Opinions on water fluoridation are varied. Some concern the safety of fluoride, it's efficacy, and some it's concept as being forced medication when applied to public water supplies.
The uniting factor behind all of these points is the validity of the argument that underpins the opinions that different people hold. In the UK, we would proverbially say that you can 'ask the man down the pub' for his opinion. In the US, perhaps a 'bar-room lawyer' (or even a 'barrack-room lawyer', if you have a military 'leaning').
All these types of people seem to know what is what. Sometimes they may be right, and sometimes the opposite. What matters is where they get their information from.
Sadly, and in all avenues of life, we will always find someone who thinks they know the truth. It's a greater shame that some of those we know are of this ilk, will find themselves being fed the 'truth' about water fluoridation and how good it is for all and sundry.
The truth sometimes has more than one side, or one perception. The truth can be constrained by limitation of knowledge. Perception can likewise be restricted by exposure to what can be seen.
Consider these two arguments:
When I (the author) attended university / college, I learned two interesting lessons.
The first was a filmed (and contrived) incident. From the first viewpoint, an old lady was outside a building.. She was rummaging through her purse. She was then approached by a young man who began to wrestle with her, seemingly in an attempt to steal her purse. From this viewpoint, it looked like an attempted mugging.
The class was then shown the same incident from a different camera angle, it could be seen that a heavy object was being lowered on a rope from a room above the lady and out of her sight. The young man who raced over to her was trying to drag her away from danger as quickly as possible because the heavy object was about to fall on top of her.
Now the 'mugger' was actually a hero!
What do we learn from this lesson? It's obvious you need to be made aware of all the facts in a situation before forming an opinion.
The second lesson concerned a real-life incident about another incident where it appeared a shopper was trying to rob a shopkeeper. The first challenge was to establish which facts could be conclusively proven from the evidence given. Each student in the class was given a list of statements and was asked which could be established as being factual, and those where there was doubt.
After the first attempt to answer the questions, students were then paired up and asked to debate between themselves the same questions. Answers improved.
Finally, students were put into small groups and, again, there was an improvement in the quality of observation.
Not wilfully 'blowing my own trumpet', I can say that my own powers of observation were the most accurate. But! When I was grouped up with other students, the answers improved (showing that I did not 'know it all'!). So, while I was the best student in the class, I fell short of an ideal analysis. (Personal) lesson learned
Ultimately, and the answer to the test, was that the shopper was not robbing the shopkeeper. I personally was unsure of some facts until I consulted with other students. Lesson learned. Be wise, but do not expect to be a paragon of wisdom.
Footnote (and this is relevant to what I shall add shortly): The same test was given to a group of Police Inspectors prior to being given to the students. The Police Inspectors remained adamant that the shopper was robbing the shopkeeper. It is because the police are like this. They are trained, and sometimes (it appears) brainwashed into adopting an attitude of guilty until proven innocent. They perceive what they think is a potential crime and will not accept the truth when it is established otherwise. They are like wild dogs who sink their teeth into their victim and will not let go - because it's in their nature not to let go.
"I keep 6 honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are WHAT and WHY and WHEN and HOW and WHERE and WHO. - Rudyard Kipling.
What have we learned?
So what does this all have to do with water fluoridation? The answer is quite simple. Who is trying to 'educate' you on water fluoridation? Are they in possession of all of the facts they should be made aware of?
In the first lesson, we saw that observation from different angles gave a much better perception of an event. The same goes for those who promote water fluoridation. Putting aside those who are financially, commercially or academically rewarded for supporting water fluoridation, we have to factor in those who do not stand to gain from promoting water fluoridation. After all, the pro-fluoride establishment cannot bribe everyone to sing it's tune.
It is these 'innocents' who are sent out into the greater environment and asked to speak at events of the virtues of adding fluoride to water. But if they are honest, decent people, why do they do this?
One sure-fire way is to give such people only the 'facts' that will support the pro-fluoride lobby's argument. Frequently, these facts are based upon idiotic statistical comparisons,word of mouth, trust in peers, etc. So, the innocents go on their merry way and spout all the garbage they have been fed by those who wind them up like clockwork toys and use them to engender a sense of trust within whichever community they may exert some influence. Now, it's true he (or she) may be a nice person. They may be well-known for being (for example) the best dentist in town and with a friendly and caring and considerate manner. No argument there. But when someone like this is sent to an event to promote water fluoridation, and is then made to look a fool by being 'properly' educated by an anti-fluoridation speaker, then guess what will happen?
From personal experience I've seen (and these are the people usually chosen to give pro-fluoridation views) dentists just turn their backs on speakers of opposing viewpoints and ignore what they have to say.
They do this because they have already been warned by their peers that anyone who speaks out against water fluoridation is a rank amateur, a crank, a liar, a fool, etc.
The other tactic is to listen, but to be brainwashed by the pro-fluoride lobby to such an extent that they cannot understand an opposing view. They are fed to gills with pro-fluoride propaganda that everything else they hear to the contrary is nonsense.
In the second lesson about a shopkeeper and shopper, we learned that we have to analyse in detail every claim made about any situation where there is doubt. Those who support fluoridation, and apart from those intelligent enough to seek the real truth and 'change horses', are shown 'evidence' which is circumstantial at best, and then told it is the absolute truth. So, to them, the innocent shopkeeper is actually a robber and should be arrested. Not really fair, is it? But the pro-fluoride lobby makes them see their opponents in that sort of light. While we are trying to educate, and inform, they are labeling us as criminals - criminals who will have no honour and go to any lengths to defend their position. After all, that's what criminals do. Don't admit to anything unless your situation is hopeless.
So who are the real criminals here? Is it those who have more qualifications then some people have had hot dinners. People who have even risen to the point they have Nobel Prizes in their field of expertise?
Perhaps it's the plethora of highly-qualified and sincere doctors, scientists, etc., whose integrity is established, who are the criminals. After all, it's these types of people, the ones who dedicate their lives to furthering the cause of humanity by honestly representing science. They are the trouble-makers, aren't they?
(Some of) The Facts of Life
We live in a world where we are deceived, lied to and abused every day - even when we are not fully aware of what is going on around us and how it will affect us - either now, or later. But it's real and it will never stop until the world comes to an end. That's because we are dominated by the most corrupt people on the face of the planet. They have no virtue, no honour, no concern for humanity, the environment ... I could go on and on. These are the people who misuse and abuse their power and authority for personal gain.
Water fluoridation will never truly be defeated while we live in such a world. It will not be defeated because their are not enough decent people in positions of power who can stop or prevent the practice. Only 'people power' can have any influence or affect. But when the people are fed a continuous barrage of lies by the pro-fluoride lobby, then they will never realise the insidious designs their 'masters' will have planned for them.
Now, you can empower yourself by making a stand against water fluoridation. Or, alternately, you can continue to live in the dream world created for you where nobody in authority ever lies to you, never exploits you, never abuses you, and whom are are all but Saintly. Keep dreaming of beautiful butterflies, soft, cuddly rabbits, and sugar-coated doctors, dentists, etc., all bearing 'gifts' of fluoride - and all conveniently added to your water supply by your friendly local water supplier. Ah! Who really cares if you are being drip-fed toxic waste every day? After all, it's only a slow poison and you will not see immediate effects. And don't forget! You also have to be a 'Patriot' and do your bit for your country by swallowing this poison on a daily basis.
As in the well-known movie 'The Matrix', you have a choice. Swallow the blue pill and continue to live a life based upon ignorance and apathy. Take the red pill and learn about the real world around you.
From Wikipedia: "The red pill and its opposite, the blue pill, are popular culture symbols representing the choice between embracing the sometimes painful truth of reality (red pill) and the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue pill).
The last word. No, I haven't forgotten the police analogy. The fluoride 'police' are those within the system who are taught to think just one way. They permeate the fluoride lobby and their only objective is to behave in such a way that anyone who opposes fluoride is outside the law (OK, the laws that they lay down based upon all the worst aspects of society). These 'police' are the sort of people who will never want to accept that the anti-fluoride lobby is anything but an organised crime syndicate. If we appear on their 'radar', and become a threat to their authority, then they come looking for us. And it is those with the most impressive credentials that will suffer the most. The greater perceived threat to the pro-fluoride mentality, the greater the punishment.
The pro-fluoride police are everywhere. They do not wear uniforms or badges, but they do operate effectively. Without them, there would be no water fluoridation. The establishment wants you to be forced to accept water fluoridation and does not want to honestly inform you as to why.
Get the message? If you do, think about spreading it.