6 ms·

Default water, lol. What an incredibly, terribly, dumb argument. There is no such thing as "Default Water" - it neither exists in nature, nor in man-made syst

by RajT88 2y ago

Default water, lol. What an incredibly, terribly, dumb argument. There is no such thing as "Default Water" - it neither exists in nature, nor in man-made systems. Good luck with that. We can - and should - modify our our systems in the interests of public health. Nothing comes without corner cases which impact people like you - them's the breaks. Life isn't fair, but we are engineering a society for the benefit of almost everyone in it. People can choose not to drink flouridated tap water if they want - building a well isn't that expensive, although you will probably need a treatment system because of the naturally occurring stuff (minerals, hydrogen sulphide, possibly excess flouride and other stuff). "Freedom isn't free", as they like to say. You may have to invest in your "freedom" to drink the water you want to drink. You will have to pay the price of your kids not getting vaccinated - they may not be able to go to public schools. There are much bigger hills worth dying on (see: Flint, MI). Leave the wildly successful public health programs alone.

amazingamazing 2y ago
> People can choose not to drink flouridated tap water if they want - building a well isn't that expensive, although you will probably need a treatment system because of the naturally occurring stuff (minerals, hydrogen sulphide, possibly excess flouride and other stuff). that's hilarious because brushing your teeth is more effective, and cheaper than adding fluoride to water. I'm sure people in Manhattan will really get on building those wells. at the end of the day there's not a single paper that actually says ingesting fluoride is water. they all correlate incidental fluoride contact on the teeth, due to it being in the water. fact is, brushing your teeth is more effective and has no downsides. ingesting fluoride is bad and is discouraged literally not only by all dentists, but this fact is present on all toothpaste in the usa.
- RajT88 2y ago
  Thank you for demonstrating that you don't understand how public health programs work.
  - amazingamazing 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - RajT88 2y ago
      More bad faith talking points - which have been addressed by other commenters in other sub-threads responding to you. (I am able to read those, you know) This is a dead horse. You're in the wrong. Please do not engage with me any more.
      - amazingamazing 2y ago
        they haven't though. feel free to post a paper showing that fluoride ingestion is good for you. there's no dispute that fluoride contact on the teeth is good. there are plenty of papers showing that *ingestion* may be bad for you and results in lower IQ. feel free to research. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/research/assessments/noncancer/completed/fluoride https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/research/assessments/noncancer/com...
        RajT88 2y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
      - ifyoubuildit 2y ago
        > Default water, lol. What an incredibly, terribly, dumb argument. > More bad faith talking points Do you talk to people like this in person? If not, why not? (If so, how's that working out for you?)
        RajT88 2y ago
        Hello, Pro-RFK policy guy! I see you're taking a play from the right-wing playbook: If you can't refute a thing you want to refute, complain about decorum instead.
- ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
  Despite people knowing about the effectiveness of brushing teeth with fluoride toothpaste, there are benefits (less cavities in young people) to having a certain level of fluoride in the water. Presumably, not everyone is good at brushing their teeth, yet we can improve dental health by adding in some fluoride in those areas that have low or no fluoride naturally in their water supply.
  - gazebo64 2y ago
    >Presumably, not everyone is good at brushing their teeth Is it fair that everyone is forced to ingest this chemical for the benefit of people who can't or won't engage in their own basic hygiene?
    - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
      That sounds like a child's argument - "it's not fair!". It's basic public health logic - is it a net benefit to the population to add fluoride to the water supply and at a suitable price point or is there a more effective method to achieve the desired outcome? Meanwhile, we have toxic tyre pollution being released into the very air that we breathe which has no known benefit to the population's health and has been shown to lead to heart/lung problems and early deaths. Is that fair?
      - gazebo64 2y ago
        > is it a net benefit to the population to add fluoride to the water supply and at a suitable price point or is there a more effective method to achieve the desired outcome What if I don't care about that outcome if it means my water supply is tainted with a chemical I have no desire to ingest? Is it incomprehensible to you that somebody may not be particularly concerned with a statistical decrease in cavities for people that can't be bothered to brush their teeth if it means being force-fed a potential neurotoxin?
        ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
        It's a public health matter. If you don't care about public health then I personally don't care what you think.

by RajT88 2y ago

amazingamazing 2y ago

> People can choose not to drink flouridated tap water if they want - building a well isn't that expensive, although you will probably need a treatment system because of the naturally occurring stuff (minerals, hydrogen sulphide, possibly excess flouride and other stuff). that's hilarious because brushing your teeth is more effective, and cheaper than adding fluoride to water. I'm sure people in Manhattan will really get on building those wells. at the end of the day there's not a single paper that actually says ingesting fluoride is water. they all correlate incidental fluoride contact on the teeth, due to it being in the water. fact is, brushing your teeth is more effective and has no downsides. ingesting fluoride is bad and is discouraged literally not only by all dentists, but this fact is present on all toothpaste in the usa.

RajT88 2y ago
Thank you for demonstrating that you don't understand how public health programs work.
- amazingamazing 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - RajT88 2y ago
    More bad faith talking points - which have been addressed by other commenters in other sub-threads responding to you. (I am able to read those, you know) This is a dead horse. You're in the wrong. Please do not engage with me any more.
    - amazingamazing 2y ago
      they haven't though. feel free to post a paper showing that fluoride ingestion is good for you. there's no dispute that fluoride contact on the teeth is good. there are plenty of papers showing that *ingestion* may be bad for you and results in lower IQ. feel free to research. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/research/assessments/noncancer/completed/fluoride https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/research/assessments/noncancer/com...
      - RajT88 2y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
    - ifyoubuildit 2y ago
      > Default water, lol. What an incredibly, terribly, dumb argument. > More bad faith talking points Do you talk to people like this in person? If not, why not? (If so, how's that working out for you?)
      - RajT88 2y ago
        Hello, Pro-RFK policy guy! I see you're taking a play from the right-wing playbook: If you can't refute a thing you want to refute, complain about decorum instead.
ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
Despite people knowing about the effectiveness of brushing teeth with fluoride toothpaste, there are benefits (less cavities in young people) to having a certain level of fluoride in the water. Presumably, not everyone is good at brushing their teeth, yet we can improve dental health by adding in some fluoride in those areas that have low or no fluoride naturally in their water supply.
- gazebo64 2y ago
  >Presumably, not everyone is good at brushing their teeth Is it fair that everyone is forced to ingest this chemical for the benefit of people who can't or won't engage in their own basic hygiene?
  - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
    That sounds like a child's argument - "it's not fair!". It's basic public health logic - is it a net benefit to the population to add fluoride to the water supply and at a suitable price point or is there a more effective method to achieve the desired outcome? Meanwhile, we have toxic tyre pollution being released into the very air that we breathe which has no known benefit to the population's health and has been shown to lead to heart/lung problems and early deaths. Is that fair?
    - gazebo64 2y ago
      > is it a net benefit to the population to add fluoride to the water supply and at a suitable price point or is there a more effective method to achieve the desired outcome What if I don't care about that outcome if it means my water supply is tainted with a chemical I have no desire to ingest? Is it incomprehensible to you that somebody may not be particularly concerned with a statistical decrease in cavities for people that can't be bothered to brush their teeth if it means being force-fed a potential neurotoxin?
      - ndsipa_pomu 2y ago
        It's a public health matter. If you don't care about public health then I personally don't care what you think.