What is there to say? America is full of idiots. Anyone for some vitamin A? How about some invermectin? Listening to actual experts is, after all, "elitist".
In related news, dental insurance rates for Utah residents skyrocket.... Yet another move by a Red state to distinguish itself--in a bad way. There are other red states contemplating this move. Two Canadian cities tried it a few years ago, but rescinded the ban when incidents of dental decay shot up.
Too bad Republicans don’t believe in science. Our history indicates that science has been very good. I guess history is too similar to science for some folks?
For decades, American attitudes toward science have been deeply polarized along political lines, with many Republicans expressing distrust in government and, by extension, in government-funded science. This polarization has led to a growing divide in how science is perceived across party lines. I believe everyone deserves access to accurate, unbiased information presented in an apolitical manner, with respect and without condescension. However, the reality is that much of the science that impacts our lives—such as environmental research, health studies, and public safety measures—comes from government agencies or scientists funded by the government. I recently came across a statistic showing that two-thirds of Democrats have "a great deal" of confidence in the scientific community, compared to just one-third of Republicans. This highlights a significant gap in trust between the two parties. It's clear that many Republicans remain skeptical of government science, but more needs to be done to bridge this divide and foster greater trust in the scientific community. We must find ways to present science that resonates with people from all political backgrounds, ensuring that facts and evidence can be trusted and understood, no matter where you stand politically. What sometimes seen is an effort to shock the public into action, exaggerate some dire scenarios. For example - It was "a bit over-the-top" to depict most Florida will be underwater, this will take centuries, and again, the model used was the most pessimistic
Just because Republicans tend to favor a policy doesn't mean that it's inherently unscientific: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/11/12/fluoride-water-rfk-jr-trump-public-health/ (Or: https://archive.ph/NLwaF) Same with bashing ivermectin, as later studies showed that it did have use as a treatment for COVID after all. (Intravenous bleach, though, not so much.)
You cannot make a claim about something without evidence and then retroactively use research to show it was correct. Also, Fluoride is safe in water and Ivermectin is not a covid treatment.
As opposed to making a claim about something without evidence and then deliberately ignoring research that shows it was incorrect? Because if one is unwillingness to change one's mind based on subsequent evidence, one has left science behind. Those used to be my statements of faith as well. But the evidence shows that it's not that simple.
Exactly, bingo. An effort to shock the public into action, exaggerate some dire scenarios based on gov sciense.
The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. The opinion piece cites studies that say high levels of fluoride are dangerous and the current levels are not.
Global warming is a dire scenario, I just made the point that Al Gore isn't a scientist so his analysis of this area of study isnt reputable. We need to take action on it, but we need to do so with advisement from experts.
What is this about? Epidemiological studies have suggested that fluoride is a human developmental neurotoxicant that reduces measures of intelligence in children. (lead, methylmercury, arsenic) Soluble fluorides, e.g., sodium fluoride (NaF), are almost completely absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract into the blood (Barbier et al. 2010; EFSA 2005) In addition to water Fluoride-containing toothpaste, gels, and rinses may increase total fluoride intake. Multiple studies concluded that higher fluoride exposure was associated with lower intelligence. Search criteria were: PubMed database for epidemiological studies published between January 2012 and August 2019 with the key words in the title/abstract including ‘fluoride’ and ‘IQ’. Almost all studies investigating the effect of fluoride intake on intelligence were performed in relatively poor, rural communities, e.g., in China, Iran, and Mongolia, where drinking water may contain comparatively high levels of fluoride. in areas where water is fluoridated with a precise dose of fluoride as a public health prevention measure, studies didn't show signs of reduction in measures of intelligence in children. Yet, studies had a lot of limitations. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7261729/ So far CDC assures that in the US fluoride levels are safe for consumption, but there are some inconclusive issues.
The practice of flouridating water has been going on for 80 years. It is far beyond any thrumped-up controversy. It works.
I remember when I was six years old living in Utah. So that would have been 1957. Someone came to our house and talked about the city plan to fluoridate our water.
