RFK Jr. Admits Removing Fluoride From Drinking Water Will 'Probably' Lead to More Cavities in Children
Kennedy appeared on Fox News with Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt on Thursday in conversation with host Harris Faulkner. The two were hosting an event at the Oklahoma State Capitol in Oklahoma City on the same day in order to begin the "Make Oklahoma Healthy Again" campaign focused on promoting "common-sense health policies, medical freedom, and a return to personal responsibility."
"On the issue of fluoride, what has been the response from dentists in America who may be concerned that some children in lower incomes in particular don't get those dental preventative situations where they can go in and get their teeth indemnified and treated against cavities?" Faulkner asked.
"Well, people will still get indemnified for it, to the extent that they are already indemnified. But you know, it is an issue. It's a balance. You're gonna see probably slightly more cavities, although in Europe, where they banned fluoride, they did not see an uptick in cavities. The issue is, parents need to decide, because science is very clear on fluoride," Kennedy responded.
Social media users quickly took to online platforms to ridicule the Health Secretary's rhetoric.
"Fluoride is safe and effective. RFK has no medical or Dental background that makes him an expert on Fluoride," wrote one.
"On the downside there will be more cavities but on the upside there will be... um actually there is no upside," joked another.
"More cavities for kids in families who can't afford dental care. And neglected cavities can cause other health issues with infections etc, not to mention leading to the need for more serious and expensive dental work..." noted a third.
"So they admit that taking out fluoride is bad, yet they'll still do it. Morons," said a fourth.
"Some dentists are excited. They will have a lot more business soon," said another.
The American Dental Association has reiterated their support for fluoridating water supplies after RFK Jr. announced his intention to direct the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to denounce water fluoridation.
"As dentists, we see the direct consequences fluoride removal has on our patients and it's a real tragedy when policymakers' decisions hurt vulnerable kids and adults in the long term. Blindly calling for a ban on fluoridated water hurts people, costs money, and will ultimately harm our economy," said ADA President Brett Kessler, D.D.S.
Originally published on Latin Times
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
4 hours ago
- DW
China factor: Trump's Asian tariff plan – DW – 07/08/2025
The US president's latest volley of tariffs heavily targets Asian countries, including Japan, South Korea and Indonesia. Many experts say it's part of a strategy to force them to reduce trade with China. US President Donald Trump announced new tariffs on 14 countries on Monday night, the majority of them in Asia. He said the tariffs would kick in on August 1, but left the door open for further negotiations, saying the suggested tariffs were "more or less" final offers. "If [countries] call with a different offer, and if I like it, we'll do it," he said. Among the countries Trump hit were Japan, South Korea, Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Laos and Myanmar. Analysts say the focus on Asian countries is part of a move by the Trump administration to indirectly target China as part of its ongoing trade and strategic rivalry with the country. China is by a distance the largest trading partner of Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar and Indonesia and is the biggest source of imports for both Cambodia and Thailand. The move by Trump is likely aimed at putting pressure on these countries to strike agreements with the US as quickly as possible. Some observers have suggested that plans to include countries' trade relationship with China as part of the deals could backfire. "Negotiations could prove problematic if, as some reports are indicating, the US is trying to get other parts of Asia to exclude China from regional supply chains," Gareth Leather, senior Asia economist with Capital Economics, wrote in a note. Since Trump's so-called Liberation Day tariffs announcement on April 2, the White House has only reached tariff agreements with three countries — the UK, Vietnam and China. The deal with Vietnam points towards US demands to target China. The US agreed to lower tariffs on Hanoi to 20% but includes a provision for a 40% tariff on so-called trans-shipping of goods, whereby China sells goods to third countries via intermediaries, such as Vietnam. Trans-shipping is the shipment of goods to an intermediate destination, then to another final destination. It is often a normal part of global trade but can also be a method used to disguise a product's place of origin. Earlier this week, the published a report which suggested Chinese businesses were sending increased volumes of goods to the US via countries in Southeast Asia, a form of trans-shipping aimed at avoiding new US tariffs on Chinese goods. It cited data from the US Census Bureau that showed that while Chinese exports to the US had dropped by 43% year on year, its overall exports had risen by 4.8% in the same period, suggesting that it was rerouting goods to other parts of the world. At the height of the tariff confusion in April, Trump's team specifically cited Vietnam as an example of how trans-shipping was a problem. Trump's trade advisor Peter Navarro said Vietnam was "essentially a colony of communist China" in an interview with Fox News. "Vietnam sells us $15 for every $1 that we sell them and about $5 of that is just Chinese product that comes into Vietnam, they slap a 'Made in Vietnam' label on it and they send it here to evade the tariffs," he said. The fact that Vietnam has now done a deal provides an example of how other Asian countries might find a way to negotiate with Trump ahead of the August 1 tariffs kicking in. However, Gareth Leather is doubtful, pointing to the fact that those countries may be concerned about damaging relations with China. "This could open other countries up to retaliation from China, which is not only a bigger trading partner than the US but also a more important source of investment," he wrote. According to Capital Economics' chief Asia economist Mark Williams, Vietnam had "one of the weakest hands" to play in negotiations with the US given the amount of goods it sold to the country. Williams thinks the US trade deal with Vietnam isn't a "template that other countries will feel they have to follow." "Instead, the key lesson for other countries from this deal, and that agreed previously by the UK, is that they will be expected to curtail some trade with China," he wrote in a jnote to clients. The deal the US struck with the UK in June includes provisions that Britain complies with strict American security requirements such as scrutinizing supply chains and ownership of companies, a move seen as aimed at China. In letters to the leaders of the countries hit with the August 1 tariffs — which Trump published on social media — the US President described the trade surpluses they have with the US as a "major threat to our economy and indeed our National Security." Given that the Trump administration has already reached a trade truce with China, the ongoing tensions with other Asian countries are not only about Beijing. Trump has focused on Japan in recent weeks, describing it as "spoiled" and criticizing it for not buying more US products, particularly agricultural goods. The focus on agricultural products has also included other Asian partners such as South Korea and India. While Gareth Leather suggests most countries would be willing to make concessions to avoid a return to penal tariff rates, "for example by stamping down on re-routing of Chinese goods," other experts are more skeptical. Bill Reinsch, senior economics adviser with the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), doubts that certain Asian countries will go far enough to appease Trump, given his core unpredictability. What is likely holding them up, he told DW, is the sense that "well, if we agree to something, are you going to come back two weeks later with sectoral tariffs on something else?" If the US can't be trusted not to move the goalposts, he stated, "it's very hard to see people being willing to make commitments."
Int'l Business Times
18 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
Medical Groups Sue US Health Secretary Over Covid-19 Vaccine Change
Several leading medical groups filed suit against US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Monday, accusing him of endangering public health with new Covid-19 vaccine recommendations. At the end of May, Kennedy announced via social media that federal authorities would no longer recommend Covid-19 vaccines for children and pregnant women, resulting in blowback from health experts. In the lawsuit, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American College of Physicians (ACP) and other leading medical groups are calling on the court to stop Kennedy's "unilateral, unscientific" directive and restore the Covid-19 vaccine to immunization schedules. "It is really unconscionable to take away a parent's ability and choice to protect their children through vaccination," said Tina Tan, a pediatrician and president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, one of the plaintiffs. Since taking office, Kennedy -- who spent decades spreading vaccine misinformation before becoming President Donald Trump's top health official -- has worked to overhaul American vaccination policies. In June, he fired all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and appointed his own panelists, under the banner of "Make America Healthy Again." Monday's complaint also highlighted the controversial new appointees to ACIP. "We are on a dangerous path," warned Susan Kressly of the AAP, denouncing what she described as misinformation spread by Kennedy while citing the concerns of her peers and parents of patients. "Pediatricians cannot stay silent as the system we rely on to support life-saving vaccines is chiseled away piece by piece, with Secretary Kennedy leading efforts to sow doubt and distrust in the American success story of vaccines," Kressly said. The problem isn't limited to parents and children, as misinformation about vaccines undermines a long-standing trust between doctor and patient. Increasingly, medical professionals are finding that adult patients are "hesitant to get their vaccines. They are not trusting the system anymore," said Jason Goldman, president of the ACP. The issue of vaccines extends beyond Covid-19 in the US. Johns Hopkins University released a count Monday finding the US has recorded its worst measles epidemic in more than 30 years, with 1,277 cases confirmed since the beginning of 2025, and illness recorded in 40 of 50 states. The total US figure is the highest since 1992. The joint complaint was filed in Massachusetts, a northeastern US state. Federal health officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment from AFP.
Int'l Business Times
2 days ago
- Int'l Business Times
Elon Musk Receives Barrage of Questions on Guns, Tax Cuts, and Abortion After Declaring 'America Party' Formed
Billionaire entrepreneur and recent MAGA deserter Elon Musk proclaimed that his new political party—the America Party—is now formed, prompting a barrage of questions about the party's platform. "By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it!" Musk posted on X. "Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom." Musk's announcement followed an Independence Day poll on his social media platform where 65.4% of respondents voted in favor of the party's creation. Social media users responded by pressing Musk on the new party's positions on guns, abortion, immigration, healthcare, military spending, and tax cuts. What's the new party's postion on guns and abortions? — unseen1 (@unseen1_unseen) July 5, 2025 Conservative commentator Dana Loesch asked if the party would defend the Second Amendment "as the Founders intended," while others grilled Musk on whether the party would reverse recent tax cuts, restore funding for social programs, or support policies like the carbon tax or universal healthcare. Some also questioned if the party would embrace controversial stances on immigration, including expanding H-1B visas, and where it stood on hot-button cultural issues like ending child gender transition or abortion access. Many referenced Musk's work with DOGE. "Is this new American Party going to undo the massive firings, push-outs, and buy-outs you did under DOGE costing the jobs of thousands of Americans?" a user asked. What's your position on the current $1 trillion military budget, and why didn't DOGE follow through on your pledge to audit the Pentagon? — Michael Tracey (@mtracey) July 5, 2025 At this time, Musk has yet to offer any official outline specifying the party's priorities, and left the majority of questions below his announcement unanswered. But hints at party policy could be found elsewhere on X. Tech investor Tyler Palmer guessed at the America Party's platform in response to another post from Musk, naming debt reduction, military modernization, AI tech acceleration, limiting energy regulation, free speech and pro-natalism. "Is this the America Party platform?" Palmer asked. Musk confirmed with a one word reply: "Yeah!" In a post listing the same items, Tesla Owners Silicon Valley said the list represented the America Party's focuses, asking "Are you down for this?" Musk shared the post to his timeline, suggested his endorsement. Musk first posed the idea of a new party amid a public falling out with President Donald Trump over the "Big Beautiful Bill" legislation. Musk railed against the sweeping legislation for adding trillions to the national debt, which soon deteriorated into both men launching increasingly personal attacks on their respective social media platforms. The so-called "breakup" has been uncomfortable for voters who support both men. A majority of the responses to Musk's new venture cautioned against splitting the anti-Democrat vote, drawing parallels to Ross Perot's Reform Party run in the 1992 election, which ended in a win for former President Bill Clinton. "The more you start explaining its specific positions, the more people you're going to lose," one user warned. "Next thing you know, Democrats win 43%, Republicans 37%, America Party 19%." "I'm vehemently opposed to the creation of a third party!" another user wrote in a lengthy explanatory post. Acknowledging support for both President Trump and Elon Musk, they added their hope that "both 'dads' can come to an agreement and work together for a successful 2026 midterm election." Musk offered no direct response to those concerns either. The closest he came was writing, "The replies to this announcement are comedy gold." The replies to this announcement are comedy gold 🤣🤣 — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 5, 2025 Originally published on Latin Times Elon musk Donald trump Elections
