IQ loss of 3 points in children. This seems substantial.
Unofficial summary: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ntp/about_ntp/bsc/2023/may/publiccomm/neurath20230429_bsc_508.pdf
Paper: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ntp/about_ntp/bsc/2023/fluoride/documents_provided_bsc_wg_031523.pdf
I haven’t looked at that report in particular, but I VERY quickly looked into fluoride 6 months ago for my own decision-making purposes, and I wound up feeling like (1) a bunch of the studies are confounded by the fact that polluted areas have more fluoride, and people with more income / education / etc. [which are IQ correlates] are better at avoiding living in polluted areas and drinking the water, (2) getting fluoride out of my tap water is sufficiently annoying / weird that I don’t immediately want to bother in the absence of stronger beliefs (e.g. normal activated carbon filters don’t get the fluoride out), (3) I should brush with normal toothpaste then rinse with water, then use fluoride mouthwash right before bed (and NOT rinse with water afterwards, but do try extra hard to spit out as much of it as possible), (4) use fluoride-free toothpaste for the kids until they’re good at spitting it out (we were already doing this, I think it’s standard practice), but then switch.
I’m very open to (1) being wrong and any of (2-4) being the wrong call. FWIW, where I live, the tap water is 0.7mg/L.
Huh, this does seem potentially important. Seems like the kind of thing where I would love a Scott Alexander or @Elizabeth post on.
I happened upon a X thread where cremieuxrecueil describes a particular study that concludes fluoridation is fine, then Scott Alexander replies that the literature is complicated and prenatal exposure seems at least plausibly bad, and then cremeiuxrecueil replies that the rest of the literature is worse but agrees that bad prenatal effects are still possible. Also, a couple other people including gwern chimed in to agree that the study cremieuxrecueil likes is indeed the best study in the literature.
Oh god damn it. I did wonder how in the world such reactive molecule could be harmless. I owe my hippie mom an apology, and I’ll thank my stars each time I deal with my relatively cavity-ridden teeth. I need every IQ point I can get to keep up with you youngsters :)
“Many European countries have rejected water fluoridation, including: Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Scotland, Iceland, and Italy.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_by_country