The conversation about fluoride’s health benefits has exploded recently after a US federal toxicology report, court ruling and independent scientific review all called for updated risk-benefit analysis. Ian Sample hears from Catherine Carstairs, professor of history at the University of Guelph in Canada, about how attitudes to fluoridation have evolved, and Oliver Jones, professor of chemistry at RMIT University in Australia, about where the science stands today
pull down to refresh
related posts
30 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined 28 Nov
People suddenly feel empowered to question received beliefs.
Your colleagues have lost control of the narrative.
reply
34 sats \ 2 replies \ @Imyourfed OP 28 Nov
There's a lot of debate on this now. Curious to see where it all leads
reply
37 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 28 Nov
Even people like me, who don't think it's a sinister plot to lower IQ's and make people more compliant, don't see how this delivery mechanism makes any sense.
I think we're going to see this play out on topic after topic.
reply
35 sats \ 0 replies \ @Imyourfed OP 28 Nov
Yeah I get that. The way it's delivered raises some questions. I'll be interested to see how this kind of debate plays out with other issues too.
reply
11 sats \ 0 replies \ @DesertDave 28 Nov
It's great for calcifying the pineal gland is what I hear. I grew up in Tucson, one of the few cities that doesn't put in the water, or so I am told. 🤷♂️
reply