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%.

    • @GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      577 months ago

      Every single scientific study regarding the use of fluoride in drinking water to help protect oral health. Link me a scientific study that proves flouride in drinking water is harmful.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          fedilink
          197 months ago

          try to understand that scientific consensus once said that it’s safe to put lead in gasoline, paint, and pipes.

          Please show this consensus.

            • @snooggums@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              297 months ago

              Ah yes, comparing lies from for profit companies to actual science done by medical providers is a very valid comparison.

              Wait, not it isn’t. The article shows how real science overcame blatant lying.

              You played yourself.

              • @john89@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                -307 months ago

                At the time, people couldn’t tell the difference.

                That’s my point.

                Do you just believe all scientific consensus as fact?

                • @NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  217 months ago

                  It’s more useful to follow scientific consensus and update your reasoning in the presence of new evidence than it is to label something a contaminate while providing no data to support that position.

                  • @john89@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -25
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    That’s a dangerous path to go down, considering scientific consensus once thought lobotomies were appropriate treatment for unruly housewives, lead was acceptable to put in… pretty much everything, tobacco isn’t as bad as you think, burning fossil fuels doesn’t cause global warming… etc etc. (don’t get me started on nutrition)

                    You know what’s really useful? Understanding the science yourself. That’s difficult though, which is why most people treat it like a religion.

                    Have faith.