We can't find evidence that holds up here. Proponents are reasoning from mechanism or analogy rather than direct human data, and the most credible skeptics raise objections we can't dismiss.
and I'm not even convinced that by drinking fluoride you know it's not like you're sitting there and you're swishing with it anyway so I I don't know that you're getting the dental anti- decay benefits regardless you're just putting a neurotoxin in your body yeah
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
regardless we know that it's a neurotoxin right right and and anything that's neurotoxic even if there are safe levels you know if I had a choice you know if there were two pieces of tuna fish on a plate and one said hey this has a safe level of mercury and it and this one has no Mercury probably go for the one with no Mercury um you know this has a safe level of fluoride but this one has no fluoride to go for the one with no fluoride zero fluide