Misinformation campaigns increasingly target the cavity-fighting mineral, prompting communities to reverse mandates. Dentists are enraged. Parents are caught in the middle.

Misinformation campaigns increasingly target the cavity-fighting mineral, prompting communities to reverse mandates. Dentists are enraged. Parents are caught in the middle.

The culture wars have a new target: your teeth.

Communities across the U.S. are ending public water fluoridation programs, often spurred by groups that insist that people should decide whether they want the mineral — long proven to fight cavities — added to their water supplies.

The push to flush it from water systems seems to be increasingly fueled by pandemic-related mistrust of government oversteps and misleading claims, experts say, that fluoride is harmful.

“The anti-fluoridation movement gained steam with Covid,” said Dr. Meg Lochary, a pediatric dentist in Union County, North Carolina. “We’ve seen an increase of people who either don’t want fluoride or are skeptical about it.”

There should be no question about the dental benefits of fluoride, Lochary and other experts say. Major public health groups, including the American Dental Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, support the use of fluoridated water. All cite studies that show it reduces tooth decay by 25%.

    • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
      223·
      7 months ago

      LMAO all your sources are YouTube videos but you’re trying to act like you’re making a serious science backed argument!!

      “I’m not one of the crazies guys, sure I’m arguing for the same stuff, but I watched the REAL research videos, you have to believe me”

      • Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        313·
        7 months ago

        If you had bothered to watch the videos, you’d have noticed that they cite and link the primary source research studies they refer to. The position they take is also rather nuanced - not “fluoride bad” but “There is not insignificant but not overwhelming evidence that fluoride intake should be reduced during pregnancy”

        • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          182·
          7 months ago

          Hi! I’m a scientist. A microbiologist, even. If I watched the video evidence every Internet person threw at me, I’d likely still be catching up to a backlog from my twenties. It’s time consuming and, more often than not, completely full of insane conspiracy theories.

          If there’s even any primary research referenced, then you have to vet that to determine if the video makers even interpreted it correctly. If they haven’t, that’s an entire extra step where you argue with the person providing the video about how the research was misrepresented or misunderstood.

          So GTFO of here with “if you had bothered to watch the videos”. It’s “if the OP had bothered to link the actual research”.

          We’re not going to do the work of substantiating someone’s point for them.

          • Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            310·
            7 months ago

            As your linked site points out, they rated that way based on a bias toward veganism. Since fluoride is not animal based, that doesn’t have any bearing on this particular topic.

            • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              61·
              7 months ago

              No, they rated it that way because the author makes claims relating to veganism that either cherry picked or aren’t supported by science. It’s not a stretch to posit that someone who makes spurious claims about nutrition would make spurious claims relating to anything else.

              And I quote:

              …Science-Based Medicine debunks one by one, many of Dr. Gregers claims. They also claim that NutritionFacts cherry-picks information that will always favor veganism.

        • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          101·
          7 months ago

          Big ooof. You’re awfully cocky for someone who doesn’t know how to vet their sources. You know anyone can get a .org domain, right? And that anyone can start a non-profit? I could start the non-profit Cat Food for Health (catfoodfacts.org) that promotes a CFBD (cat food based diet) for humans in no time.

          If you’re going to throw around “changing science” claims, come back when you have peer reviewed journal articles. Internet videos have long been the gold standard evidence stating “I’m completely insane” so it’s not a good look, even if they might contain any valid information.

          Edit: I have purchased catfoodfacts.org, CFBD website forthcoming.

            • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              5·
              7 months ago

              It’ll take a bit, work gets in the way of everything. It may be mostly MS Paint based which I know boosts credibility to at least 10x that of a YouTube video.

            • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              6·
              7 months ago

              Your response is primarily surprisingly boring, childish insults… and you’re asking if I’m the stable person? I get that you need to deflect from the fact you don’t have any response beyond “nuh uh!” but maybe put a little effort into it next time. At least make it interesting.

            • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
              5·
              7 months ago

              When you’re so fragile that the slightest constructive criticism makes you throw a little tantrum, maybe arguing on social media isn’t the best fit for you.