Is Fluoridated Drinking Water Safe?

Countries that do not fluoridate their water have also seen big drops in the rate of cavities.

Since the mid-1940s, compounds containing the mineral fluoride have been added to community water supplies throughout the U.S. to prevent tooth decay. Health concerns expressed by opponents have largely been dismissed until recently. Now, evidence is mounting that in an era of fluoridated toothpastes and other consumer products that boost dental health, the potential risks from consuming fluoridated water may outweigh the benefits for some individuals. Last summer, for the first time in 53 years, the U.S. Public Health Service lowered its recommended levels of fluoride in drinking water.

The Evidence

Beginning in the early 20th century, scientists linked high levels of naturally occurring fluoride in certain community water supplies to low levels of tooth decay. In 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan, became the first community in the world to add fluoride to tap water. When subsequent studies showed a significantly lower rate of cavities in schoolchildren, water fluoridation spread to other towns and cities. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention named community water fluoridation one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century.

But many experts now question the scientific basis for the intervention. In June 2015, the Cochrane Collaboration—a global independent network of researchers and health care professionals known for rigorous scientific reviews of public health policies—published an analysis of 20 key studies on water fluoridation. They found that while water fluoridation is effective at reducing tooth decay among children, “no studies that aimed to determine the effectiveness of water fluoridation for preventing caries [cavities] in adults met the review’s inclusion criteria.” *

The Cochrane report also concluded that early scientific investigations on water fluoridation (most were conducted before 1975) were deeply flawed. “We had concerns about the methods used, or the reporting of the results, in … 97 percent of the studies,” the authors noted. One problem: The early studies didn’t take into account the subsequent widespread use of fluoride-containing toothpastes and other dental fluoride supplements, which also prevent cavities. This may explain why countries that do not fluoridate their water have also seen big drops in cavity rates (see chart).

Read more here

Drinking water with flouride
Drinking water without flouride

Dr. William Hirzy, former VP of EPA’s HQ Union, Recommends Portland Flush Fluoridation Proposal

J. William Hirzy, Ph.D. | March 2013

Dr. William Hirzy, a former risk assessment scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency, explains why EPA Headquarters Union of Scientists and Professionals oppose fluoridation. This letter, written in March 2013, was sent to Clean Water Portland — a group that led a resoundingly successful effort to prevent the fluoridation of Portland, Oregon’s water supply.

In 1997 the EPA HQ scientists’ union voted to oppose water fluoridation.

My name is William Hirzy. I have a Ph.D. in chemistry from the University of Missouri. I’ve been involved in environmental and human health risk assessment for 35 years, in the chemical industry, then at EPA HQ as senior risk assessment scientist.

Since 1986, at EPA as a union officer, I’ve studied and followed the developing science on fluoride toxicity. I currently teach at American University.

Human breast milk contains 100 to 200 times less fluoride than fluoridated water.

By far, the best study ever undertaken of the efficacy of fluoridation as a dental cavities preventative was done by the U.S. National Institute of Dental Research. That study, published in 1990, failed to show a statistically significant reduction in cavity rates among 39,000 U.S. teenagers between those having fluoridated water and those not having it. The authors claimed an 18% reduction in cavities due to fluoridation, but were unable to show statistical significance – the hallmark of a conclusive epidemiology study.

The CDC now admits that fluoride’s effect on dental health is primarily after permanent teeth are in and exposed to fluoride on their surfaces. There is no need to swallow fluoride to experience this effect.

Read more here

Lightbulb conspiracy - Planned obsolescence

Once upon a time….. products were made to last. Then, at the beginning of the 1920s, a group of businessmen were struck by the following insight: ‘A product that refuses to wear out is a tragedy of business’ (1928). Thus Planned Obsolescence was born. Shortly after, the first worldwide cartel was set up expressly to reduce the life span of the incandescent light bulb, a symbol for innovation and bright new ideas, and the first official victim of Planned Obsolescence.
 
During the 1950s, with the birth of the consumer society, the concept took on a whole new meaning, as explained by flamboyant designer Brooks Stevens: ‘Planned Obsolescence, the desire to own something a little newer, a little better, a little sooner than is necessary…’.
 
The growth society flourished, everybody had everything, the waste was piling up (preferably far away in illegal dumps in the Third World) – until consumers started rebelling… Can the modern growth society survive without Planned Obsolescence? Did the eternal light bulb ever exist? How can a tiny chip ‘kill’ a product? How did two artists from New York manage to extend the lives of millions of iPods? Is Planned Obsolescence itself becoming obsolete?Cosima Dannoritzer
Source:IMDb

Sir Ken Robinson - Changing education paradigm

Creativity expert Sir Ken Robinson challenged the way we educate our children, championing a radical rethink of how our school systems cultivate creativity and acknowledge multiple types of intelligence.

In this talk from RSA Animate, Sir Ken Robinson lays out the link between 3 troubling trends: rising drop-out rates, schools’ dwindling stake in the arts, and ADHD. An important, timely talk for parents and teachers.

2010 TEDtalk

The Corporation

The documentary shows the development of the contemporary business corporation, from a legal entity that originated as a government-chartered institution meant to affect specific public functions to the rise of the modern commercial institution entitled to most of the legal rights of a person. The documentary concentrates mostly upon North American corporations, especially those in the United States.

The Corporation examines and criticizes corporate business practices. The film’s assessment is affected via the diagnostic criteria in the DSM-IV; Robert D. Hare, a University of British Columbia psychology professor and a consultant to the FBI, compares the profile of the contemporary profitable business corporation to that of a clinically diagnosed psychopath (however, Hare has objected to the manner in which his views are portrayed in the film; see “Critical reception” below).

The Corporation attempts to compare the way corporations are systematically compelled to behave with what it claims are the DSM-IV’s symptoms of psychopathy, e.g., the callous disregard for the feelings of other people, the incapacity to maintain human relationships, the reckless disregard for the safety of others, the deceitfulness (continual lying to deceive for profit), the incapacity to experience guilt, and the failure to conform to social norms and respect the law.