Dinah Sanders

Dinah Sanders


Currently self-employed as a writer, I hold degrees in History and Library Science. I put these skills to work on cocktail history and taxonomy in The Art of the Shim: Low-Alcohol Cocktails to Keep You Level and on the Bibulo.us blog. My first book, Discardia: More Life, Less Stuff, explored letting go of what doesn’t make life awesome.

Following (2)

Office of the City Administrator
Ryan Freitas

Followers (11)

Michael Nulty
Tom K.
Мартин Стојчевски
Eckhart Beatty
Andy
Tyler
Dan
Shawn K. Quinn
Adriana
Laura Gluhanich
Neighborland

Recent Activity

Dinah Sanders

Please also see:
The Surgeon General and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) position www.publichealthreports.org/do...

Community Preventive Services Task Force, an independent, nonfederal, unpaid panel of public health experts, which concluded that research evidence "does not demonstrate that community water fluoridation results in any unwanted health effect other than dental fluorosis" (white spots on teeth)
www.thecommunityguide.org/oral...
In 2011, the CDC proposed a new level for fluoridation — 0.7 parts per million [it was previously 0.7-1.2] — that is expected to reduce the likelihood of fluorosis while continuing to protect teeth from decay.

Scientific Reviews and Reports: Assessing the Evidence (CDC)
www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/safet...

The American Academy of Pediatrics
ilikemyteeth.org/fluoridation/
"A 2010 study examined the issue of fluorosis and infant formula, and reached the conclusion that 'no general recommendations to avoid use of fluoridated water in reconstituting infant formula are warranted.' The researchers examined the condition’s impact on children and concluded that 'the effect of mild fluorosis was not adverse and could even be favorable.'"

Seems like this may be, like measles and whooping cough immunizations, one of those things where a benefit which heavily outweighs its (in this case minor) risks is no longer recognized as a major benefit once it has succeeded in radically reducing a significant health problem. A few generations in, people have forgotten what it was like before.

Dan
Dan
Jun 16, 2015

Thanks Dinah ... a friend from Portland shared these insights as well - www.usatoday.com/story/news/na...

Posted by Dan on Jun 16, 2015
Galen Maloney
Galen Maloney
Jun 23, 2015

Appreciate the links Dinah and your contribution to the debate, but they seem to simply support the standard line of government agencies and mainstream institutions. Changing the way things are being done is never easy and I don't think we should count on our institutions to police themselves and admit to having been mistaken with the fluoride experiment. And I was not able to view the actual studies and methodologies, as the links just gave summaries of the findings. But even if the studies were found to be credible, the best case scenario is that adding fluoride to our water supply is not that harmful But if thats the case, why are we adding this chemical to our drinking supply? Why take the risk? I trust the independence and credibility of the studies showing that fluoride has no significant benefit against tooth decay. But all I am saying is that the people of SF should decide, just like they did in Portland. Let their be a public campaign where the various studies can be vetted and analyzed and we'll let lady liberty and democracy decide.

Posted by Galen Maloney on Jun 23, 2015
Dinah Sanders
Dinah Sanders
Jun 25, 2015

The best case scenario—which is well-supported by a lot of good scientific research that has been repeatedly revisited and found to still be accurate—is that adding fluoride to water supplies radically reduces the incidence of dental caries in people of all ages, without adding significant health risks, and that this reduction in dental issues dramatically alleviates a major source of and contributor to of a wide variety health problems.

Consider the possibility that the reason this is the standard line of government agencies and mainstream institutions is that the findings are solid and that this is a substantial public good.

Seems like you're starting from a position that no scientific findings endorsed by any publicly-funded institutions could possibly be valid.

Posted by Dinah Sanders on Jun 25, 2015
Sign up or sign in to add a reply.