Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
In this Discussion
- Cherry_Pie May 2013
- Clever_girl May 2013
- Dr_William_Hayward May 2013
- ed_chigliak May 2013
- flossy_log_lady May 2013
- freddy May 2013
- kdawg May 2013
- lolo May 2013
- Loose_Thread May 2013
- ManInTheIvoryTower May 2013
- MirandaJuly May 2013
- Schlabe May 2013
- swamp_knobbler_mahan May 2013
- the_owls May 2013
- UncleBoatShoes2011 May 2013
- YoursTruly May 2013
FLUORIDE
How is it possible that we're not talking about fluoride on UHX? Are we all silently agreeing not to raise the issue here? Is everyone just sick of the crazy debate? Did I miss the fluoride thread?
I'm curious.
You know what would be helpful for this and all other contentious issues that have to do with "science?" A website designed like this: split down the middle, pro vs. against, with links on either side to the articles people keep citing as "evidence" of this or that. Wouldn't that be great? I think a lot of us can consume scientific research decently well, we just need an easy way to access it.
I'm curious.
You know what would be helpful for this and all other contentious issues that have to do with "science?" A website designed like this: split down the middle, pro vs. against, with links on either side to the articles people keep citing as "evidence" of this or that. Wouldn't that be great? I think a lot of us can consume scientific research decently well, we just need an easy way to access it.
Comments
I don't get a good vibe off of voting yes. I went to a debate... I felt the "PRO" folks were really rude and kept talking about "the kids" and "cavities" but it's about so much more than that... I hate to be all tree hugger, but what's it going to do to my environment, ya'll?
What's it going to do to my senior citizens who need to avoid fluoride (folks with DM, HTN, etc.)
Why ya'll gotta change our yummy water? I refuse to drink the water when I go home to visit my family, it's nasty. No wonder people are all heart attacky with their soda pops. I don't blame them -- Coke > TX water.
I voted no.
Also just seems literally insane to just add a chemical to our DRINKING WATER because there is a slight chance it might prevent some cavities. Cavities??? Maybe if it prevented, I don't know, cancer. Sure, I guess.
It's another one of these weird obfuscatory issues, I feel like, where the real actual issue is that millions of people live in poverty and have no access to health care and don't know how to brush their teeth or eat food that isn't 90% refined sugar, but instead of actually dealing with those dark, complex facts, and, I don't know, give people free dental care or something crazy and socialist like that, we're gonna pay some company millions of dollars to dump fluoride in the drinking water like that's actually gonna fix anything. I mean, I am open to my smart friends arguing with me but right now it seems like a JOKE
The goofiness of the proposal plus all that other stuff I just said just makes me think fishy capitalist bullshit is underfoot and that makes me suspicious. However I am not bothering to research my theory. YOU'RE WELCOME
I didn't know I was pissed about this until recently, this debate is really getting to me
To me, it feels like things in Portland "ain't broke" to an extent that they "need fixin."
I will elaborate further when I'm not typing on my damn iPhone because I still don't have Internet in new house.
I don't mean to get things all crazy in here. I will not try to convert you. I was just curious if, indeed, all my smart uhx friends are anti-. It appears to be so!
I'm not wildly pro
My concern about the anti position is that it ends up coming off like how the far right refutes global warming. Liberals (and those considered level headed) point to so much scientific data about global warming, and the case seems similar for pro-flouridity.
It's supported by so many health organizations and the CDC and the EPA. If I start to think that the CDC and EPA are out to poison me then I start to feel like an Alex Jones following libertarian who constantly lives in paranoia and that depresses me.
In Portland it seems like there is SO MUCH MONEY behind the ANTI campaign which is surprising and also a little alarming.
I'm confused I guess.
Fluoride is flavorless. Texas water tastes bad because it comes from Texas.
My son spent the first 4 years of his life in Portland, and I'm a little concerned about the fact that he was probably fluoride-deficient during that time. It's something that could affect him for the rest of his life.
I think it's crazy that Portland doesn't have fluoridated water. Every other major city in this country does. I don't think it's some mass delusion. If it didn't work, or if it was unhealthy, surely it wouldn't be so widespread? It's basically a settled issue for the rest of the country.
The wikipedia article is also a good source of info if you have concerns.
However, I think it is worthwhile to take a very close look at anything that will affect the most vulnerable people in our communities. There is some ignorance from the pro- side in statements like "just drink bottled water."
But we also need to acknowledge the seriousness of dental health. The cost of water fluoridation is much cheaper relative to dentistry. Cavities can lead to fatal complications and lower life expectancy.
I do understand and part of me agrees with the notion that every person should have a choice about whether or not they ingest fluoride. But I agree that it's sort of like our rules about immunizations. You don't want to immunize your child? Cool. That's your choice. Do not expect, however, to be allowed to enter your child into our public schools where he/she can cause major disease outbreaks. If you want your community to PAY for your child's schooling, the community-as-a-whole gets to vote on what sorts of rules people have to abide by in order to be allowed to attend school. Similarly, if the community-as-a-whole determines that it is in the best interest of vulnerable kids in said community to fluoridate the water, and you're against it, I agree - that sucks for you. But that's what living in a community/democracy means. That's why we're voting on it. Right?
I am sympathetic of both sides
My BF is anti- and I will certainly choose my battles wisely
I respect paranoia and doubt of the government, which God Knows has put its citizens in harm's way in many incidents
Vaccines are good
Fluoride might be good
The moon landing didn't happen
Besides, if fluoride is toxic/causes cancer/whatever bad thing the No campaign says, why aren't they showing me the stats that show that Bad Thing happening at elevated rates in every other major American city and also every other city in the Portland metro area that fluoridates? If they're right, those stats ought to be compelling, right?
My sister works with poor Native American populations in Oregon. They have free access to dental care. This "access" does very little to prevent horrible things from happening in the mouths of very small children in these populations. And once those horrible things happen, treatment is complicated and dangerous. In her words: "Try doing a filling on a one year old. You can't with simple local anesthesia at the dental office so the babies need to go under general anesthesia in a hospital which has a statistically significant risk of causing morbidity, mortality and decreased mental function. And many of the kids I see have done this two or three times by the time they're five."
Anyway, I'm all for "increasing access," but, as someone who also works in a public health capacity (sort of) with really ill folks, I'll tell you - giving people access will NOT solve the problems in and of itself. I can give you umpteen examples from my own work where people have "access" coming out their ears (health professionals literally calling them over and over again offering them free help to make healthy choices) and they continue to make poor choices. HUMAN NATURE!
I certainly don't feel like the crazy paranoid "Government wants to poison us" arguments ("arguments") hold a lot of water (ha ha). I grew up drinking fluoride and I have awesome teeth, I don't give a shit, I'll drink fluoride. My irritation with this issue is that, just as with so many others, we are manipulated into thinking about all the poor sad poverty-stricken children with cavities, and oh someone really ought to DO SOMETHING, and then this fluoride thing is presented as a wonderful humanitarian act and if you are against it you must not care about poor children, and in the ensuing foofaraw everybody forgets that the whole reason we are even talking about this shit is because we live in a country that doesn't believe in providing medical care, education, the means to a decent life, the ability to have agency and consciousness about our choices and decisions, to its citizens, and that that is deeply, morally fucked up.
I also am increasingly suspicious of, and morally opposed to, the kind of paternalistic governmental attitude these kinds of things reveal/promote. If it's an issue of systemic poverty and dental care only addressing problems rather than prevention--which I totally believe is the case--surely the solution shouldn't just be feeding poor people chemicals like they're without any agency or abilities or even potential to acquire those things, like they're livestock our government has to grudgingly provide basic care and nutrients for, to save money on actually giving people the tools to make their lives better. Poor people make bad choices (which, first of all, is already a really paternalistic and condescending attitude, even if it's true. We should just recognize that) not because they're stupid and need a father to lovingly force-feed them vitamin pills for their own good. They are fundamentally excluded from the possibility of making good choices, and THAT'S the problem. Not cavities. Cavities are one symptom of a problem much, much more horrible. But we feel that by addressing cavities we are doing our small part in addressing the real problem, and we aren't. Like lets put diabetes medication in all our water too because it's easier than investing in education and social infrastructure and limiting the power of fast food corporations, and changing the way capitalism works, and actually addressing inflation and cost of living and raising the minimum wage etc. etc. Instead we want our government to just give us pills. I get that the pills are necessary--the fluoride is probably necessary, I believe these stats flossy is sharing--but they are necessary BECAUSE our government so FUNDAMENTALLY FAILS US in much, much grander ways, and that bothers me, and it bothers me when we find ourselves focusing on the small stuff at the expense of the bigger issues.
I guess I sound like a ranting weirdo but oh well
i just hate america, that's all
So we are okay with risking added chemicals in our water supply to save our pipes but not our children's dental health?
freddy Besides, if fluoride is toxic/causes cancer/whatever bad thing the No campaign says, why aren't they showing me the stats that show that Bad Thing happening at elevated rates in every other major American city and also every other city in the Portland metro area that fluoridates? If they're right, those stats ought to be compelling, right?
This.
EDIT: Loose thread already mentioned the chemicals! Nice job LT sry I missed your earlier comment.
it's cool if i'm wrong this time too
because i have no power really
This is the kind of thing that I don't think a lot of people understand. In my own experience - I've worked with diabetics who literally have limbs FALLING OFF OF THEIR BODIES - they are missing toes, or feet, and their legs are so swollen they can't walk, and they come to this place to get a free lunch and go straight for the apple pie and chocolate cake. Those people KNOW they should not eat that cake, YT! And here is this organization providing a FREE lunch with all sorts of vegetables and lean meats, etc.
So, back to fluoridation, I just imagine my sister reading comments like "Why don't we just provide more education?" coming from people who do not work with these populations and wanting to respond, "Hey, you know who really cares about these people? I do. I care about them so much that I devoted my entire career, took a significant pay cut, drive out to the boondocks every single day when I could be spending that commute time with my own little babies, to try to help these people via free treatment and free educational outreach. And I'm saying we need fluoride."
(I'm totally putting words in her mouth)
Don't you see how frustrating that would be, though?
First off, I really appreciate how the debate has not come up on UHX until now. It's been a nice break from all the extreme hyperbole and lack of civility swirling around this issue.
I understand not trusting the goverment, generally, but I do personally trust the CDC. I do not feel the CDC is out to get me. The CDC did not let black men with syphilis go untreated so as to observe what happens when you reach the tertiary level of infection (that was the precursor to the NIH). I do not feel the CDC is in the pocket of "big fluoride".
From my friends working in the medical field - fluoridating the water is seen as one of the greatest public health successes of the 20th century, right next to eradicating polio.
There is already fluoride in our water, it occurs naturally, just not at levels enough to provide preventative benefit.
Every time you drink a beer that is not made & bottled in Portland you are already drinking fluoridated water.
Genetics play a big part in dental health, along with diet and tooth-brushing, etc, but voting against this measure will most greatly affect POOR CHILDREN, especially minority populations.
To me there are big similarities in the anti-fluoride and anti-vaccine debates, but many of my friends who would never be against vaccinating kids are totally against fluoridation, which is weird to see in my fb feed (does not affect my love for them tho). It feels like we are back in the Bush era of being "anti-experts", ie "my gut says it's bad, I gots to trust my gut, whatever snobby egghead "experts"".
I am not sure if I agree on the basic premise of letting the public decide matters of public health...if we had a vote on immunization requirements for school attendance, would we currently have a SUPER MASSIVE pertussis & measles epidemic instead of just a small one? Given Oregon's history and mindset, if you could vote on it, miscegenation would probably still be illegal.
Anecdotally, when I moved to Portland I was really shocked by how jacked so many people's teeth were/are, and I had been living in poor areas of NYC and Chicago. It could be all the meth as much as the lack of fluoride though, honestly.
unrelated - Fluoride in crystal form is incredibly beautiful and one of my favorite minerals.
SO MANY THOUGHTS, I APOLOGIZE.
Obviously I know not everyone is like the parent I described, and obviously I think more access and more education are important. It's complex.
SINK THREAD!
BUT.
this is exhibit a of why UHX is so lovely - even with the most contentious debate in recent Oregon history, no one here is calling people with other opinions a stupid doodoo head or whatever. They are explaining their feelings, or sharing their facts, or whatever, in a fairly calm manner, and not denying the other side's basic humanity. I really appreciate you guys.
ok YT said get off my land but that's JOKES, FOLKS.
PS I ALSO HATE AMERICA. Or at least certain aspects of it, deeply.
SINK THIS THREAD FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND TO PROTECT OUR FREEDOM
They can take our tooth decay, but they can't take, ER FREEDUMS! /braveheart
#FUCKTEETH
#OHWAIT
#IDONTKNOWWHATIBELIEVEANYMORE
#SINKTHISTHREAD
HTN = hypertension
At this point, I'm not sure what to think! I've never had a cavity. I grew up "not poor" but I'm pretty poor right now.
Fluoride does not substitute whatsoever for basic dental hygiene: brushing and flossing. Those inhibit plaque buildup. Bacterial plaque produces the acid upon consuming sugars that cause cavities.
And fluoride cannot prevent decay from acidic foods or acid reflux. Sugared soft drinks are doubly evil: carbonic acid and sugar.
Fluoride cannot prevent decay from insufficient production of saliva, which acts to neutralize acid in the mouth.
Yes, fluoride does strengthen enamel when the teeth are growing in specific childhood years. Yes, it yellows teeth. I had fluoride tablets as a kid and mine are yellow. But I have only had a single cavity in my life. No plans to be a film star. So dietary fluoride works. I would recommend fluoride tablets and treatments at specific young ages.
The Portland water system produces between 80 and 140 billion gallons per year. Of the about 900,000 customers, from the census about 20% are in ages under 18. Ages that can benefit from dietary fluoride are under 6. So maybe 7% Of that 60,000 maybe 20% have insufficient dental care - 12,000. It is hard to imagine that they would consume more than a gallon a day of tap water. That would be 4.4 million gallons a year.
So we are going to fluoridate 80-140 billon gallons of water to maybe reach .005 - .003% (.00003) of effective consumption under the most optimistic assumptions they will drink a gallon of tap water a day? Seriously? What if they drink less or none? The figures speak for themselves.
But salmon, goldfish, hamsters, dogs and cats without dental care will have steely teeth in case they are eating Voodoo Donuts.
Meanwhile don't we have 100% coverage of children under the Oregon Health Plan, and have health, and even dental programs, in schools? A perfect setting for fluoride tablets! Fluoride tablets cost $.50 per year per person, Portland fluoridation: over $40 per year per at risk kid. And at the same time, through those existing systems, we could engage behavior with those kids: diet, brushing, flossing - each much more effective than dietary fluoride. Hey, give out fluoridated toothpaste too! Free.
I'm an almost 100% supporter of public health analysis. But fluoride in water has become a groupthink in dental and city circles. It's a feel good fix that is not very effective. It is 1950's thinking, when the idea was conceived: the 20th century. We are in the 21st now.
Here are two narratives. "We used our existing public health infrastructure to assess children, provide treatment and measure results." Vs "We used averages from other cities and the CDC and did the recommended, pat on back."
Portland can do the better, and we have all the health infrastructure to do better *in place and funded today*.
So let's be effective rather than let's feel good.
But flossy, when I say "education" I mean something much, much deeper than just "telling people not to put soda in their babies' bottles." If that's all "education" was (the receipt of information) then everyone in America would be very smart and would never make bad decisions.
Also, if soda is made with fluoridated water and all these poor kids are drinking is soda....
But I'd be curious to hear more about your thoughts on dental education. What do you think we're not doing that we should be doing? I honestly know next to nothing about it (aside from what my sister does with a very specific population).
PS: Many beers and sodas already have fluoride in them because they are bottled in places with fluoride.
I don't agree with the FL bandaid on a bunch of bad habits.
Stop allowing food stamps to buy snacks. Give out free tablets. More access to dental care. Teach pediatric doctors primary dental care.
There are so many things we can put into place before we change the entire water supply.
Besides water, kids are often drinking juice and milk, especially when they are in school. Unfortunately, there's no fluoride in juice and milk. Some kids may be drinking soda, I don't know how common that actually is. But there are plenty of kids who don't drink soda, so let's not depend on it as a source of fluoride.
Dr Hayward makes a lot of good points. His argument is the most convincing anti-fluoride argument I've seen. And apparently there is already a program in Portland schools to give free fluoride tablets to kids, but you have to request it. But I'd imagine the kids who are drinking lots of soda don't have parents who would make that request. I would love to see a more aggressive push for getting fluoride to kids, especially if the current fluoridation measure fails.
I'm not sure where I stand on the issue anymore, but I'd note there's a benefit from adults drinking fluoride:
Citing a 1990 study, the CDC points out that the amount of fluoride secreted in the saliva of people in fluoridated communities is negligible—probably not enough to ward off decay. But the organization also says the mere act of drinking a glass of fluoridated water raises the fluoride in your saliva for an hour or two. This, according to the American Dental Association, "continually bathes the teeth, providing a reservoir of fluoride that can be incorporated into the tooth surface to prevent decay."
And for what it's worth, lolo, I don't think putting limits on what people can buy with food stamps is a solution (to cavities or any other problems like obesity or diabetes). Poor people's choices are already limited, and food stamps are already a stigma. Making it even harder to buy "snacks" seems like it would make that worse. Where do you draw the line between healthy and unhealthy food? Would shoppers have to check every item in their cart against a "allowed or not allowed list"? Wisconsin is trying to do this, and their list of allowed foods is bizarre and nonsensical. It's really hard to set standards on what's "good" food and what's "bad" food, and I don't relish the idea of leaving that decision in the hands of politicians or bureaucrats. Ultimately, It's an idea rooted in good intentions, but to me, it's a little paternalistic. "Let us tell you what to eat." I'd rather let people make their own choices, especially when they're struggling enough.
The notion that the CDC is out to poison people? Really?