Lol, the Lancet lost all prestige when it claimed that the U.S. invasion of Iraq left over a million dead based on a survey done by stringers. Rwanda had a million dead, the difference in the scale of death was visible to anyone but the Lancet chose to publish a lie for a political agenda. It is garbage.

The real question is how do you blame this on the Jews?

To be fair, I know that Coca Cola has funded studies to show that sugary drinks have nothing to do with weight gain or obesity (I'm pretty sure that's right, I can't remember it off the top of my head), and I wouldn't be surprised if back in the day cigarette companies did the same thing to show that they don't cause lung cancer.
However, people do take these studies with more than a grain of salt, because that is bad science. The bias is there from the beginning and so will influence the outcome and can skew the results. And funnily enough, batfink has fallen for that bias in the fluoride issue. The article in the OP was pushing an agenda and framed the actual results in a misleading way. The Lancet took their data from a meta-analysis (though I still can't figure out where they got the 7 point IQ drop that they quoted...??), and the meta-analysis was a summary of several studies done, most of them coming from China.

Because people don't brush their f*cking teeth anymore.

Sounds ridiculous. If you're not brushing your teeth I doubt fluoridated water is going to be a miracle cure for dental health. I would be interested to know how beneficial it actually is.

Numerous countries banning the practice, the public having no idea of the costs or operation, the clergy of science conflicted on the issue and the potential for disaster pumping chemicals that some are calling "neurotoxins" into a perfectly good water supply.

It does not seem unreasonable to have concerns and questions regarding the practice but to do so you are bombarded with "conspiracy theorist", "nut job" ad hominems.

Not trying to get into the war on diets but they didn't eat large amounts of processed grains and other things that go with a society that lives in a fixed position. When humans switched from hunter gathers to farming and started making food made from grains a staple is the where they start finding increased levels of tooth decay. As I understand it this creates a different ph and then sort of bacterial ecosystem in your mouth that isn't great for your teeth.


But its potentially not perfectly good drinking water. Its a very large stagnant pool of water that is a prime area from which to spread disease. We have our water governing bodies filter it and then treat it with other chemicals (most likely industrial waster too, as that would be the cheapest and most effective way to produce it. Doesn't mean it isn't useful) to make sure that we don't have spread whatever bacteria or disease related organism to the general public.

Too assess the risk/benefit I'd suggest reading documents such as the one in link below by NSW health and if you can find it the Australian Standards for adding fluoride to water.

http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/environment/water/Documents/fluoridation-questions-and-answers-nsw.pdf