So we have to choose between a 100% known bad outcome for poor people and a potential bad effect for young people from a poorly done study. I don’t think it’s too crazy of a decision to go with the option that does a significant amount of known good to the most disenfranchised part of the population, personally.
I disagree with your risk calculus. We are talking about something so 100% fundamental to human life, water. This is something we should consider absolutely sacrosanct, and a human right to all. It should be unthinkable to alter or modify it in any way imho.
I’m not trying to “Precious bodily fluids” here. , but this is one thing we all should have personal choice over.
You’re right it’s more expensive and the logistics are worse, but at the same time you could inculcate better habits in your population, and even subsidize proper mouth rinses.
If we begin to assume that the government is going to start manipulating the water supply secretly, you would then have to assume that any water that you didn’t personally purify is suspect, and at that point water fluoridation is the least of your concerns.
I agree, which is why I don’t want any tampering or adultering of water to begin with. I trust now that the levels are appropriate, but your whole argument boils down to “we’re adding stuff to water because it’s convenient”, which is true, but a lot of things are convenient.
Let’s have people take new referenda on adding them, flouride was added in the early 1900s without any political process.
I say this as someone who grew up in areas with truly horrible water quality from agricultural and industrial runoff, that was still declared “perfectly fine” by a dramatically corrupt local government. I also lived near the town where “A Civil Action” took place, and the water tasted funny there too (not terribly bad, but still weird).
If you don’t add chlorine to your water supply, it has a tendency to harbour some much worse stuff. Like cholera. And the level to which water is artificially fluorinated is much lower that it is naturally in many places. Just ‘pure’ water would be a terrible idea
Chlorine is our anion gap, we have so much more than you can imagine, it’s literally in salt.
Flourine is less common, saying some places have a lot is like saying arsenic is fine because chile has high concentrations. The Pampas actually is known for their wines and they have massive arsenic.
I disagree with your risk calculus. We are talking about something so 100% fundamental to human life, water. This is something we should consider absolutely sacrosanct, and a human right to all. It should be unthinkable to alter or modify it in any way imho.
I’m not trying to “Precious bodily fluids” here.
, but this is one thing we all should have personal choice over.
You’re right it’s more expensive and the logistics are worse, but at the same time you could inculcate better habits in your population, and even subsidize proper mouth rinses.
I agree, which is why I don’t want any tampering or adultering of water to begin with. I trust now that the levels are appropriate, but your whole argument boils down to “we’re adding stuff to water because it’s convenient”, which is true, but a lot of things are convenient.
Let’s have people take new referenda on adding them, flouride was added in the early 1900s without any political process.
I say this as someone who grew up in areas with truly horrible water quality from agricultural and industrial runoff, that was still declared “perfectly fine” by a dramatically corrupt local government. I also lived near the town where “A Civil Action” took place, and the water tasted funny there too (not terribly bad, but still weird).
If you don’t add chlorine to your water supply, it has a tendency to harbour some much worse stuff. Like cholera. And the level to which water is artificially fluorinated is much lower that it is naturally in many places. Just ‘pure’ water would be a terrible idea
Chlorine absolutely makes sense.
Chlorine is our anion gap, we have so much more than you can imagine, it’s literally in salt.
Flourine is less common, saying some places have a lot is like saying arsenic is fine because chile has high concentrations. The Pampas actually is known for their wines and they have massive arsenic.