Hi, I was looking at this material, and thought I’d post an answer to my niece, who asked the following question.
Fluoride has been tied to bone cancer, lower IQs, and osteoporosis. So why is it still being added to your water?
By Timothy Gower, Prevention magazine
My answer to her query is both specific, and also general as to the scientific method.
I thought some of the posts were quite enlightening, like that of Akashic Librarian/Chris Anthony.
HI, (to my niece) I understand your curiosity. As a lifelong scientist I will try to give you a partial reply; but don’t have a lot of time to look up related articles, etc. at this time.
There is one study apparently showing an increase in bone cancer in male children; though another similar study did not show this propensity. There are 400 cases of osteosarcoma in children diagnosed each year; 250 are males. The author admits that her study isn't all that large, and has some limitations, and further research is needed to confirm such a connection. I never really believe a first test, until scientists from another unrelated laboratory or clinical patient group confirm it. It is probably worthwhile to run another series.
It is time-consuming to research these reports in the literature properly (reading the entire original article; reading the author's discussion, reading comments by other respected researchers in the field, looking at the statistics, and looking at the statistical analysis to see which methods of statistical analysis they used; and trying to understand which should have been used, and trying to understand the particular analysis, etc.).
Did they use the one-sample t-test; one-sample median, binomial, Chi-square goodness of-fit, chi- square test, Fisher's exact test, one-way ANOVA, Wilcoxon-Mann whitney test, Kruskal Wallis, McNemar, Friedman, repeated measures logistic regression, factorial ANOVA, simple linear regression, non-parametric correlation, analysis of covariance, discriminant analysis, multivariate multiple linear regression, etc. I never used all of these myself. Some are appropriate in one situation and ludicrous in another.
Sometimes the answer seems obvious without any arcane mathematics that if 200 fellows go aloft in airplanes and parachute; and all those who used Brand A parachutes survived, and all who used Brand X parachutes were killed when they impacted the ground; that Brand X was at fault.
But, what if there were other variables, perhaps inadvertently unreported?
What if all the people who used Brand X were untrained, had average IQ's of 44, had osteogenesis imperfecta, and went up with an idiotic daredevil pilot, and jumped during high winds when over a lake or mountain peaks?
Whereas the guys using Brand A were all reasonably intelligent (personally have always wondered about the intelligence of skydivers - but never mind) experienced skydivers who jumped over open prairie or a huge expanse of sand on a pleasant windless day.
Sometimes the repeated experiment by others simply never gives the results of the original group, due to some inadvertent mistake or change in the test environment, or due to stupidity or malfeasance, or whatever. Remember the cold fusion test/debacle?
To my knowledge Fluoridation is probably safe if the dose is reasonable. Very high doses found NATURALLY in the groundwater can cause brownish mottling of the teeth (like my classmate, Marguerite). Extreme doses will show endemic fluorosis of the bones, with areas of increased density, changes in the growth "arrest" lines, some bone formation in soft tissues, etc. Too high a dose of even distilled pure water ingested over too short a time will kill. Too much Vitamin A will make your skin slough, and more will kill you.
When our boys went to England to fight the second war; they were shocked to find that the English who didn't fluoridate their water, bother too much with good dental practices, and were fond of sweets: had mostly rotted teeth. Even fairly young people. But, you could bet your month's pay that your English girlfriend's parents had rotted away half their teeth.
People a couple centuries ago believed that tomatoes were poison, and would not eat them; and a very long time ago that cats were good luck; and later that they were bad luck (especially black ones crossing your path).
A number of people believe they are being tracked by black helicopters; that meat won't rot if you put it under a wire pyramid of a certain size and proportions, and believe all the scariest stories about the bermuda triangle and Area 57, that Aluminum cooking utensils will surely kill you, that Elvis is still alive, that vegetarianism is the only way to live, that high colonic enemas are necessary for all mammals to live a healthy life, etc. No one can change their minds by showing them the best, most exhaustive heaping up of facts to refute their beliefs.
Beliefs are beliefs. Some believe in Muhammad and Allah, some don't. Some believe wrestling on TV is all real and on the up and up. Some believe minds can bend spoons; some believe spoons can bend minds.
I have told vegetarians that I will help them set up large groups of hunters and safaris to kill all the meat-eating animals in the world, and so get rid of all the evil meat-eating animals to make the world a better place, and make all vegetarians happy at last.
I find it a pain in the neck to argue a complex scientific logical question with someone on a blog who doesn't know what a peer review is, or what a double - blind test is, what Koch's Postulates mean, or have any idea how to prove a scientific principle. Archimedes and Hippocrates would be brought to tears to read some of the blogs.
I will only make so much effort to change minds. Right now I have some pressing matters and can't devote a lot of time to this. If I were one of the many sham scam artists; I would simply state a bunch of unsupported "facts" as the absolute truth, and have done with it.
Must get at some checks, property tax, investments, etc.
As I occasionally ended my lectures:
“I have just 2 more articles to read, and then I will know it all.”
Del