“Commercial dental hygiene products are unrelated to water fluoridation.”
Another favoured scarecrow argument is that genuine experts that support drinking water fluoridation can be ignored because they have associations with various brands of commercial dental hygiene products. However, how much relevance does this actually have to fluoridation of drinking water?
The anti-fluoridation advocate are only too happy to point out that the fluoridation chemicals used for fluoridation of drinking water are by-products from unrelated industries, such as the manufacture of fertilisers. They also criticise fluoridation chemicals for not be the same product as the pharmaceutical grade fluorides used in toothpastes. Both these arguments prove to be real, but irrelevant.
They cannot make such claims and at the same time assume that association with commercial dental hygiene producers is a conflict of interest because the arguments are in contraction to one another. Dental hygiene products are not tied to fluoride and certainly not sourced from the same supplies as that used for drinking water fluoridation.
Moreover, commercial dental hygiene producers, if seeking profits, would prefer that drinking water fluoridation did not occur. If this were the case, it would mean that their product is the prime source for good dental health.
The unrelated process for drinking water fluoridation is actually in competition with commercial dental hygiene products, strictly speaking.
That the leading dental health expert bodies support drinking water fluoridation and even individuals associated with competition dental health products should further ones confidence in its effectiveness, NOT reduce it!
Have you heard of any other anti-fluoridation arguments that I’ve not covered? Feel free to forward them to me via the post submissions forms here and, time pending, I’ll do what I can to provide a strong counter-argument based upon facts.