I really wish this issue would be resolved in our society, once and for all. I get so frustrated when yet another argument comes up for the “for” or “against” side, without a clear answer. This morning I was sent a link to a press release that argued “against” and listed 10 sources to back up their argument. Sounds like a pretty strong case, right?
The review sets out to investigate the adverse effects of fluoride supplements rather than any treatment effects. The research question is not clearly defined and there are no inclusion or exclusion criteria. The search strategy was limited and no effort was made to search other electronic databases other than MEDLINE (which for dental studies may not have been the most appropriate database). The validity of the studies was not assessed, and details of the review methodology were not provided. A definition of fluorosis was not provided, and as most of the children only had very mild to mild fluorosis it is not clear what the health implications are. The small number of included trials meant that the authors’ conclusions should be interpreted with caution.
So, I’m not siding “for” or “against” fluoride … just feeling really frustrated that what sounded like a good argument “against” turns out to not really be all that strong. Just because an article is published doesn’t mean it’s truly accurate – any data can be positioned to support whatever theory is desired.
I’m a mother who wants to make the BEST possible choices for my son …
Off I go … grumbling about the lack of good solid evidence … on a rainy day … after a miserable night (probably a growth spurt) … and with a gaping cavern for a tummy … hope your day starts better than mine has!