in the past hour
Spindles commented on Portland Voters Are Stoopid.
Thank you Portland! What a fantastic victory for common sense and what a dismal failure for anti-science pollution advocates.
May 20
Spindles commented on The City of Portland, Oregon Should Run for Washington Lieutenant Governor.
Fluoride is heartily enforced by Portland minority groups because it works. And no other reason ...
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-20…
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-20…
May 20
Spindles commented on The City of Portland, Oregon Should Run for Washington Lieutenant Governor.
May 20
Spindles commented on The City of Portland, Oregon Should Run for Washington Lieutenant Governor.
Yeah, and check out this tin-foil hat wearing fluoride denier. Vote yes for kids!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRLz4a7l…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRLz4a7l…
May 20
Spindles commented on The City of Portland, Oregon Should Run for Washington Lieutenant Governor.
Look at the type of anti-science dogma that is coming out of Portland: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PYej_OgZ…
It's no wonder those people are misinformed about what the CDC has called one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century!
It's no wonder those people are misinformed about what the CDC has called one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century!
May 6
Spindles commented on Portlanders Have a Very Uncivil Argument About Water Fluoridation.
Almost half the include IQ studies in the Harvard study were below 3ppm, well below the MCL. For the purposes of toxicology and the margin of safety, the variability of dose for 1 ppm will often hit 3 ppm (or 5ppm or more) equivalent, especially among infants who are formula fed.
Further, the amount of fluoride that would be dumped into the Columbia River directly from sewage treatment effluent is about the same as what was dumped into the river when we were having massive salmon die-off due to fluoride contamination from an aluminum smelter by the John Day Dam in the seventies and eighties. Studies were done in the late eighties on this issue, and they proved Salmon die at 0.2 to 0.5 ppm and cannot swim past even a temporary fluoride plume.
Further, the amount of fluoride that would be dumped into the Columbia River directly from sewage treatment effluent is about the same as what was dumped into the river when we were having massive salmon die-off due to fluoride contamination from an aluminum smelter by the John Day Dam in the seventies and eighties. Studies were done in the late eighties on this issue, and they proved Salmon die at 0.2 to 0.5 ppm and cannot swim past even a temporary fluoride plume.
May 3
Spindles commented on Portlanders Have a Very Uncivil Argument About Water Fluoridation.
Dental fluorosis is only the first sign of fluoride toxicity and in its most severe form, believe me it is not just a few white streaks. But hey, what's a few disfiguring streaks of discoloration on the surface of the tooth enamel when dealing with ... dental health?
May 3
Spindles commented on Portlanders Have a Very Uncivil Argument About Water Fluoridation.
The York and Iowa studies, the two best studies to date on fluoride's effectiveness show that there is no statistically significant effect on tooth decay when fluoride is added to the water.
The CDC's own website rarely links to actual studies, and when they do they ignore the reviews that always say the evidence for fluoride's effectiveness are mixed. They cherry pick a couple studies, of often poor quality, and say the issue is settled. The pro-fluoride crowd was even citing an Australian study that happened recently. The Australian study, with support from Colgate, is another poorly designed study that made a lot of unnecessary guesses in its protocol for significance for partial exposure versus almost complete exposure, and then it only finds significance for life-long exposure. However, basic statistics tells us that one study with inconsistent significance is not good enough when you have tons of studies already showing mixed results, as chances are with so many studies, some will definitely show significance out of pure chance. You can't just pick and choose studies. That's why we use systemic reviews and the much larger better controlled studies which tell us that the evidence is not conclusive that fluoridated water is effective at preventing tooth decay.
More...
The CDC's own website rarely links to actual studies, and when they do they ignore the reviews that always say the evidence for fluoride's effectiveness are mixed. They cherry pick a couple studies, of often poor quality, and say the issue is settled. The pro-fluoride crowd was even citing an Australian study that happened recently. The Australian study, with support from Colgate, is another poorly designed study that made a lot of unnecessary guesses in its protocol for significance for partial exposure versus almost complete exposure, and then it only finds significance for life-long exposure. However, basic statistics tells us that one study with inconsistent significance is not good enough when you have tons of studies already showing mixed results, as chances are with so many studies, some will definitely show significance out of pure chance. You can't just pick and choose studies. That's why we use systemic reviews and the much larger better controlled studies which tell us that the evidence is not conclusive that fluoridated water is effective at preventing tooth decay.
May 3
Spindles commented on Portlanders Have a Very Uncivil Argument About Water Fluoridation.
Meh, one more thing. Yes, let's look at the percentages of persons receiving fluoridated water and rates of untreated tooth decay shall we? I'm going to use Oregon as our jumping off point.
According to the CDC’s compiled data on states that have submitted records for untreated tooth decay in third grade students, Oregon sits fifth from the bottom at 35.4%. Also, according to the CDC’s 2010 Water Fluoridation Statistics, the percentage of persons receiving fluoridated water in Oregon is 22.6%, making Oregon the least fluoridated state in the US that has submitted data on untreated decay. So surely states with worse dental health numbers than Oregon have comparably low rates of fluoridation? Well….
Louisiana, with an untreated decay rate of 42% has 41% of its population drinking fluoridated water. Arizona, with an untreated decay rate of 40% has 57% of its population drinking fluoridated water. New Mexico, with an untreated decay rate of 37% has 77% of its population drinking fluoridated water. And Texas, with the highest untreated decay rate of 43% has 80% of its population drinking fluoridated water. Kentucky, the state who sits just ahead of Oregon in its dental health numbers with an untreated decay rate of 34.6% has a whopping 99.9% of its population drinking fluoridated water! New York, who sits just ahead of them with an untreated decay rate of 33% has 75% of its population drinking fluoridated water. The numbers posted off the CDC’s own website suggest no correlation between the percentage of persons drinking fluoridated water with a lowered rate of untreated dental decay.
Even in states with relatively low rates of untreated dental decay, the individual cities within them, fluoridated or not, do not necessarily reflect the state average. For instance, take the cities of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and Las Vegas, Nevada, two fluoridated cities that according to 2010 population statistics rank the closest in size to Portland. Wisconsin had an untreated dental decay rate of 20%, with 88% of its population receiving fluoridated water. But statistics from the 2008 Make Your Smile Count survey showed “children in Milwaukee (Wisconsin) to have an untreated decay rate of 37.5 percent, far higher than the state average of 20 percent,” and in 2012 Milwaukee’s City Council actually directed the Milwaukee Water Works to lower the concentration of fluoride in the city’s drinking water.
According to the CDC, Nevada’s untreated dental decay rate is 28%, with 73% of its population receiving fluoridated water. But according to a joint United Way and Nevada Community Foundation study, in the city of Las Vegas, Nevada, untreated dental decay among third-graders sits at an alarming 38.9%.
And this brings us back to Portland, a city that despite not fluoridating its water has an untreated dental decay rate of 21%, a figure that’s lower than the national average of untreated dental decay and a figure that actually brings the statewide average of Oregon down, where Oregon children outside of Portland have a 44% rate of untreated decay.
More...
According to the CDC’s compiled data on states that have submitted records for untreated tooth decay in third grade students, Oregon sits fifth from the bottom at 35.4%. Also, according to the CDC’s 2010 Water Fluoridation Statistics, the percentage of persons receiving fluoridated water in Oregon is 22.6%, making Oregon the least fluoridated state in the US that has submitted data on untreated decay. So surely states with worse dental health numbers than Oregon have comparably low rates of fluoridation? Well….
Louisiana, with an untreated decay rate of 42% has 41% of its population drinking fluoridated water. Arizona, with an untreated decay rate of 40% has 57% of its population drinking fluoridated water. New Mexico, with an untreated decay rate of 37% has 77% of its population drinking fluoridated water. And Texas, with the highest untreated decay rate of 43% has 80% of its population drinking fluoridated water. Kentucky, the state who sits just ahead of Oregon in its dental health numbers with an untreated decay rate of 34.6% has a whopping 99.9% of its population drinking fluoridated water! New York, who sits just ahead of them with an untreated decay rate of 33% has 75% of its population drinking fluoridated water. The numbers posted off the CDC’s own website suggest no correlation between the percentage of persons drinking fluoridated water with a lowered rate of untreated dental decay.
Even in states with relatively low rates of untreated dental decay, the individual cities within them, fluoridated or not, do not necessarily reflect the state average. For instance, take the cities of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and Las Vegas, Nevada, two fluoridated cities that according to 2010 population statistics rank the closest in size to Portland. Wisconsin had an untreated dental decay rate of 20%, with 88% of its population receiving fluoridated water. But statistics from the 2008 Make Your Smile Count survey showed “children in Milwaukee (Wisconsin) to have an untreated decay rate of 37.5 percent, far higher than the state average of 20 percent,” and in 2012 Milwaukee’s City Council actually directed the Milwaukee Water Works to lower the concentration of fluoride in the city’s drinking water.
According to the CDC, Nevada’s untreated dental decay rate is 28%, with 73% of its population receiving fluoridated water. But according to a joint United Way and Nevada Community Foundation study, in the city of Las Vegas, Nevada, untreated dental decay among third-graders sits at an alarming 38.9%.
And this brings us back to Portland, a city that despite not fluoridating its water has an untreated dental decay rate of 21%, a figure that’s lower than the national average of untreated dental decay and a figure that actually brings the statewide average of Oregon down, where Oregon children outside of Portland have a 44% rate of untreated decay.
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Someone really needs to learn them some science. Go science.