Fluoride should not be added to drinking water.

Thanks to my opponent. "Fluoride should not be added to drinking water" is an absolute statement. My opponent's position therefore seems to be (and his initial post appears to back this up) that fluoride should not be added to drinking water under any circumstances and that if it is currently being added then this should be stopped. My position is simple: In some cases (notably, areas where people aren't getting enough ) then fluoride should in fact be added. I will examine my opponent's arguments and sources first. "1. Fluoride is poisonous." All substances are poisonous, including all food, drink and medicines. Toxicity is determined by dose. The amount of salt you would find in most salt cellars (dispensers) would be more than enough to kill you. Even water itself, the very substance that anti-fluoridation campaigners seek to protect the purity of, will kill you if you drink too much. http://www.dailymail.co.uk... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.telegraph.co.uk... "on the side of a tube of toothpaste it says to "contact a poison control center immediately" if you swallow your toothpaste." It doesn't say that on my tube of Colgate Total. "2. Fluoride has only been made to seem desirable through the use of propaganda." On the contrary, the use of fluoride in drinking water has been made to seem desirable by science and only opposed by propaganda. If you define 'propaganda' then we could discuss this in more detail. "3. A lack of fluoride does NOT lead to tooth decay." Obviously not. Teeth decay for many reasons and were decaying long before fluoride was ever added to water, however fluoride absolutely does protect against tooth decay, as the evidence in my sources will prove. "4. Not only is adding fluoride to the drinking water poisonous to humans, it is actually COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MONEY..." I guess the argument to this point hinges on whether you are pro universal health care. I am and firmly believe that there is enough evidence to show that fluoride in the water saves taxpayers enough in free dental care for kids from low income families. "5. Since fluoride is already in many foods and beverages, fluoridation is unnecessary since we're already receiving 300% or more of the American Dental Association's recommended daily amount." My opponent is absolutely correct that we need proper evidence of overall fluoride intake, if people, especially young children are definitely getting enough fluoride then there is no need to give them more, but this is often not the case as I will prove below. The quote with statistic does not cite any scientific source, merely makes unfounded claims. My opponent's sources are both websites set up by anti-fluoridation campaigners and do not express a balanced view, I urge readers to examine them and compare them to my sources below which are scientific or journalism based. "To its critics ... the sure benefits .. may pale in comparison to the uncertain consequences...To its advocates, fluoridation is one of the most effective ways of achieving equality in dental health...no-one seriously doubts that fluoridation does stop decay." http://news.bbc.co.uk... "Fluoride can greatly help dental health by strengthening the tooth enamel, making it more resistant to tooth decay. It also reduces the amount of acid that the bacteria on your teeth produce...Fluoride is found naturally in ... water supplies, and is also added to some.... One part of fluoride for every million parts of water (1 ppm) has been shown to have the best effect. All water contains some fluoride." http://www.dentalhealth.org.uk... Can't believe I am out of space already, not used to this word limit. Resolution negated. Thanks.