POH

12 Mar, 20 tweets, 9 min read

Putting "ideology ahead of science", in its purest form.
dentistrytoday.com/news/todays-de…

In 2019, proponents of fluoride and fluoridation were broken hearted to see the National Toxicology Program (NTP) draft a monograph citing some of the same safety concerns they had been raising.

Citing NTP’s draft document, proponents of fluoridation declared that science was on their side.

"Science works by experiments that can be repeated” -|-
The "experiment" of #fluoridation to prevent #toothdecay has been repeated for 7 decades. If it worked, tooth decay would not be the number one problem encountered in childhood. #Dental schools would be closing. #NotScience

Talking about no science. -|- "Despite progress, we know that people of color and those at lower income levels remain at greater risk for decay."

How does the caries process know how much money a patient has, or what color their skin is? It doesn't. When all your thinking is centered around money, one says this sort of thing. #FilthyLucre ruins more #Science than stupidity does. #Twofer

Nobody has any current longitudinal studies on caries rates (that they will share). One cannot know any change w/o that data. -|- "Discouraging people from receiving the benefits of topical fluoride and fluoridated tap water could lead to a significant spike in dental disease."

All that study showed is #Dentists in Alaska worked a little harder. There was no spike in caries, only a spike in business. That was the only data they had. $ is really studied! -|- "A study conducted in Alaska’s capital city showed this happened after water fluoridation ended."

Since the author was negligent in providing a link to the NTP report, here is a link. Funny, this has a revision date of Sept. 2020. #StannousFoilHats are outdated, even in their blather. fluoridealert.org/wp-content/upl…

Just a #FluorideFriday fact.

Cherry picking quotes is fun. Excluding the full text, and using things out of context, is at best misleading.

They ended their apologetic w an admission. 😢
"The identified study should be viewed as part of the research effort to investigate possible associations between fluoride exposure & neurological development in children. Together with a larger body of evidence on this topic, ..."

" ... further well conducted research is needed to reduce
uncertainty."
-|-
The argument that the CADTH pooh pooh'd the Green paper is perfidious. They admitted they haven't a clue. #TheyDontKnowAndTheyDoItAnyway. #EndFluoridationNow. It may be too late for this generation.

Ignorance is what happens when one does "A limited literature search".
This is what they did.
A limited literature search.

Pay close attention to the actual search term used by CADTH. Tricky, that. Which would limit the scope, for sure.
Do any of the #StannousFoilHats read any of the papers they say support the practice of adding bioavailable #fluorine to our diet?

Appears not. Or, if they do, a valiant attempt at spinning the paper is made. Making discoveries is what Science is all about. Trying to disprove science done by others is criticism, nothing more. Like they said back in 1951, they have no data.

Imagine the mindset that thinks adding #fluorine to their diet, in such quantities that it damages the teeth of 1 of 5 kids, is a good idea for preventing decay in those same kids? Baffling in the light of current research.
#PreciousBodilyFluids, y'all. #EndFluoridationNow