18 replies to this topic

[Ghostrider]

I have been using ACT fluoride rinse to help prevent tooth decay. But I have learned that sodium fluoride is bad stuff. What's an alternative that I can use that is equal or better in preventing tooth decay. Yes, I already brush and floss thoroughly.

[jwilcox25]

But I have learned that sodium fluoride is bad stuff.

Fluoride is great for teeth, well-studied, and safe if you don't ingest large amounts. The anti fluoride in water campaign is baseless in terms of any real evidence, and the case for not using it in mouthwash is even weaker (unless you're prone to swallowing a lot of mouthwash).

Anyway, as for alternatives, you could look into xylitol.

[OneScrewLoose]

But I have learned that sodium fluoride is bad stuff.

Fluoride is great for teeth, well-studied, and safe if you don't ingest large amounts. The anti fluoride in water campaign is baseless in terms of any real evidence, and the case for not using it in mouthwash is even weaker (unless you're prone to swallowing a lot of mouthwash).

Anyway, as for alternatives, you could look into xylitol.

This.

[amere]

But I have learned that sodium fluoride is bad stuff.

Fluoride is great for teeth, well-studied, and safe if you don't ingest large amounts. The anti fluoride in water campaign is baseless in terms of any real evidence, and the case for not using it in mouthwash is even weaker (unless you're prone to swallowing a lot of mouthwash).

Anyway, as for alternatives, you could look into xylitol.

This.

Fluoride might strengthen teeth but it is neurotoxic. I find it hard to understand how people can be so masochistic about their health, presuming they practice what they preach that is.

Why not help your your teeth to help themselves by keeping your Vitamin D and K levels up and get sundry other health benefits that come with?

http://wholehealthso...ooth-decay.html
http://wholehealthso...ooth-decay.html

[ajnast4r]

little to no fluoride is absorbed systemically from mouthwash so thats of no concern. keep using act.

the overwhelming majority of evidence suggests that water fluoridation has NO detremental effects on health...in fact every major scientific body that has studied this agrees, fluoride within reason is beneficial and poses no danger. i wrote an extensive post on this in another thread and would be happy to post a ton of references for anyone who needs clarification.

the whole fluoride scare is just like the whole aspartame scare...it simply does not hold up under scientific scruteny.

[kismet]

Fluoride is great for teeth, well-studied, and safe if you don't ingest large amounts. The anti fluoride in water campaign is baseless in terms of any real evidence, and the case for not using it in mouthwash is even weaker (unless you're prone to swallowing a lot of mouthwash).

Not necessarily...

little to no fluoride is absorbed systemically from mouthwash so thats of no concern. keep using act.

the overwhelming majority of evidence suggests that water fluoridation has NO detremental effects on health...in fact every major scientific body that has studied this agrees, fluoride within reason is beneficial and poses no danger. i wrote an extensive post on this in another thread and would be happy to post a ton of references for anyone who needs clarification.

the whole fluoride scare is just like the whole aspartame scare...it simply does not hold up under scientific scruteny.

...I have thought that water fluoridation can be an issue for some people. Let's say, life extensionists, people who brush their theeth thrice daily and drink ungodly amounts of green tea. They are getting all the fluoride they need and more. So at best additional F is useless, perhaps it's detrimental. That's just what I heard, but is there any evidence to the contrary? (not on the population level) If not, the precautionary principle should apply.

What are the evidence-based adequate, optimal and "upper intake" levels for fluoride?

Edited by kismet, 16 March 2010 - 06:49 PM.

[OneScrewLoose]

Thrice is a really cool word and should be used more often.

[amere]

little to no fluoride is absorbed systemically from mouthwash so thats of no concern. keep using act.

the overwhelming majority of evidence suggests that water fluoridation has NO detremental effects on health...in fact every major scientific body that has studied this agrees, fluoride within reason is beneficial and poses no danger. i wrote an extensive post on this in another thread and would be happy to post a ton of references for anyone who needs clarification.

the whole fluoride scare is just like the whole aspartame scare...it simply does not hold up under scientific scruteny.

Sure it doesn't, if you purposely ignore all the evidence to the contrary. You seem to have an emotional attachment to scientific orthodoxy/authority, one beholden to commercial interests as it happens. Maybe you have a point... didn't the FDA nail the DRI for Vitamin D? All those prevented cancers... How else could you have such an unbalanced view on this? Perhaps it's that you hear hysterics on the anti-fluoride side and you overcompensate, becoming reactionary...

How responsible to treat the most obvious symptom of widespread D-deficiency with a neurotoxic, endocrine-disrupting, sarcoma-promoting halogen which by happenstance hardens enamel when it binds to it! A quick fix is the most that you can expect from the authorities, but to do it to yourself boggles the mind. Certainly, if you're optimally healthy you might, might, tolerate it relatively harmlessly. It won't extend your life though. Bisphenol A is probably fine too! It seems that anything goes, as long as it stays nice and subclinical.



http://www.fluoridea...g/health/brain/
http://www.fluoridea.../health/pineal/
http://www.fluoridea.../health/cancer/

[ajnast4r]

Sure it doesn't, if you purposely ignore all the evidence to the contrary. You seem to have an emotional attachment to scientific orthodoxy/authority, one beholden to commercial interests as it happens. Maybe you have a point... didn't the FDA nail the DRI for Vitamin D? All those prevented cancers... How else could you have such an unbalanced view on this? Perhaps it's that you hear hysterics on the anti-fluoride side and you overcompensate, becoming reactionary...

How responsible to treat the most obvious symptom of widespread D-deficiency with a neurotoxic, endocrine-disrupting, sarcoma-promoting halogen which by happenstance hardens enamel when it binds to it! A quick fix is the most that you can expect from the authorities, but to do it to yourself boggles the mind. Certainly, if you're optimally healthy you might, might, tolerate it relatively harmlessly. It won't extend your life though. Bisphenol A is probably fine too! It seems that anything goes, as long as it stays nice and subclinical.



http://www.fluoridea...g/health/brain/
http://www.fluoridea.../health/pineal/
http://www.fluoridea.../health/cancer/

yes, i do have an emotional attachment to evidence based science & medicine as does any real student of the sciences. the FDA (read kevin trudeau much?) did not set the DRI's the Institute of Medicine of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences did, and yes they DID nail the DRI for vitamin D based on the science that was available in the late 90's when they were established. the evidence suggesting a higher DRI for vitamin D is fairly new and technically has not been scrutinized enough to warrant a change in the DRI...although I suspect it soon will.

if you read the studies you suggested as references you would see they are based on concurrent exposure to arsenic & toxic forms of fluoride, iodine deficiency, having dental fluorosis, exposure to excessive & high fluoride levels beyond recommended levels(one of the studies in your link was at 2.5mg/mL vs the recommended 1.5mg/L) , fetal poisoning & poisoned rat studies. therefor they are NOT relevant when talking about fluoride mouthwash or controlled fluoridation of water in 1st world countries.

fluoride at scientifically established levels is both safe AND beneficial. i would suggest you stop getting medical advice from blogs and stick to credible scientific bodies:

http://www.cdc.gov/f.../systematic.htm
http://www.nhmrc.gov...ses/eh41syn.htm
http://www.ada.org/p...nity_safety.asp
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/18584000
http://www.who.int/w...ls/fluoride.pdf

What are the evidence-based adequate, optimal and "upper intake" levels for fluoride?

http://lpi.oregonsta...erals/fluoride/

Edited by ajnast4r, 16 March 2010 - 09:47 PM.

[VampIyer]

What are the evidence-based adequate, optimal and "upper intake" levels for fluoride?

http://lpi.oregonsta...erals/fluoride/

According to that source, about 10mg per day is the upper limit for adults.

If I'm drinking 3-4 liters of water per day, that could be 5mg of fluoride (last time I researched my local levels, they were higher than the "optimum" 0.7-1.2 ppm quoted in the source anyway)

If I want to drink a cup of green tea, gnaw on some chicken bones, use sea salt, brush with a fluoride toothpaste, and rinse with ACT... I think I could approach or exceed that 10mg limit in a normal day.

This is why I don't support fluoridation of the water supply... it's not optimal for me, which is why I might invest in a reverse osmosis setup soon.

I get plenty of fluoride as it is... I'm quite certain of that.

Perhaps if they just reduced the fluoridation (maybe 1/3 of what it is, or just <0.4ppm), then I'd be satisfied with a PUR filter.

Edit: I have no issues with fluoride oral care products... I support their use, but I use Xyliwhite in conjunction.

Edited by VampIyer, 17 March 2010 - 07:40 AM.

[nancyd]

Oil pulling: You swish 1T of sesame or sunflower oil in the morning before having any food/liquid for 15-20 minutes each day. It's part of ayurvedic medicine.

Edited by nancyd, 19 March 2010 - 01:22 AM.

[niner]

Oil pulling: You swish 1T of sesame or sunflower oil in the morning before having any food/liquid for 15-20 minutes each day. It's part of ayurvedic medicine.

Interesting, but what does it relate to? Does this have something to do with fluoride? Strengthening of tooth enamel? Do you swish for 15-20 minutes? That seems like a long time, and wouldn't it get kind of gross?

[Gerald W. Gaston]

Oil pulling: You swish 1T of sesame or sunflower oil in the morning before having any food/liquid for 15-20 minutes each day. It's part of ayurvedic medicine.

Interesting, but what does it relate to? Does this have something to do with fluoride? Strengthening of tooth enamel? Do you swish for 15-20 minutes? That seems like a long time, and wouldn't it get kind of gross?

I'm been oil pulling for about a month and a half. Every morning for 20 minutes. Even multiple times when I am fasting. I have burning tongue and also I believe some low grade infection under some fillings in my left back teeth. I have a dental appointment next week when I get back in town. I started with olive oil and coconut oil as that was all I had at the time, but in a few days switched to untoated, unrefined sesame oil as per recommended on the oil pulling website. But now I switch the three up often. I know this sounds like hokey Ayurvedic stuff, and both the explanation given of how it works and them claiming it cures everything under the sun sets off quack alarms. But after oil pulling then brushing, then rinsing with salt water every morning... my oral health seems much, much better. No oral pain or odd sensations now and the gums look better. I have always brushed in the morning, after lunch (with flossing), and at night (with flossing). But these changes came when I introduced the oil pulling and salt water rinse. Of course it could be time, placebo, or simply the salt water rinse... but whatever it is, as long as it 'appears' to help I'll keep doing it.

http://www.oilpulling.com/
http://www.oilpulling.com/faq.htm
http://www.oilpulling.org/oil-pulling/
http://www.earthclin...il_pulling.html
http://www.keratosis...atment-157.html

[resveratrol]

fluoride at scientifically established levels is both safe AND beneficial. i would suggest you stop getting medical advice from blogs and stick to credible scientific bodies

Scientific American published a great article re: second thoughts on fluoridation in 2007:

http://www.scientifi...hts-on-fluoride

The gist of the article is that there's an increasing amount of evidence that fluoridation of water in the quantities at which we're currently doing it is not as safe as we thought.

The case on fluoride is far from closed, and I for one have a very hard time with the notion of anyone adding these kinds of chemicals, safe or no, to my water supply without my approval. It's fundamentally unconstitutional.

[bobdrake12]

URL for Professional Perspectives: Fluoride in Tap Water Video:

[caston]

http://www.youtube.c...feature=related

Edited by caston, 20 March 2010 - 05:46 AM.

[kismet]

Could any of the critics post actual peer-reviewed (primary) evidence or good reviews? That would make it so much easier to double-check the claims. Considering how controversial the topic is, the fear that most of those links are dubious is unfortunately justified.

Edited by kismet, 20 March 2010 - 01:24 PM.

[amere]

yes, i do have an emotional attachment to evidence based science & medicine as does any real student of the sciences. the FDA (read kevin trudeau much?) did not set the DRI's the Institute of Medicine of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences did, and yes they DID nail the DRI for vitamin D based on the science that was available in the late 90's when they were established. the evidence suggesting a higher DRI for vitamin D is fairly new and technically has not been scrutinized enough to warrant a change in the DRI...although I suspect it soon will.

if you read the studies you suggested as references you would see they are based on concurrent exposure to arsenic & toxic forms of fluoride, iodine deficiency, having dental fluorosis, exposure to excessive & high fluoride levels beyond recommended levels(one of the studies in your link was at 2.5mg/mL vs the recommended 1.5mg/L) , fetal poisoning & poisoned rat studies. therefor they are NOT relevant when talking about fluoride mouthwash or controlled fluoridation of water in 1st world countries.

fluoride at scientifically established levels is both safe AND beneficial. i would suggest you stop getting medical advice from blogs and stick to credible scientific bodies.

I should have said a love of authority for the sake of authority. Pardon me.

You make some reasonable points. Some rather snide. I thought NIH too originally, but a glance at Wikipedia said otherwise. I could certainly have misread. More sneeringly, of course I don't get medical advice from blogs.However, you might concede, in your infinite wisdom, that it is a reasonable way to get across one's viewpoint shorthand.

As to your conditions, iodine deficiency is common. Mild to moderate fluorosis is common. Your excessive and high!!!! level is not very much more than the recommended level. 'Being thirsty'-, 'drinking tea'-, 'using toothpaste'- more. Easily. I would suggest that the water supply(!) is not the best conduit for any agent with a narrow therapeutic range, much less one whose therapeutic qualities are questionable. And yes, deciding on what is relevant according to whether it supports your desired conclusion is indeed a faithful tool of 'evidence-based' medicine. Dishonesty makes for compelling arguments.

Otherwise, we have a philosophical difference that likely won't be bridged. You believe that being wrong for decades on D, on lead, on plastics, is OK. I see it as a gross failure. The healthy levels are, and have been, absolute. Not arriving at them is excusable how? The evidence suggests that the pretence of responsibility is just that. Public health indeed!

In conclusion, how often in history have acceptable limits been shown to be too low? Decide for yourselves.

Edited by amere, 22 March 2010 - 12:18 PM.

[Sillewater]

Scientific American published a great article re: second thoughts on fluoridation in 2007:

[url="http://www.scientifi...icle....hts-on-

The quoted article above and then this one: http://www.fluoridation.com/epa2.htm

Has made me wary of fluoride. Luckily here in Vancouver we dont have fluoride in the water. Thus I use ACT and try my best to lessen the fluoride intake from tea by ditching the first wash and not steeping more then 5 min.