Fluoride should not be added to drinking water.

----- POISON: PRO sees this debate as coming down to simply pointing out to the readers different DISTINCTIONS. PRO would argue that there is a world of difference between what is considered "Poison" and what is not. It is common sense to know that poison does something destructive and harmful. Water doesn't do this (except in freak cases)(like CON is trying to use), that is why it is COMMON KNOWLEDGE that water is NOT poisonous. Fluoride on the other hand causes destructive things: (from source #1- Rd. 1)(but actually every single source from PRO also shows this) things like: "hypersalivation, vomiting, and diarrhea. .. multiorgan failure. Central vasomotor depression. .. direct cardiotoxicity also may occur. .. respiratory paralysis, dysrhythmia, or cardiac failure. " Summary: It is a given that: Fluoride is poison, water is not. ----- PROPAGANDA: PRO would have liked to have had more space to elaborate on the history of how fluoride came into favor, but due to the need to focus on the most relevant points in the debate PRO is not able to go into very much detail. BUT PRO has shown that there is still deception actually taking place (by showing the website misdirection in Rd. 2). Summary: It is a given that: Propaganda has made fluoride seem good, but has "lead people away" from understanding the dangers associated with it. ----- PROPER USE OF FLUORIDE: CON said: My opponent seems here to be agreeing that people "need" fluoride to "come into contact with their teeth" to have healthy teeth which pretty much negates most of his other points. That is not the case, it doesn't negate PRO's points because: PRO can and will concede that fluoride may prevent cavities. BUT there is another important DISTINCTION that needs to be made. To summarize: Fluoride in toothpaste = good. Fluoride in water = BAD. The resolution in question deals with drinking water (ingested), which is much different than toothpaste (spit out). Summary: It is a given that: Water is ingested, toothpaste is not. ----- WASTE OF MONEY: "It is obvious that adding fluoride to water is being done by people who are on the government's payroll. " Agreed. (by CON). Because fluoride is poisonous (Shown by Pt. 1), and because there is already sufficient (or rather too much - 300%) fluoride in people's diets (Shown by Pt. 5) therefore it is a TOTAL waste of money to add fluoride to drinking water. Summary: It is a given that: Taxpayer money could be used for something better than funding something which harms people's health. ----- TOO MUCH FLUORIDE ALREADY: CON seems to take issue with the source used by PRO, but in Rd. 2 doesn't cite a source of his own but rather says "Please compare them with independent journalistic and recognised scientific sources to see the disparity. " PRO at least posted a source that backs up the claim made. The source seems reliable and the claim made is reasonable. It is not like something outrageous was asserted, just a simple claim that we already get sufficient (too much) fluoride in our diets regularly. But here is another source about it: . http://www.fluoridation.com... Summary: It is a given that: There is no need to add fluoride to water, because there is already too much fluoride in our diets already naturally. ----- Main Point: PRO now comes to the point of making the MOST IMPORTANT DISTINCTION OF ALL! : It doesn't matter if fluoride does help prevent tooth decay, because the whole issue of this debate is about it's poisonous nature. Specifically in the resolution "drinking water" is clearly stated. The debate is concerning drinking water and keeping it safe (not about cavities). PRO would urge the readers to CAREFULLY consider the IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONS that have been made and see how the case for PRO actually is correct. I thank the readers and my opponent and would urge a vote for PRO. AFFIRMED: "Fluoride should not be added to drinking water. "