Major health groups support water fluoridation as a public health benefit and emphasize that the practice is safe.

Summary

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that a Trump administration would prioritize removing fluoride from public water systems, a position at odds with major health organizations like the CDC, the American Dental Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics, all of which endorse water fluoridation as safe and beneficial for dental health.

Despite Kennedy’s controversial stance on health and environmental issues, which includes previously debunked claims linking vaccines to autism, Trump has praised his passion, stating that Kennedy would have significant freedom to influence health policy if Trump were elected.

  • @[email protected]
    31•23 days ago

    The issue is not whether fluoride is good or bad. Conservatives vilify medical experts as “woke” and it that as a reason to dismiss their advice.

    I too can cherry pick an article to support my position. The number of cavities in children born in Calgary, Canada within the decade after they removed fluoride from their water was higher than nearby Edmonton who kept fluoride.

    We can argue about who has more links to support their argument; or we can argue about whether politicians should govern based on the recommendations of experts, or trust that “they know best”.

      • @airglowEnglish
        31•23 days ago

        The article you linked explicitly concludes:

        Overall, despite the remaining uncertainties, and based on the totality of evidence the present review does not support the presumption that fluoride should be considered as a human developmental neurotoxicant at current exposure levels in European countries.

      • JayEnglish
        27•23 days ago

        … And it literally actually says it’s not a concern.

      • @[email protected]
        22•23 days ago

        When you dismiss other scientific evidence like this, it makes it seem less like you are mindfully sharing research for open discussion, and more like you have a link to use as “ammunition” to defend the conclusion you’ve already reached (and won’t be reasoned out of)

        • @[email protected]English
          16•23 days ago

          These people use research the same way a drunkard uses a lamppost - for support rather than illumination.

          (Paraphrasing)

        • skulblaka
          9•23 days ago

          And didn’t even fucking read the article they are attempting to use as ammunition, to boot, the article specifically denies the point they’re trying to make

      • @[email protected]
        7•23 days ago

        Claims to not have cherry picked anything yet follows up with the claim that scientists are fake experts and he doesn’t listen to them.

        You’ve exposed your ruse here, bud.

          • @[email protected]
            7•23 days ago

            I’m not putting words in your mouth, you clearly don’t think they’re experts by your use if the snarky quotes around it and stated “you people worship” which obviously excludes yourself from that category.

            If you’re trying to challenge people, why aren’t you replying to the multitude of comments pointing out that the study you linked doesn’t say what you think it does?