Need real dialogue in fluoride debate

Need real dialogue in fluoride debate

I was disappointed to read the article that so boldly conjectured that fluoride should be used in bottled water. This is nothing but a fluoride industry sales pitch.

If you really want to be of help to the general public you would engender real dialogue. The headline of the alternate viewpoint might read, “Is fluoride making your children dumber?” or how about, “According to the CDC, dental fluorosis is now estimated at 41 percent among adolescents aged 12-15 in the U.S.” This one has real buzz, “Ten fluoride facts that the ADA doesn’t want you to know” That will get them reading the paper.

For well-reasoned and scientifically based information that would provide true health benefits for the readers of this paper, (Aren’t we worth it?) look to the information available at http://fluoridealert.org. You will find the most current science and living, concerned scientists and professionals with powerful information on the folly and dangers of water fluoridation. A simple request, is it not? My expectation is that your paper is here for the benefit of the people of this metropolitan area. Prove me right.

In the future, if you are going to allow articles that use generous parroting such as, “most other health authorities remain convinced that fluoridation benefits the general population,” please name the authorities and their affiliations. Let us decide if they are credible. Offer opposing viewpoints, let us see for ourselves. (Aren’t we smart enough?) My experience always leads me to “follow the money”, when dealing with anything that is put forward by public policy for the common good. It seems jaded, I agree, but it has always served me well.

Michael Doll

Naperville