Comment: The collectivist answer to this is "the greater good."

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Now THAT's A Good One! (see in situ)

The collectivist answer to this is "the greater good."

I have heard this issue addressed. It is justified that the harm is so low to the people who don't "need" water fluoridation that it greatly outweighs the overall benefit to society. This of course is ridiculous, as there is no such thing as "the greater good" because everyone has a different idea of what the greater good is, but collectivists are somehow able to do the necessary mental gymnastics.

I brought this up with a public health official in Ohio and she actually took it a step further and said, paraphrasing, "well fluoride really isn't a medicine. It' an element, like iodine or chlorine in the water. It doesn't count as mass medication." This is dead-wrong, but it is how she justified it.

**My response to the "greater good" argument is this: if we are acting in the name of the greater good, and we are justifying that it is right to harm one person to help a larger number of other people, why don't we take it a step further? There are thousands and thousands of people who need organ donations. Why don't we just sacrafice someone in our society and donate their organs to needy people? We could transplant their eyes to the blind, kidneys, skin, lungs, heart, et cetera. We could help many people at the expense of one. This would help the "greater good," right?

***Also, about the dentures argument, there is a weak science argument that I have also heard for justifying fluoridated water to edentulous (toothless) people...

Bacteria biofilms accumulate on denture teeth and there is a weak link between dental plaque and and systemic health (particularly cardiovascular.) The fluoride ion, in addition to hardening enamel, plays a small role in interfering with the transport and intracellular process of the pathogenic Strep. mutans bacteria. Theoretically this could benefit patients with dentures, but it has never been clinically demonstrated. I don't agree with the argument, just playing devil's advocate.