Advertisement
We have all heard that England does not fluoridate its water, and it shows by their gruesome teeth (some of them do have some rough-looking teeth).
However, not only has England not fluoridated its water but most of the continental Europe has not. Why is that? All the research points to that the health negatives outweigh the health positives.
Sure you might have little or no cavities but what’s the risk to your body? A lot of research points that fluoride is linked to cancer and other negative impacts of ingestion. Would you put a little arsenic in your water if it reduced cavities? Chances are not, and I feel the same way about fluoride.
In this situation I like to think of a joke I heard a ways back. What do you call a person that flunked medical school? A dentist, ha ha. Maybe fluoridated water is the way to go, but how can that be decided unless one does their own research, looking at both points of view?
The Tribune encourages letters to the editor on current issues. Please limit letters to 250 words or less.
We reserve the right to edit all letters and require that all letters include the name, address and phone number of the writer for verification purposes.
Letter writers will be limited to no more than one letter a month. Please do not send poetry, or items taken from other publication or from the Internet.
Send letters to the editor to letters@lacrossetribune.com.
