Tried Fluoride free toothpaste for a first time.

[Haggises]

Good for you.

Fluoride is pretty controversial. Even to this day. http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/09/portland_votes_to_add_fluoride.html

Most European countries don't add it to water.

The story behind it is pretty interesting.

The big secret is, you add it to water and it's something you can charge for. You have to 'dispose' of it and you have to treat it as Haz Mat and pay appropriate fees for appropriate disposal if you don't have a source for it. It's a bi-product of big industry. It's toxic waste.

It makes a great rat poison.

I personally am opposed to it. It's a heavy metal and passes the blood brain barrier. Like --- lead or mercury.. It actually occurs naturally in some water supplies. Where many people suffer from poor teeth and a condition known as flourosis. Google it.

Russia used it in their Gulags during the early 20th century to make prisoners more passive and lessen the need for extra guards.

No real accountability for the aggregate affect of fluoride either in food. Lets say you buy food that was made in a facility on a water supply with fluoride in it. Lets say your home water has fluoride in it. Lets say you buy a loaf of bread from a bakery that is on city water with fluoride. Lets say you have some soup or sauce made with water that has fluoride in it.

Add it all up. You don't just get the "recommended" amount the government says is beneficial to teeth, (which they recently lowered this recommended amount), and you see that all of the sudden you're actually ingesting many times a safe level.

Fluoride only 'benefits' teeth in contact. It doesn't work through your blood system. It does accumulate in your body, your brain, your bones, and can cause permanent brown spots on your teeth. It can cause soft bones, and I digress.

If people are informed and knew all the pros and cons I doubt many would want fluoride at all in any form.

There is so much misinformation in this post that I'll just stick with one.
Fluoride is not a heavy metal. It's not a metal at all.

 

[Captain Coconut]

There are also studies which shows the fluoride actually promotes decay of the tooth's enamel over the long term. So while it is beneficial superficially in the short term it may well be detrimental to your teeth over the course of your lifetime.

As someone who reads and writes studies like this, I can tell you that there are studies which show just about every point of view, even ones that are provably false. Could you point to this research, because I haven't heard of it. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but I've heard this kind of thing before, and it's often just a rumor-mill type thing. For instance, since it's bad to ingest, when people repeat information without checking the source material (like has been done on this thread), they usually don't understand what the actual facts are, and it gets turned into something different entirely.

 

[bakerbarber]

A lot of what I said was from memory, and obviously I'm not an expert nor do I have a photographic memory.

Many of the points opposing Fluoride can be found here; http://www.fluoridealert.org/articles/50-reasons/ .

In my opinion, there are no good reasons to expose people to this material in quantities above what they would normally encounter.

My opinions are my own, my interpretations and misinterpretations are also my own. Whether I can recite word for word technical minutiae verbatim is not in question. I cannot.

I can read both sides and opinions of particular topics and form my own opinion.

Here's some of the established beliefs and reasons presented in favor of fluoridation from WebMD; http://www.webmd.com/oral-health/guide/fluoride-treatment .

If you think this is scary, read up on deodorant or contrails.

RBGH and BSE don't get much discussion. How about bleach and LFTB.

I like to recommend a book that is somewhat thought provoking from time to time; http://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Sludge-Good-For-You/dp/1567510604

It encourages people to learn the facts and make their own choices.

 

[P Funk]

As someone who reads and writes studies like this, I can tell you that there are studies which show just about every point of view, even ones that are provably false. Could you point to this research, because I haven't heard of it. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but I've heard this kind of thing before, and it's often just a rumor-mill type thing. For instance, since it's bad to ingest, when people repeat information without checking the source material (like has been done on this thread), they usually don't understand what the actual facts are, and it gets turned into something different entirely.

I have definitely read more than one study of this type. I do appreciate your point of people simply regurgitating information heard as fact. And I too do agree that there are studies that can back just about any viewpoint on a particular subject. One has to not only dissect the study itself but also take into account other factors such as who commissioned the study. The tobacco companies commissioned study after study which 'proved' that smoking was not harmful to one's health. Does that mean that smoking is not harmful to one's health? Of course not.
I don't have the source material with me at the moment. As I mentioned, my wife has a library's worth of these types of studies/books. When I get home tonight, I'll have her pull the ones relating to fluoride and I'll post back with the sources.

It looks like bakerbarber has posted some online sources already as well.

 

[Captain Coconut]

I agree completely with the stuff bakerbarber is saying, but that's about fluoridating the water supply. I haven't seen anything against topical application of fluoride (i.e., in toothpaste or mouthwash).

 

[rajagra]

I too have read in the past that fluoride is a neurotoxin that can cross the blood-brain barrier and is cumulative - the body has no way to get rid of it.
What gets me is when people say it is safe when added to water because "it is in such low amounts that it couldn't possibly do any harm." Yet magically that same level IS considered enough to do good!

 

[DeusVult]

The fluoride in toothpaste is inorganic fluoride, sodium fluoride usually though sometimes a few other fluoride compounds. The fluoride added to our water supply is hexafluorosilicic acid. This compound is primarily produced as a by-product of phosphoric acid production; the irony is thick really, since phosphoric acid is used in soda pop for the sourness needed and soda pop is certainly a big factor in tooth decay.

Bottom line, water fluoridation is a convenient way to discard of fluorosilicic acid, which would otherwise be hazardous waste. Tooth decay is not caused by fluoride deficiency, that is certain. Might as well paint your teeth with plastic -- oh, yeah, they do that too.

I use Nature's Gate fluoride free toothpaste and I like it very well. Full disclosure, I have a degree in chemistry, work as a toxicologist, and I'm a fluoride hater.

 

[Captain Coconut]

Tooth decay isn't caused by fluoride deficiency in the same way that concussions aren't caused by a helmet deficiency. Both helmets and fluoride have been confirmed to be effective at preventing their respective ailments, though.

 

[DeusVult]

Helmets don't necessarily prevent concussions, and fluoride doesn't always prevent tooth decay. If you abuse your teeth by soaking them in sugar all day long, fluoride isn't going to save you. Dive off your motorcycle headfirst at 150 mph and your helmet will split in two.

 

[Captain Coconut]

Helmets don't necessarily prevent concussions, and fluoride doesn't always prevent tooth decay. If you abuse your teeth by soaking them in sugar all day long, fluoride isn't going to save you. Dive off your motorcycle headfirst at 150 mph and your helmet will split in two.

You've got to be kidding.

I'll humor you, although you should know better.

First, there is no question that a helmet drastically reduces the risks of a head injury.

Second, sugar doesn't soak into teeth, it acts as food for bacteria which produce acidic byproducts that demineralize enamel. If you brush your teeth and floss 3 times a day, you can sit there with a mouthful of sugar and it isn't going to magically soak in and make holes in your teeth. Similar to how a helmet works, fluoride strengthens the enamel, drastically reducing the rate that it demineralizes.

Nobody here is talking about a magic force field. We're talking about prevention. Do you honestly think that a prevention is not worth using unless it's absolutely 100% effective? Good luck finding something that matches that criteria.

 

[rajagra]

I think DeusVult's point is that the act of brushing teeth for a few minutes 3 times a day is going to struggle to compete with the effect of chugging sugary drinks all day long.

I stopped taking sugar in my tea/coffee for this very reason decades ago.

 

[Captain Coconut]

I don't think that sugars are all that big of a deal. Acidic drinks are MUCH worse for the teeth than sugary drinks.

 

[rajagra]

I don't think that sugars are all that big of a deal. Acidic drinks are MUCH worse for the teeth than sugary drinks.

However, a direct relationship between diet and dental caries is accepted. All fermentable carbohydrates, including sugars and starches, contribute to dental caries formation. Starches are broken down to sugars in the mouth by salivary amylase. Thick plaque bacteria, present on tooth surfaces, metabolize sugars to form organic acids. These acids lower the pH of plaque. Although tooth enamel is generally hard and wear resistant, it is slightly soluble in acids. Thus, the presence of these organic acids causes the tooth enamel to begin to dissolve or demineralize. The longer the pH remains low or acidic, the more likely enamel erosion will occur.
Teeth surfaces are repeatedly attacked by acids and then repaired by the action of saliva. Saliva contains many cario-protective components that help defend teeth against erosion including calcium and phosphate, fluoride, buffers and anti-microbial agents. It therefore neutralizes acids, dilutes sugars in food as well as assists in repairing losses to teeth surfaces through remineralization. Unfortunately, this 'normal' remineralization process is very slow. Thus, if demineralization of enamel exceeds the remineralization repair process, caries formation will occur.
The frequency and severity of attacks on teeth surfaces can be influenced by a number of factors. For example, "grazing" on food and drink for long periods of time increases exposure of bacteria to fermentable carbohydrate and therefore increases the exposure of teeth to acids. Similarly, foods that stick to teeth will increase exposure of teeth to acids since they remain in the mouth longer. Other factors include the amount and virulence of bacteria present, the abundance and make-up of saliva, the inherent resistance of teeth to acid and the type of food ingested.

And that is from the Canadian Sugar Institute which represents the sugar industry!!! (My bolding.)

 

[kingfisher]

You're right about the SLS, I can't really use toothpastes with SLS in them. The problem is that most of the SLS-free ones are also fluoride-free. It's that all-or-nothing, organic way of thinking I guess. Problem is, without the fluoride, the enamel gets soft(er). My teeth took a turn for the worse for awhile. I'd rather deal with the SLS than cavities, so I'm back to using SLS toothpaste until I can find some SLS-free stuff that still has fluoride (which is important for healthy enamel, despite what the naysayers have to say).

Kiss My Face and Burt's Bees both make fluoride-containing, SLS-free toothpastes that are quite nice.

 

[DeusVult]

There's a lot of research that suggests helmets provide minimal protection from head injuries, especially the severe type. For less energetic collisions, helmets help, a little. For high energy collisions they do nothing. Helmets also make it more likely that the neck will break, by adding weight to the head. Helmet laws have not reduced fatalities per vehicle mile (of vehicles requiring helmeted drivers). People die anyway. Squashed, heads and all. If helmets are so great, why don't car drivers have to use them?

 

[Captain Coconut]

This is getting ridiculous. I said myself that sugars act as bacteria food, which leads to tooth decay, but it's still not nearly as destructive as acidic drinks. The real issue here is fluoride, and whether it prevents tooth decay.

The idea that helmets don't save lives is also ridiculous. I have several friends who would be dead if not for motorcycle helmets. The ideas that you put forth, DeusVult, have been circulating for a long time, and they've been debunked. In fact, here are the first 4 results when I Googled "helmet statistics."
http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm
http://www.livestrong.com/article/343526-statistics-for-helmet-safety/
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/809861.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/Features/MotorcycleSafety/

Some people just want to find something to argue about.

 

[rajagra]

Motorcycle helmets can absorb a fair bit of energy, which is useful.
Bicycle helmets are the worthless ones. They are designed to absorb only as much energy as is created when falling over while stationary. If you fall off bicycles a lot before setting off, you should definitely wear a cycle helmet.

 

[Captain Coconut]

Motorcycle helmets can absorb a fair bit of energy, which is useful.
Bicycle helmets are the worthless ones. They are designed to absorb only as much energy as is created when falling over while stationary. If you fall off bicycles a lot before setting off, you should definitely wear a cycle helmet.

Where do you get this stuff? Read the very first link I posted.

Like I said, some people just want to argue.

 

[rajagra]

Where do you get this stuff?

From the actual standards. for example: Consumer Product Safety Commission's Safety Standards for Bicycle Helmets
"B. Overall Description of the Standard...
1. Impact Attenuation... ...Under the standard, the helmet is tested with three types of anvils...
... Impacts are specified on a flat anvil from a height of 2 meters and on hemispherical and curbstone anvils from a height of 1.2 meters."

These drops emulate the effect of your head falling to the ground without any cycle speed, and result in impact speeds of just 11 to 14mph (less if you take account of wind resistance.)

Helmets protect by absorbing energy by permanent deformation of the foam. They are tuned to work to the above spec. Those impact speeds are what they will protect against. In real world accidents you need to add cycle speed to the equation, and maybe the speed of a motor vehicle too. They don't even try to make cycle helmets to deal with that. It's shameful.

 

[Talal]

strong points made by both DeusVult and rajagra imo..