In other words, what happens when a population suddenly stops taking fluoride in their drinking water, like Juneau's citizenry did?
Now, thanks to a recent study led by first author and public health researcher Jennifer Meyer from the University of Alaska Anchorage, we've got new insights into the subsequent effects.
In the study, Meyer assessed Medicaid dental claim billing records for two groups of children and adolescents aged 18 or under.
One of these groups represented what the researchers call "optimal" community water fluoridation (CWF) exposure: 853 non-adult patients on behalf of whom Medicaid dental claims were filed in 2003, years before the fluoride cessation began in 2007.
The other group was made up of 1,052 non-adult patients from families who similarly met Medicaid income requirements, and who made the same kind of dental claims almost a decade later, in 2012.
[...] "By taking the fluoride out of the water supply... the trade-off for that is children are going to experience one additional caries procedure per year, at a ballpark (cost) of US$300 more per child," Meyer explained to KTOO News.
Reference: Jennifer Meyer, Vasileios Margaritis & Aaron Mendelsohn, Consequences of community water fluoridation cessation for Medicaid-eligible children and adolescents in Juneau, Alaska, BMC Oral Health, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0684-2
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 16 2019, @09:37AM (14 children)
There is no "nope"... why do you keep denying that that they compared prices?
And as I said, inflation *in dental expenses* is much higher than CPI. So this entire increase in expenses is illusory. Even according to the official government stats inflatoin was twice as strong as what they assume:
https://www.in2013dollars.com/Dental-services/price-inflation/2003-to-2012?amount=334 [in2013dollars.com]
And government stats always understate inflation so they can screw over anyone with an inflation-adjusted pension or social security.
(Score: 5, Informative) by FatPhil on Monday December 16 2019, @09:45AM (13 children)
Read the paper. Get someone to read it for you if that's too hard. Notice, right at the start where it should tell you what they're going to be doing, they actually tell you what they're going to be doing! And what they're going to be doing is "A bivariate analysis (Mann-Whitney U test) of the mean number of caries procedures performed per client".
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 16 2019, @10:10AM (5 children)
So you deny what I quoted above comes from the paper? To be clear, I do not deny that they counted number of fillings, etc. The level of this communication has dropped below zero though, even dumber people than who wrote this paper are apparently reading it and taking it to be important.
(Score: 3, Funny) by FatPhil on Monday December 16 2019, @11:53AM (4 children)
I do that because it does not come from the paper.
See how logic works?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 16 2019, @04:01PM (3 children)
Wow! This is peak idiocy I've seen on this site. Those quotes come directly from this paper.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 16 2019, @09:37PM (1 child)
Both of you quoted the paper. You each are suffering from what you accuse the other of.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 16 2019, @11:43PM
Where do you see that?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:28AM
Are you confusing the paper for the article?
My quotes have almost exclusively come from the paper.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Monday December 16 2019, @02:56PM (6 children)
What they're not doing is considering the "root cause" of the caries.
It would seem to be a safe assumption that underlying diet and other factors remained relatively constant during the period studied, however- that rate of one cavity per year might (just might) drop equally dramatically with a dietary change such as elimination of sugar-soft-drinks from the childrens' diet as it does with fluoridation of the municipal water.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 16 2019, @04:04PM (2 children)
Sugar doesn't matter so much as pH. I wonder if the fluoridation process affects the pH at all.
(Score: 3, Informative) by HiThere on Monday December 16 2019, @07:23PM (1 child)
pH is important, but is relatively independent. The water is carried in metal pipes, so the pH will be normalized. The fluoride salts that get embedded in the teeth are less sensitive to acid than what they replace.
That said, I'm not really impressed with the study. It's not long term enough. There is evidence (I'm not sure how good) that excess (whatever that means) fluoride will eventually affect the chances of getting cancer. But you'd need a longitudinal study lasting for at least 30 years to pin that down. (Probably 40 or 50 years would be better.) But that's going to have a lot more effect on medical costs than a few extra cavities.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 16 2019, @11:47PM
No, it isn't independent, the reason sugars are bad for your teeth is because bacteria in your mouth eats it and shits out acids that lower the pH. Sugar on its own does nothing to enamel.
Good grief, the nonsense in this thread.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:22AM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday December 17 2019, @03:48PM (1 child)
Meanwhile, the UK is known for their excellent teeth and fine cooking. /s
The U.S. is chronically guilty of letting the packaged food and many other industries abuse the population, seemingly profits are our king.
It's pretty ridiculous here, but more often it's disguised as "health bars," or "designer coffees" - things that at first glance you wouldn't expect to be hiding so much high fructose corn syrup. It really is the corn farming lobby (think: Monsanto) that has done the most damage over the past 50 years.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday December 17 2019, @04:29PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves