Anti-fluoride water manager resigns after secretly lowering town’s levels

Town manager says fluoride levels now restored and will be monitored monthly.

Read the whole story

 

[fcrary]

toothpaste is 1300-1500ppm, the stuff they put on your teeth at the dentist is considerably higher than that. Fluoride in water is recommended at 0.7ppm . Do the math. It's not even close. If you brush two times a day you'll be fine and you don't need fluoridated water. 70-80% of the advantage of brushing is mechanically removing plaque and is even more important than fluoride. I'm just saying you don't have to do that if you know your kid is brushing. I trust public utilities do it because lots of people don't push their kids to brush and lots of people skip brushing. That doesn't diminish what I said about you not needing extra fluoridation if you do indeed brush your teeth.

Which might be fine if everyone brushed their teeth twice a day with fluoridated toothpaste. Personally, I brush my teeth once a day, and I think that's what most people do. So twice a day sounds like an unjustified assumption on your part. Second, there are people who can't afford toothpaste, so you are ignoring their dental health. And, although it's probably no longer a common practice, I didn't grow up using toothpaste. As you note, most of the value of brushing is from the mechanical abrasion. When I was a kid, my family put baking soda on the toothbrush, which is better for that mechanical action but provided no fluorine. That's probably a bad idea and I wouldn't recommend it, but it's how we did things. Probably because my parents grew up decades before fluorine was even a concept for dental health. Overall, I think you are saying that fluorinated water isn't useful if everyone follows the same practices you do. But people don't necessarily do that.

I never asserted it shouldn't be done; only in the plain case where I plainly stated "... if you are currently brushing your teeth and using well water" . You are turning that into a general statement, and it never was. Have a good life, sir.

I'm sorry. Perhaps your earlier statement were poorly phrased and I misunderstood them. But it did sound like you were saying the practice of fluoridating water was unnecessary if people followed the same dental hygiene practices you do. That is a general statement and assumes that everyone is like you. So I thought I should point out that that is a poor assumption.

 

[ApplePaladin]

Fluoridating drinking water is effective and safe according to 70 years of research and countless studies examining efficacy. The Earth is also round like a ball, and orbits the Sun.

============================================================================
Any medical treatment should be ONLY done with the patient's and their doctors decision. It should NEVER be done by any faceless bureaucrat, such as those in the American Medical Association, the American Dental Association, and the American Public Health Association, the CDC or anyone else, no matter how many degrees and scepters of honorary titles they may have. Even if they did a million studies, the decision should STILL nevertheless be left up to the patient and their doctor.

Why are there so many hypocrites, such as the the abortion proponents, who yell at the top of their lungs "It's my body and my decision". Why are these the very same people advocating things like fluoridation of drinking water, forced jabs with substances mislabeled "vaccines", and other public health measures that are forced on everybody, whether they want it or not?

Comparing fluoride in the water to reproductive health care is an intellectually bankrupt non sequitur. I'll spell it out for you: Being forced by the state to be a brood mare at extreme health risks even in unconscionably traumatic situations is not the same as having trace amounts of a mineral in your water that will make your teeth slightly less likely to rot at no risk to yourself. Your anti-vaxx nonsense just came completely out of left field and is both unwelcome and wholly irrelevant.

All potable water has naturally-occurring elements and minerals in it, often including fluoride. Providing fluoride as an additive in tap water at a safe level to confer public health benefits with no risk is - in a world without gullible idiots enamored with conspiracy theories - a sensible, unobjectionable thing to do. In this world it's still a sensible thing to do; we're just saddled with gullible idiots enamored with conspiracy theories who raise stupid objections despite extensive documentation already existing that refutes them.

 

[viridianvex]

I read the headline and assumed this would be a polarized and heavily commented topic. Too many comments to read all of them but read the first few pages and a few of the last and this is playing out how I knew it would on Ars. I know this comment will get downvotes because the high majority of Ars readers will believe all commentary coming from the CDC/FDA etc regardless of what the actual studies show but here goes anyway.

1) Fluoride is a known neurotoxin. At certain levels it is absolutely harmful as proven many times by scientific studies.

2) The tooth decay benefits from fluoride are a topical benefit. Meaning they work when applied to the surface of the tooth. Not when ingested. Or we would offer fluoride pills.

3) Most westernized countries do not fluoridate their water.

4) The tooth decay charts the CDC and other organizations use to prove the fluoride has helped with tooth decay are almost identical to the similar charts from other countries that don't fluoridate water and coincide with modern dentistry practices and with fluoridated toothpaste (topical treatment).

5) Forced medicine through water is a very strange practice. If society truly believes that we should be treating mass population via water intake why are we not adding vitamins and other critical health supplements to the masses (which btw are not known neurotoxins) via the mainstream water supply?

I am not of the belief that fluoride is due to conspiracy but I am of the belief that we should not medicate the population with water and we should certainly not be medicating the population via water with a known neurotoxin that is only beneficial in a topical capacity. Especially without any clear indication that this is helping and also especially as many westernized countries that do not follow this practice continue to have the same or better outcomes regarding tooth decay.

The dose really does matter here, assuming you are arguing in good faith. Chlorine has been used to commit war crimes during WW1 as well as in Iraq. It also keeps swimming pools from being complete cesspools, and since the chlorine ion breaks away from sodium when in a solution, you get some in ionic form anytime you consume salt. Arguing that fluorine is a neurotoxin is about as useful as saying mercury is poisonous so we should avoid vaccines (most of which don't contain it, and for those that do, merely in a compound.)

If you are really so concerned, why don't you find some evidence that putting fluoride in water at current levels actually causes neurotoxic effects?

edit: missing words, it is late...

 

[viridianvex]

Take all his pension money back. And if he bitches about that, toss him in jail for a couple years and take it. The history of anti-fluoridation of course is backlash against the fascist Communists after WW2, polluting the PBF. This guy is undoubtedly a trump supporter, who is tied for biggest fascist of all time - VERY ironic.

There is no irony here. Communists aren't fascist. They were anti-fascist, and fascists were anti-communist.

Came here to say this. Maybe OP was thinking of these guys?

Spoiler

 

[graylshaped]

Fluoridating drinking water is effective and safe according to 70 years of research and countless studies examining efficacy. The Earth is also round like a ball, and orbits the Sun.

============================================================================
Any medical treatment should be ONLY done with the patient's and their doctors decision. It should NEVER be done by any faceless bureaucrat, such as those in the American Medical Association, the American Dental Association, and the American Public Health Association, the CDC or anyone else, no matter how many degrees and scepters of honorary titles they may have. Even if they did a million studies, the decision should STILL nevertheless be left up to the patient and their doctor.

Why are there so many hypocrites, such as the the abortion proponents, who yell at the top of their lungs "It's my body and my decision". Why are these the very same people advocating things like fluoridation of drinking water, forced jabs with substances mislabeled "vaccines", and other public health measures that are forced on everybody, whether they want it or not?

Put your seat belt on or get out of my car, you idiot.

 

[ApplePaladin]

I read the headline and assumed this would be a polarized and heavily commented topic. Too many comments to read all of them but read the first few pages and a few of the last and this is playing out how I knew it would on Ars. I know this comment will get downvotes because the high majority of Ars readers will believe all commentary coming from the CDC/FDA etc regardless of what the actual studies show but here goes anyway.

1) Fluoride is a known neurotoxin. At certain levels it is absolutely harmful as proven many times by scientific studies.

2) The tooth decay benefits from fluoride are a topical benefit. Meaning they work when applied to the surface of the tooth. Not when ingested. Or we would offer fluoride pills.

3) Most westernized countries do not fluoridate their water.

4) The tooth decay charts the CDC and other organizations use to prove the fluoride has helped with tooth decay are almost identical to the similar charts from other countries that don't fluoridate water and coincide with modern dentistry practices and with fluoridated toothpaste (topical treatment).

5) Forced medicine through water is a very strange practice. If society truly believes that we should be treating mass population via water intake why are we not adding vitamins and other critical health supplements to the masses (which btw are not known neurotoxins) via the mainstream water supply?

I am not of the belief that fluoride is due to conspiracy but I am of the belief that we should not medicate the population with water and we should certainly not be medicating the population via water with a known neurotoxin that is only beneficial in a topical capacity. Especially without any clear indication that this is helping and also especially as many westernized countries that do not follow this practice continue to have the same or better outcomes regarding tooth decay.

A.) "At certain levels" most things are toxic. Too much or too little water will kill us. Small amounts of certain dangerous substances convey health benefits. We need the sun to live; too much sunlight will kill us. Many vitamins and supplements are toxic at high doses. Saying "this thing is bad because at certain levels it's toxic" is as unhelpful as it is obvious.

2.) All potable water has naturally-occurring elements and minerals in it, often including fluoride. Providing people with water from their taps just as they can find it in normal, naturally occurring sources is not "medicating the population." Portraying it that way is dishonest and emotionally-manipulative. It's revealing that you can't make an argument against fluoridated water without trying to short-circuit people's critical thinking by scaring them into accepting your argument.

 

[gsgrego]

Fluoridating drinking water is effective and safe according to 70 years of research and countless studies examining efficacy. The Earth is also round like a ball, and orbits the Sun.

============================================================================
Any medical treatment should be ONLY done with the patient's and their doctors decision. It should NEVER be done by any faceless bureaucrat, such as those in the American Medical Association, the American Dental Association, and the American Public Health Association, the CDC or anyone else, no matter how many degrees and scepters of honorary titles they may have. Even if they did a million studies, the decision should STILL nevertheless be left up to the patient and their doctor.

Why are there so many hypocrites, such as the the abortion proponents, who yell at the top of their lungs "It's my body and my decision". Why are these the very same people advocating things like fluoridation of drinking water, forced jabs with substances mislabeled "vaccines", and other public health measures that are forced on everybody, whether they want it or not?

Why are idiots who have less medical knowledge than people in the dark ages demanding that their ignorance dictate the rules for everyone?

 

[Meathim]

They should sue him to recover more than half his salary since he decided not to do half his job.


Fluoridation, either of water or store-bought salt, is one of the greatest health success stories of the 20th century. It's too bad we can't have nice things without nutjobs inventing reasons to be fearful and angry.

Is it though? In my country, Sweden, it’s actually illegal to add fluoride to drinking water. But swedes are pretty healthy still

Well having a generally saner government and population helps. I do note that while Sweden doesn't add fluoride to drinking water... I found from this study it also doesn't remove it when naturally occurring levels are higher than even what "fortified" water in the US. The study shows a correlation with better dental health in areas of higher fluoride content... but no measurable correlation with cognitive issues.

At one point in school we were very jealous of a girl in our class who got to chew fluoride gum because the natural levels where she lived was considered too low. This was in the 90's, in a deep blue area of the map. I don't know if they tested all the wells and water sources regurarly and if not why they tested her household water source.

EDIT: I may misremember this actually. I also remember she had white spots on her teeth and some googling shows that is a sign of too much fluoride, and she had them before she had to chew that gum. Now I wonder what was in the gum...

Edit again: No wait, white spots can have a variety of reasons apparently. So it probably was fluoride gum ahe had, but there were other reaons for the white spots. What a trip man.

 

[gsgrego]

I read the headline and assumed this would be a polarized and heavily commented topic. Too many comments to read all of them but read the first few pages and a few of the last and this is playing out how I knew it would on Ars. I know this comment will get downvotes because the high majority of Ars readers will believe all commentary coming from the CDC/FDA etc regardless of what the actual studies show but here goes anyway.

1) Fluoride is a known neurotoxin. At certain levels it is absolutely harmful as proven many times by scientific studies.

2) The tooth decay benefits from fluoride are a topical benefit. Meaning they work when applied to the surface of the tooth. Not when ingested. Or we would offer fluoride pills.

3) Most westernized countries do not fluoridate their water.

4) The tooth decay charts the CDC and other organizations use to prove the fluoride has helped with tooth decay are almost identical to the similar charts from other countries that don't fluoridate water and coincide with modern dentistry practices and with fluoridated toothpaste (topical treatment).

5) Forced medicine through water is a very strange practice. If society truly believes that we should be treating mass population via water intake why are we not adding vitamins and other critical health supplements to the masses (which btw are not known neurotoxins) via the mainstream water supply?

I am not of the belief that fluoride is due to conspiracy but I am of the belief that we should not medicate the population with water and we should certainly not be medicating the population via water with a known neurotoxin that is only beneficial in a topical capacity. Especially without any clear indication that this is helping and also especially as many westernized countries that do not follow this practice continue to have the same or better outcomes regarding tooth decay.

1. Natural sources of water has upwards of 2 ppm in it. You would need at least 4 ppm for it to become a problem, likely much higher though.

2. No. This is, wrong.

3. Have you considered facts like the water in some countries already has high fluoride?

4.Evidence? Sources?

5.Hahahaha. Americans "I eat 5 triple quadruple burgers full of fking shit other countries wouldn't let animals eat".

The fact that people are more concerned that fluoride(which is naturally present in water) is in their water and not that most ice creams do not have cream or milk in them anymore would be funny if it wasn't just absolutely sad how just plain dumb people have become.

 

[gautier]

“I cannot in good conscience be a party to this." So, if you disagree and don't want to commit, just resign, don't fuck your job and the people you are supposed to support.

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

The CDC estimated in 2016 that nearly 73 percent of the US population served by municipal water systems receives fluoridated water.

Wait, what? 80 years after we started fluoridating drinking water 27% of systems still aren't doing it, WTF.

It's not 73% of municipal water systems, it's 73% of all Americans. That remaining 27% is probably largely comprised of people with wells instead of municipal water.

Incorrect. I'm not served by a municipal water system, so I don't figure into the percentage of people "served by municipal water systems." Of those that ARE, 73% receive fluoridated water. The remainder do not, because their municipal water system isn't fluoridating.

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

I was on the fence about this, but looking at the long list of frequent poster fools in favor of flagellating this principled man has convinced me: I'm going to get a reverse osmosis system for my drinking water and put the minerals I like in it. I'm partial to Dasani. Not all heroes wear capes.

Dasani is literally municipal tap water.

 

[Ochre_face]

I was on the fence about this, but looking at the long list of frequent poster fools in favor of flagellating this principled man has convinced me: I'm going to get a reverse osmosis system for my drinking water and put the minerals I like in it. I'm partial to Dasani. Not all heroes wear capes.

Dasani is literally municipal tap water.

One early lessons I learned in just how the water industry works was as a teenager. The little village where I grew up is on a major highway with a huge service station, shops, petrol, restaurants etc. One of the local farmers put up a bottling plant to sell branded water at the service station. It was the same water coming out of the taps in the bathroom, since it came from the same source.

Later, working in Mozambique, one of the big local operators wanted to put up a bottling plant just outside the park where I worked. Several local villages relied on that stream, which in turn fed the park itself. The villages fell into our social support catchment area, and park management was enthusiastic about allowing them to divert god knows how much water because of the "economic opportunities".

That was a decade ago, I never checked to see whether the plant got built or not. I'm no hydrologist so I can't say what impact it would have had, but "not good" at a minimum.

 

[passivesmoking]

his righteous, five-page resignation letter

More like self-righteous. What a prick.

Restoring the town's water to the state-recommended fluoride level "poses unacceptable risks to public health," the now-ex water superintendent, Kendall Chamberlin, wrote in his resignation letter, according to local media. “I cannot in good conscience be a party to this."

In good conscience? But you can in good conscience deceive the people you've been tasked with serving for the last decade? If it was a moral issue for you then you should have quit. What you actually did is morally equivalent to selling tic-tacs as birth-control pills due to your "pro-life" beliefs. You're not a hero, you're not a martyr, you're a prick.

 

[Derecho Imminent]

70-80% of the advantage of brushing is mechanically removing plaque and is even more important than fluoride. I'm just saying you don't have to do that if you know your kid is brushing. I trust public utilities do it because lots of people don't push their kids to brush and lots of people skip brushing. That doesn't diminish what I said about you not needing extra fluoridation if you do indeed brush your teeth.

100% agree with you that the larger part of brushing is the brushing. I carry a travel toothbrush in my pocket so If I eat something away from home I can still brush. Doesnt matter that I have no toothpaste. The important part is not leaving food residue in your mouth for hours. Tooth decay is caused by germs, and they cant multiply if you dont feed them.

 

[isparavanje]

Even if we had 100% free and universally available dental care, we'd still need this public health intervention. This intervention helps those who for one reason or another are not getting proper dental care.

I have a family member who was a mental health therapist. One of the few people willing to take Medicaid clients. There are literally people out there today who have never been taught to brush their teeth. Grown adults, not just little kids. They were literally never taught to brush their teeth and had to be taught in their 30s or later. I'll also add that people who struggle with depression... self-care is usually one of the first things to go. Trying to muster up the energy to brush your teeth on a regular basis is not easy.

It's easy to forget that, even in America, there are places that may as well be third world countries. I want to say it was LBJ who went on a tour of the country and found that there were still pockets of the country where polio was spreading even after it had been declared eradicated in the country.

I hear constantly of visitors to the US from overseas who are astounded that the whole of the US isn't uniform in our culture and behavior. It shouldn't surprise us when we encounter this belief given the export of our culture through movies, tv and music. They all think there's east cost, west coast and the south. Never mind the other parts of the country.

At least before Trump, the rest of the nation was where the "normal" people lived. People who tended to have pretty middle of the road beliefs about most things. Not coastal liberal elites or backwards southern hicks. Just regular people who fall somewhere in the middle of those two belief systems. Of course now it's largely MAGA land and they've largely tossed their lot in with the backwards southern hicks. So, I guess for the people you hear from, it should simplify things as there is largely just the three designations they've always thought there were.

Uh huh. All those people who hated obamacare cause they were middle of the road and not racists.

Well I suppose it is close to halloween, so it is prime straw man season.

People who tended to have pretty middle of the road beliefs about most things. Not coastal liberal elites or backwards southern hicks. Just regular people who fall somewhere in the middle of those two belief systems.

Is it really that hard to parse a couple simple sentences? It's not I'm writing in the style of the King James Royal Court or using especially esoteric and uncommon words or phrases. This should not be difficult for someone with at least a high school level reading ability.

I'll help you out. "Most things" means not all or not everything. Some. A portion. "Somewhere in the middle" would mean between two points. Not at either extreme. So putting them together in the context that I wrote... These people would hold moderate reviews on some, but not all, political topics. If the two extreme ends are liberal coastal elite and backwards southern hick, they would fall somewhere between those two points. Where exactly is dependent upon the individual. Some may be closer to one point than the other, but still likely closer to the middle than either extreme.

And regarding Obamacare specifically, there was a lot of misinformation being deliberately spread by probably Russia and then amplified by the GOP. Like Sarah Palin's turning palliative care into death panels or the fake pages going around about it granting the government the right to implant people with tracking chips. Even, for arguments sake, we say there was a racial element, you could trace most of that back to Trump and his birtherism nonsense. And I'd refer you back to literally the first four words of the post you quoted.

In the future, please do take the time to fully read people's posts before responding. I know it takes longer than reading every fifth word and then assuming you got the gist, but it'll save you a lot of time in the future removing your foot from your mouth.

Racism is pretty middle-of-the-road in the US. Doesn't make it good, just means there is a long way to go.

 

[isparavanje]

I read the headline and assumed this would be a polarized and heavily commented topic. Too many comments to read all of them but read the first few pages and a few of the last and this is playing out how I knew it would on Ars. I know this comment will get downvotes because the high majority of Ars readers will believe all commentary coming from the CDC/FDA etc regardless of what the actual studies show but here goes anyway.

1) Fluoride is a known neurotoxin. At certain levels it is absolutely harmful as proven many times by scientific studies.

2) The tooth decay benefits from fluoride are a topical benefit. Meaning they work when applied to the surface of the tooth. Not when ingested. Or we would offer fluoride pills.

3) Most westernized countries do not fluoridate their water.

4) The tooth decay charts the CDC and other organizations use to prove the fluoride has helped with tooth decay are almost identical to the similar charts from other countries that don't fluoridate water and coincide with modern dentistry practices and with fluoridated toothpaste (topical treatment).

5) Forced medicine through water is a very strange practice. If society truly believes that we should be treating mass population via water intake why are we not adding vitamins and other critical health supplements to the masses (which btw are not known neurotoxins) via the mainstream water supply?

I am not of the belief that fluoride is due to conspiracy but I am of the belief that we should not medicate the population with water and we should certainly not be medicating the population via water with a known neurotoxin that is only beneficial in a topical capacity. Especially without any clear indication that this is helping and also especially as many westernized countries that do not follow this practice continue to have the same or better outcomes regarding tooth decay.

I'm not sure why fluoride is considered a 'medication'. Do you also consider iodine supplementation in salt or B12 supplementation in rice to be 'medication'?

Fluoride is a nutrient, and is recognised as an essential nutrient by both the FDA and the EU. There is also an upper limit on the tolerated dose, beyond which negative effects occur. This is also typical for other essential micronutrients, such as Vitamin D, potassium, iodine, and etc. There is nothing strange here.

In addition, water fluoridation simply brings the fluoride levels in water in regions with low natural fluoride up to typical groundwater values. I personally have no dog in the fight; I think fluoridation is unnecessary in developed countries where toothpaste is typically fluoridated, but also the harms are negligible and a lot of the fears are really quite silly. Remember: natural sources of spring and ground water often have higher fluoride levels than fluoridated water. It's just asinine that people are arguing (in this very thread) that fluoride is unnatural and should not be in our diet when it is in the very water humans have drank for millennia.

 

[jonah]

I was on the fence about this, but looking at the long list of frequent poster fools in favor of flagellating this principled man has convinced me: I'm going to get a reverse osmosis system for my drinking water and put the minerals I like in it. I'm partial to Dasani. Not all heroes wear capes.

Not all idiots drool on their keyboard.

 

[kinsei]

Fluoride is a nutrient, and is recognised as an essential nutrient by both the FDA and the EU.

The EU does not recognize Fluoride as an essential nutrient.

https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/130808

"Fluoride performs no essential function in human growth and development and no signs of fluoride deficiency have been identified. "

 

[AmanoJyaku]

his righteous, five-page resignation letter

More like self-righteous. What a prick.

Restoring the town's water to the state-recommended fluoride level "poses unacceptable risks to public health," the now-ex water superintendent, Kendall Chamberlin, wrote in his resignation letter, according to local media. “I cannot in good conscience be a party to this."

In good conscience? But you can in good conscience deceive the people you've been tasked with serving for the last decade? If it was a moral issue for you then you should have quit. What you actually did is morally equivalent to selling tic-tacs as birth-control pills due to your "pro-life" beliefs. You're not a hero, you're not a martyr, you're a prick.

It's funny how in a democracy, so many decide to unilaterally make decisions for the rest of us.

The state made the decision to fluoridate based on scientific findings, made those findings available to the public, and allowed the public to vote for individuals who would either be for or against continuing the practice. All our friend had to do was bring this up to the public, and the public could have decided on this issue. Democratically.

 

[numerobis]

his righteous, five-page resignation letter

More like self-righteous. What a prick.

Restoring the town's water to the state-recommended fluoride level "poses unacceptable risks to public health," the now-ex water superintendent, Kendall Chamberlin, wrote in his resignation letter, according to local media. “I cannot in good conscience be a party to this."

In good conscience? But you can in good conscience deceive the people you've been tasked with serving for the last decade? If it was a moral issue for you then you should have quit. What you actually did is morally equivalent to selling tic-tacs as birth-control pills due to your "pro-life" beliefs. You're not a hero, you're not a martyr, you're a prick.

It's funny how in a democracy, so many decide to unilaterally make decisions for the rest of us.

The state made the decision to fluoridate based on scientific findings, made those findings available to the public, and allowed the public to vote for individuals who would either be for or against continuing the practice. All our friend had to do was bring this up to the public, and the public could have decided on this issue. Democratically.

Yeah, but he might not have gotten the outcome he wished then, because to live in a democracy you need to compromise sometimes.

 

[AmanoJyaku]

Fluoride is a nutrient, and is recognised as an essential nutrient by both the FDA and the EU.

The EU does not recognize Fluoride as an essential nutrient.

https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/130808

"Fluoride performs no essential function in human growth and development and no signs of fluoride deficiency have been identified. "

Because it's not an essential nutrient, and the FDA doesn't recognize it as such, either.

However, your link goes on to point out the beneficial nature of fluoride:

Although fluoride is not essential for tooth development, its role in the prevention of dental caries has been known for many years. Epidemiological studies have shown an inverse correlation between the presence of fluoride in drinking water and the prevalence of dental caries in children. The NDA Panel proposes an adequate intake (AI) of 0.05mg/kg body weight per day for children aged 7 months to 17 years as well as adults, including pregnant and lactating women. The AI covers fluoride intake from all sources, including non-dietary sources such as toothpaste and other dental hygiene products. The major dietary sources are water and beverages or foods reconstituted with fluoridated water; tea; marine fish; and fluoridated salt.

Even though it isn't an essential nutrient, the EU recommends its daily intake.

 

[Maxer]

They need to do a study to see if the change did anything.

And then what he did with the money or fluoride bought.

We already have enormous studies about the benefits of fluoridation and comparing with cohorts that don't have it. There really isn't anything new to be learned at this point.

Yes, but it would be fascinating regardless.

Were teeth issues happening at higher rates in this town for example?

It's an interesting opportunity to see what the impact was. It's unfortunate they don't have specific records of the lowered levels.

 

[Jhood]

Let me guess. Another who did their own research?

No, he was doing his own research... on the constituents.

 

[SixDegrees]

It's kinda weird, watching "The Peripheral" on Amazon, then looking out the window and seeing The Jackpot unfolding in real time.

 

[iquanyin]

You want to know how he was able to get away with this? Here's how:

“It’s not OK!” she wrote. “For me, the bigger issue is the unilateral way in which Kendall operated. He did not want to be told what to do.”

Dr. Howard Novak, the only dentist in the small town, said Chamberlin is a well-intentioned guy who “made a tactical error” and acted on information “that is more than suspect.”

He wasn't fired, some people are making excuses for him, and others are ignoring gaps in the system.

Blame all around.

so the town dentist is defending him?

 

[iquanyin]

This is a great example of how important compliance validation is in ANYTHING security or risk related. If you don't measure it, you can't *manage* it. And it isn't just about malicious nutjobs like this headcase. It's about the entire risk cycle. We see this all the time in InfoSec:

"Yep, we run a nightly job to perform a vulnerability scan, and it emails us when it finds anything with a CVE score of 6 or higher. We're doing a good job in our configuration management. We haven't had anything higher than a 6 in the last year."

"The last year, huh? And you know this because you haven't received any emails? Has anyone actually checked to see if the job is working right?"

"No. Why do you ask?"

We have known how important this is since the 1950s and W. Edwards Deming and his "Deming Cycle", yet I see it ALL the time that critical processes are put in place with no measurement or feedback to leadership.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PDCA

full agree. i’ve done many types of jobs. the biggest flaw i’ve seen, across the board, is this: people don’t check back to see if things are working, or working properly.

 

[spasm]

They need to do a study to see if the change did anything.

And then what he did with the money or fluoride bought.

I helped do a study of 'meth mouth' in the early 2000s with a large cohort of people under 30 who used meth, where we took a detailed history of their meth use and had some dentists look at their dental health. Turned out there was no relationship whatsoever between duration of meth use or level of meth use, the sole predictor of terrible dental health was whether they'd spent the first 6 years of their life in a town with fluoridated water or not. So yeah, I think that study has been done with bells on.

 

[arc-tu-rus]

I get that this guy could get away with this stunt due to lax local processes. But I would expect the abnormal fluoride levels to be promptly detected by regular water tests. Or isn't the water regularly tested by independent entities around the USA?

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

I get that this guy could get away with this stunt due to lax local processes. But I would expect the abnormal fluoride levels to be promptly detected by regular water tests. Or isn't the water regularly tested by independent entities around the USA?

Normally it would be up to the states individually to implement something like that.

 

[KBGB]

Fluoride is one of man's greatest blessings.

Cheap, effective & safe. People with healthy teeth and/or dental work to provide functional teeth don't get just how important it really is.

Aside from criminal prosecution this guy should be on the hook for any dental work among those who were effected.

 

[Derecho Imminent]

I get that this guy could get away with this stunt due to lax local processes. But I would expect the abnormal fluoride levels to be promptly detected by regular water tests. Or isn't the water regularly tested by independent entities around the USA?

I think the regulation isnt well done. There is no legal range as a requirement. There isnt even a lower limit to the recommended range. Its just 0.7 mg/liter recommended and 0.7 max. As a tech who has worked with specifications my whole career thats just wrong.

It used to be a proper range when it was 0.7-1.2, but they changed it.

edit: in case that wasnt clear - a proper specified range is A+/-B or from C to D, such as 0.65+/-0.5 or simply 0.6 to 0.7. The specification of 0.7 max doesnt put a lower bound on the spec. Thats whats wrong with it.

 

[efferulmans]

They need to do a study to see if the change did anything.

And then what he did with the money or fluoride bought.

We already have enormous studies about the benefits of fluoridation and comparing with cohorts that don't have it. There really isn't anything new to be learned at this point.

We have statistical knowledge about a category. That's not the same as data about this specific intervention.