• Im_old@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    The question is: does it make sense to buy toothpaste with fluoride then or can I buy one without? Just because my kids don’t like the peppermint ones and other flavours are most of the times without fluoride

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Non-fluoridated toothpaste is mainly for kids who are too young to be able to consistently spit it all out. The concentration of fluoride in toothpaste is high enough that you shouldn’t be swallowing it, because doing that on the regular is harmful to your teeth. Gray discoloration is one of the first symptoms.

      If your kids are capable of doing “rinse and spit,” then they should be using fluoridated toothpaste.

      • Dabundis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        And even then, there’s a significant safety margin worked into the advice that you shouldn’t swallow toothpaste. You’d need to eat several tubes of prescription strength toothpaste to get sick from fluoride.

        Still rinse and spit though

        • Nougat@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Absolutely true - and I just remembered, even if your kids are little and using non-fluoridated toothpaste, you should still be using this time to teach them rinse and spit.

          • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            What is this rinse? You are supposed to leave the toothpaste on your teeth iirc. No water rinse.

            Edit sorry realized this comes off harsh but not sure how to fix it. Lmao

            • EtherWhack@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 month ago

              With you having to judge millions of children, that you need to get high just to stay sane; you get a pass.

              But there is a general recommendation to not eat or drink for 15-30min after brushing to give enough time for the fluoride to bind to any exposed enamel surfaces. It’s also better to use a fluoridated mouthrinse over water, if getting the grittyness is what you’re after.

    • Rookwood@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Fluoridated toothpaste is more effective than drinking water. The fluoride works by direct contact with the enamel. Another reason it doesn’t make sense to put it in drinking water.

      • SuperIce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Fluoride in the water is beneficial in the pre-eruptive phase (when teeth are still growing). Fluoride ingestion increases tooth resistence to cavities if the ingestion happened while they were growing.

        This does mean that fluoride in water isn’t really useful after you have all your permanent teeth though.

    • insomniac_lemon@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      For other toothpaste that still strengthens enamel, there is toothpaste with hydroxyapatite (which can be ingested, at least that specific ingredient). Though it is probably more expensive.

        • insomniac_lemon@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I mean you can buy it here in a normal store. So I’m not sure if you mean a dentist can’t use/provide it, or if you’re thinking about the nano forms of it.

          Edit, just saw this:

          the FDA regulates dental products like toothpaste as cosmetics rather than therapeutic agents for cavity prevention

          Interestingly, many ingredients used in dental care, including fluoride, are employed off-label. This means they are used in ways not officially approved by the FDA but are still considered effective based on scientific evidence and clinical practice

  • bradd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    My thing is this…

    1. Adding it requires effort
    2. Removing it, if possible, requires effort
    3. It’s not a requirement
    4. There are other alternative methods to get it, like toothpaste, or sumpliments, that don’t force your neighbors to have your fluoride.
  • Doomsider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    44
    ·
    1 month ago

    So miniscule it won’t poison you but just enough to prevent tooth decay. You really can’t have it both ways. Pretending there is any real control over measurement is also ridiculous. Not to mention there is no need to drink fluoride.

    You know what does work? Using fluoride topically and getting good dental care.

      • Doomsider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        26
        ·
        1 month ago

        I don’t know. I do know fluoride works topically. I also know there is no mechanism in the body to return fluoride to the teeth topically after it is swallowed.

        So drinking fluoride is pointless.

        • ysjet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          So you don’t know, but all the data scientists and dentists, who DO know and are subject matter experts, who say it’s a good idea are to be ignored, because of your sheer ignorance?

            • ysjet@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              1 month ago

              We’ve refuted it, scientific testing has refuted it, you’re just plugging your ears and refusing to listen because you don’t like the answers.

              • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                12
                ·
                1 month ago

                I said fluoride works topically. Do you deny this? Please provide evidence to the contrary.

                I said there is no way for the body to return fluoride where it is needed. Swallowing fluoride is pointless and unnecessary at best. At worst it is probably not a good idea to have fluoride in your water if you have kidney disease.

                Don’t bother actually, we already no you know literally nothing about this topic.

                • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  You are spouting assertions about what sounds right while ignoring bodies of scientific evidence contradicting your viewpoint. Just because Lemmy users are unwilling to spend 20-30 minutes digging through arixv to refute you doesn’t make you right.

                  You don’t want to go and look up and analyze evidence that floride in the water supply is beneficial, you want to just assert the hypothesis you’ve formed as likely truth without evidence and research into related work, and I can confidently say this because experts who spend their lives reading papers and writing them on this very topic are qualified to make these assertions.

                  …This “sounds right” line of thinking has been the bane of civilization for eons. You aren’t breaking up some scientific fallacy like the church believing the Earth is the center of the universe, you are perpetuating one.

              • AmosBurton_ThatGuy@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 month ago

                And because random social media people spout conspiracies about it and clearly they’re more educated on the topic than actual trained professionals.

                /S

        • bane_killgrind@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          1 month ago

          I don’t know.

          You don’t need to know. Statistically dental health increases when municipal water is fluoridated.

  • FUBAR@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    The question about this is that the same can be said about lead. Do we want to consume that?

    • BreadOven@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      No. It can’t be said for fluoride. Lead is known to be extremely toxic. We’ve seen what it does. Fluoride in water is not toxic, which has been shown multiple times.

      Your argument is asinine.

      • FUBAR@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I don’t know why people can’t keep an open mind and look at issues without prejudice. What did I do to you for the name calling?

        Anyway fluoride in water can be toxic. It’s all about the dose

        • BreadOven@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well sorry, I suppose I didn’t need to call your comment asinine.

          But this is not an unknown issue. Multitudes of testing throughout decades have shown there is no toxicity for the levels that are in water. The county you’re living in most likely has their own case study available for you to read.

          I can look at issues without prejudice, but valid issues. This is not one of those.

          Also, if you’re talking about toxicity due to dose, you’ll die from water consumption before you’d get anywhere near toxic levels of fluoride. Don’t even think about any sort of medication you’re taking, it’s also probably more toxic than the levels of fluoride in water.

          Again, sorry. I don’t want to be mean, but there’s so much information out there opposing your comment. I’d happily point you in the right direction if you’d like to read up on the plethora of resources stating it’s not toxic, and at least somewhat beneficial.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I believe the objection to fluoride is that it is a tranquilizer that keeps us from achieving glory through violent uprising… or sweet sweet dentist profits.

  • zephorah@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Next headline will be how fluoride contributes to autism and it will have just as much evidence as the vaccine bit does. How is this even a thing? Is ground zero on this RFK?

    Meanwhile, all the people who can’t afford dentists will have even worse teeth going forward. Make America’s teeth British again.

    • Robust Mirror@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Well look at the statistics:

      Fluoride:

      • Water fluoridation in the United States began in the 1940s
      • By 1949, nearly 1 million Americans were receiving fluoridated tap water
      • In 1951, the number jumped dramatically to 4.85 million people
      • By 1952, the number nearly tripled again to 13.3 million Americans
      • In 1954, the number exceeded 20 million people
      • In 1965 an additional 13.5 million Americans gained access to fluoridated water.
      • By 1969, 43.7% of Americans had access to fluoridated tap water.
      • In 2000, approximately 162 million Americans (65.8% of the population served by public water systems) received optimally fluoridated water
      • 2006: 69.2% of people on public water systems (61.5% of total population)
      • 2012: 74.6% of people on public water systems (67.1% of total population)

      Autism:

      • First recognised in the 1940s
      • During the 1960s and 1970s, prevalence estimates were approximately 0.5 cases per 1,000 children.
      • Prevalence rates increased to about 1 case per 1,000 children in the 1980s.
      • 2000: 1 in 150 children
      • 2006: 1 in 110 children
      • 2014: 1 in 59 children
      • 2016: 1 in 54 children
      • 2020: 1 in 36 children

      Seems pretty clear cut to me.

      /s because people think I posted this in seriousness.

      • Redex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Damn, I guess fluoridated water also then caused computers, world population growth and the eradication of polio.

        Idk if this is a troll post or this person never heard of the fact that correlation does not equal causation.

        Case and point.

      • webadict@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 month ago

        This is, and I don’t say this lightly, one of the dumbest conclusions I’ve ever seen someone jump to.

        Might as well say that fluoride in the water caused software developers, lmao.

      • DevopsPalmer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Let’s ignore the better diagnosis processes and just take two trending upward statistics and make a broad correlation and call it fact.

      • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        They need to do stuff like this often in HS to show students how you can bullshit truths and make its facade of truth feel legit.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Not sure if you’re being sarcastic but if not, then I’m about to blow your fucking mind

        STOP EATING RICE!

        NAME YOUR DAUGHTER SARAH, IT’S THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE THE AMAZON! AND WHATEVER YOU DO…

        …DO NOT NAME THEM TRISTEN

        If we shut down flights to Antarctica, inflation would’ve been solved yesterday.

    • ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Democrats would love it. Republicans would suddenly discover that flouride is the only thing standing between our children and the gay agenda.

    • kalleboo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      My barometer is when it’s something that pretty much only the U.S. is obsessed with doing, then it’s probably a dumb thing caused by lobbyists or something. Fluoridation of water falls under this.

    • protist@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 month ago

      I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

      Second time I got to post this today, unfortunately because it’s almost ceased being satire.

  • madjo@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    For what’s it worth, in my country (Netherlands), we don’t add fluoride to our tap water anymore since the early 70s. We just have it in our toothpaste (though you can also get fluoride free toothpaste for those who don’t want it).

    Sure there’s still traces of fluoride in our water, as it appears in nature. But it’s not artificially added by our water companies.

    • scholar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Most places that do add it to the water supply match the levels of places where flouride occurs naturally

  • beebarfbadger@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Oh yeah? And what if someone ignores that, simply lies and says it’s toxic? I’m convinced!

    • Brickhead92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 month ago

      And both of these people telling me about fluoride in water are both experts in their field. One an expert toxicologist, and the other an expert liar. Now I don’t know what to believe.