Aug. 1, 2012
"This social debate (there isn’t much of a scientific debate) crops up in the news every now and then – mostly prompted by an antifluoridation activist or group making noise, or by a local referendum to block fluoridation in a community. Recently there has been a Harvard study making the rounds of social media, Developmental Fluoride Neurotoxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The actual findings of the study do not show that there is any risk to public water fluoridation (if anything, they show that it is safe), but the study was seized upon by antifluoridation activists and distorted for their propaganda purposes. Unfortunately, the internet is now fertile ground for the spreading of propaganda..."
Amazing how pro-fluoride can twist words until you think you're going crazy! "Did the study say what I thought I read it to say?" The latest study about fluoride causing hardening of the arteries has received the same twist, to the point where it's not clear what the researchers really did conclude. What's needed is a video interview with the researchers of both studies, and have them tell in their own words what the conclusions were, instead of the various interpretations that are surfacing about them. That would clarify the studies' conclusions and end the confusion and name-calling against those who are anti-fluoride. What do YOU think?