So who’s got top-notch and definitive science on
their side? <br><br>No one. That’s the conclusion you
must come to when reviewing the core science. Yeah,
sure, there are tons of studies published but so what?
We’ve unfortunately been inundated with a heap of
inadequate science on water fluoridation. There is, for
example, not even one randomized controlled trial on its
effects. <br><br><br>Better Fluoridation Research
Necessary <br><br>Some of the science that has accumulated
over the past 55 years borders on junk because the
methods used are inadequate or suspect and the rest of
the research on water fluoridation is only moderately
acceptable and remains inconclusive. In fact, a British
government-ordered review of the published literature conducted
recently by a committee of scientists at York University
essentially concludes that it’s time to go back to the
drawing board and do good science on this
issue.<br><br>Of course, there is a lot of denial going on in the
aftermath of this report. The pro-fluoridation forces have
somehow managed to shamelessly interpret the report as
being on their side. It’s really not on anyone’s
side.<br><br>Those fighting fluoridation have attacked the report as
narrow and have accused it of omitting huge volumes of
data - both animal and laboratory - that would have
nailed the issue down in favor of stopping fluoridation.
Well, yes, the report has serious limitations because
of its scope, but there will be no nailing down of
anything until much more solid science is
done.<br><br>What is amazing, however, is that public health policy
in this country has allowed water fluoridation to
continue in the absence of solid scientific evidence that
its benefit is greater than its risk. <br><br>When
you commit to putting a powerful chemical into the
water supply, you’d better have the best of evidence
that it is both safe and effective. The required level
of evidence is just not there.