Science inconclusive

I am disappointed to see Shawn Vestal “carry water” for pro-fluoridationists by mocking opponents as flat-earthers (July 28). There is a very real disagreement among scientists over this issue and the rewards of fluoride versus the risks are not at all clear-cut.

Virtually all European countries, ahead of us on most environmental and health issues, have abandoned use of fluoride because the benefit has been found to be slight and the risks not insignificant. Decay rates in fluoridated and unfluoridated countries are virtually identical and have declined significantly in each in the last 40 years.

Research demonstrates that any benefit of fluoride is the result of topical application, not systemic use. Toothpaste, mouthwash or dental treatment is a much more effective delivery system and promoting these would save money and public rancor.

Remember, there have been plenty of past medical practices, fully backed by the medical establishment of the time, which turned out to be useless or deadly, from bleeding and mercury treatments to hysterectomies and hormone replacement therapy. The experts can, and do, get it wrong. It is not surprising some people may decide they don’t want to be part of this grand experiment.

Richard League

Spokane