Oh and let's throw in Media Bias, too. Or perhaps the lack of it.

In the interest of showing that I am not adverse to citing a FOX News report when it deserves acknowledgement, I happened upon this article regarding fluoridation of our water supplies and wanted to share it.

Talk about a nanny state.

Conservatives and liberals should be able to come together on this issue. Although studies show that adding fluoride to municipal water supplies reduces tooth decay in the population, the adverse effects are impossible to ignore. Well, if you ask the federal government, there are little or no adverse effects. Even though studies show that i.q. levels are lower in the youth whose water is fluoridated. Huh? Not only that, other studies link possible neurological effects to fluoride. According to the FOXNews article, "The EPA includes fluoride on their list of chemicals that have “substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.”

In New York State, a study showed an increase of premature births in communities with fluoridated water. Another study shows a strong link between fluoride in the water and a serious form of bone cancer in boys.

Although I commend FOX for reporting on this issue, I must point out a flaw in the article. They quote The Journal of Public Health Dentistry, who state that fluoride is more useful in preventing fluorosis that causes discoloration of the tooth enamel.* Here's a quote:

"Another issue is the benefit of drinking fluoridated water versus applying it topically. A 2008 study published in the Journal of Public Health Dentistry found that the benefits of fluoride are topical, and intake has more of an effect on dental fluorosis—a visible change in the tooth’s enamel that usually shows up as white markings but could be more severe—than on preventing cavities."

This contradicts what the commonly known cause of fluorosis is: too much fluoride. It affects infants and children between the ages of 3 months and 8 years most commonly.

This from Wiki:

"Dental fluorosis is a developmental disturbance of dental enamel caused by excessive exposure to high concentrations of fluoride during tooth development. The risk of fluoride overexposure occurs between the ages of 3 months and 8 years. In its mild forms (which are its most common), fluorosis often appears as unnoticeable, tiny white streaks or specks in the enamel of the tooth. In its most severe form, tooth appearance is marred by discoloration or brown markings. The enamel may be pitted, rough and hard to clean. [1] The spots and stains left by fluorosis are permanent and may darken over time."

If you think America has turned into a nanny state, there is no more of an example as the fluoridation of our water supply. Even Portland, OR, a bastion of far left liberals, has recently decided to fluoridate their water. For the good of the poor city kids.

What does this have to do about guns? I think a lot. Well, maybe not guns per se, but the increased mass shootings by the mentally ill. Adding toxic chemicals to our water supply, even in low doses only compounds the exposure to polluting chemicals that our youth are getting every day. If you think environmental pollutants aren't harming our society, do some research. Much of our growing mental health issues can be partly attributed to environmental contamination that so many are exposed to at unhealthy levels. Is it any wonder that developing brains are being adversely affected?

I have been opposed to fluoridation in water for many years. I did not give my sons fluoride drops as was recommended. My sons have about 3 cavities between them. Proper diet and dental care go a lot farther to prevent tooth decay than adding chemicals to the water.

The real decay is our society. Who should get to decide what is in our water? Our nanny?

Read more:

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/02/20/fluoride-necessary-or-too-much-good-thing/#ixzz2LphDa3P9

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dental_fluorosis

photo is of me before I got my fluorosis, or hypoplasia, on my teeth. grrrrr.....

Thanks for reading!

*After re-reading the quote above, I believe the study in the Journal was highlighting the advantage of fluoride in water as opposed to topical use as the latter could lead to fluorosis