Lower Access in Disadvantaged Areas: Studies have found that areas with greater socioeconomic disadvantage often have less access to fluoridated water. This disparity is attributed to factors such as limited infrastructure, political opposition, and logistical challenges in implementing fluoridation programs in these communities .
Variability Across Income Levels: In the United States, data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) revealed that children from families with low income—but not those living in poverty—were less likely than other income groups to reside in predominantly fluoridated counties .
So your argument is somewhat flawed, poor people tend to be less flouridated, so the people who need it get it the least.
This is the wrong way to distribute this, please stop and find a better way, MOST IMPORTANTLY A CONTROLLED WAY, and work out a precise dosage schedule while you’re at it, none of this ignorant yeehaw cowboy shit where each town rolls a dice.
Rural areas tend to be socioeconomically disadvantaged, while also not being connected to a municipal water (it’s more economical to have your own well in rural areas).
Just because those people don’t have access to fluoridated water does not mean the solution is to then take away fluoridated water from the poor who do live in areas with municipal water.
You’re right it’s more expensive and the logistics are worse, but at the same time you could inculcate better habits in your population, and even subsidize proper mouth rinses.
The minute that’s successfully done across the country, I would be in favor of removing fluoride from water, but only after all economically disadvantaged have that better option in place, and they are adequately educated with better habits to utilize it. I think you’ll find that it is much easier said than done.
Btw, asked gpt4o this question:
So your argument is somewhat flawed, poor people tend to be less flouridated, so the people who need it get it the least.
This is the wrong way to distribute this, please stop and find a better way, MOST IMPORTANTLY A CONTROLLED WAY, and work out a precise dosage schedule while you’re at it, none of this ignorant yeehaw cowboy shit where each town rolls a dice.
Rural areas tend to be socioeconomically disadvantaged, while also not being connected to a municipal water (it’s more economical to have your own well in rural areas).
Just because those people don’t have access to fluoridated water does not mean the solution is to then take away fluoridated water from the poor who do live in areas with municipal water.
The minute that’s successfully done across the country, I would be in favor of removing fluoride from water, but only after all economically disadvantaged have that better option in place, and they are adequately educated with better habits to utilize it. I think you’ll find that it is much easier said than done.