New posts

Reply to thread

Message

Yes the evidence is in and it's no strawman arguement or diatribe... unless you consider the likes of;

Chronic fluoride toxicity: dental fluorosis.

Denbesten P, Li W.

Department of Orofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of California, San Francisco, USA. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21701193

published in 2011, as diatribal strawmen. The graph shown below gives a better understanding of the increasing fluorosis rate in the USA. As mentioned, other reports talk about the rate increasing to over 30%.

The blue bars are the 1986/87 USA national survey and the green is the 1999 - 2004.

What is noticable is the considerable decrease of people unaffected or questionable and significant increase in mild to severe percentage of fluorosis... and this is not even from the beginning of fluoridation in the USA.

So, before I get drawn into the changing dynamics of the financials of dentistry with fluoridation, lets establish that fluoridation means a considerable increase of fluorosis to start with.

<blockquote data-quote="Whiskers" data-source="post: 763209" data-attributes="member: 10916">Yes the evidence is in and it&#039;s no strawman arguement or diatribe... unless you consider the likes of;Chronic fluoride toxicity: dental fluorosis.

Denbesten P, Li W.

Department of Orofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of California, San Francisco, USA. <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21701193" target="_blank">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21701193</a> published in 2011, as diatribal strawmen. The graph shown below gives a better understanding of the increasing fluorosis rate in the USA. As mentioned, other reports talk about the rate increasing to over 30%.The blue bars are the 1986/87 USA national survey and the green is the 1999 - 2004. What is noticable is the considerable decrease of people unaffected or questionable and significant increase in mild to severe percentage of fluorosis... and this is not even from the beginning of fluoridation in the USA. So, before I get drawn into the changing dynamics of the financials of dentistry with fluoridation, lets establish that fluoridation means a considerable increase of fluorosis to start with.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Whiskers, post: 763209, member: 10916"] Yes the evidence is in and it's no strawman arguement or diatribe... unless you consider the likes of; [INDENT][B]Chronic fluoride toxicity: dental fluorosis.[/B] [I]Denbesten P, Li W.[/I] Department of Orofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of California, San Francisco, USA. [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21701193[/url] [/INDENT] published in 2011, as diatribal strawmen. The graph shown below gives a better understanding of the increasing fluorosis rate in the USA. As mentioned, other reports talk about the rate increasing to over 30%. The blue bars are the 1986/87 USA national survey and the green is the 1999 - 2004. What is noticable is the considerable decrease of people unaffected or questionable and significant increase in mild to severe percentage of fluorosis... and this is not even from the beginning of fluoridation in the USA. So, before I get drawn into the changing dynamics of the financials of dentistry with fluoridation, lets establish that fluoridation means a considerable increase of fluorosis to start with. [/QUOTE]

Verification