[woodruffw]

A reputational interest is impossible to falsify. But I also disagree: I don’t think the ADA would lose any face over a change in this position to most people (and to the anti-fluoride people, nothing will change).

> The rest of the world doesn't do it because of the evidence against it and widespread availability of modern dental care products containing fluoride.

Much of continental Europe does fluoridation through dietary additions (e.g. salt). Just because it isn’t in the water doesn’t mean it isn’t added. There are some countries that notably don’t fluoridate at all, and many fall into two camps: they either don’t have safe municipal water supplies, or already have naturally high fluoride levels (sometimes higher than the US’s introduced levels).

You’ve flipped the causality, by the way: it’s in Dr. Strangelove because it is a conspiracy wingnut thing to obsess over.

[kelipso]

Learning that the ADA's recommendation has led to decades of mass poisoning of the population into intellectual impairment will absolutely damage the reputation of the ADA.

[woodruffw]

First: this isn't true. Even TFA's position is conflicted: the majority of evidence points to current municipal fluoride levels having no meaningful impact on mental development. There are large parts of the world (including parts of Switzerland and Japan) with significantly higher levels of fluoride in their groundwater than the U.S. adds, and even these areas do not support the hypothesis.

Second: if you think that the average American will remember the ADA for fluoride, I'll ask you for your opinion on General Motors. They actually did poison our air and soil with a known neurotoxin for over 50 years, and they seem to be doing fine in the court of public opinion.