Dangers Of Fluoridation Essays - Water Fluoridation, Oral Hygiene

Dangers Of Fluoridation How would you feel if someone came along, and made you take medicine without your knowledge or consent? Saying that this would be beneficial without a notification as to what this was, or any background information on it. How would you feel if politicians in your city have benn adding a corrosive poison into your drinking water? They do this because they believe it will benefit your health in the future? Well believeit or not, this has been happenin in many cities around the country for a long time now. Many people are not aware of the term fluoridation. In the Webster's World Dictionary, Second Edition, one can find the definition of fluoridation as the act of adding fluorides to a water supply to reduce the incidence of tooth decay. Many cities have been adding fluorides to their communities' drinking water. There have been well documented scientifically verified negative side-effects from exposure to fluoride. There is little evidence that fluoridation causes much damage to our bodies. Several studies have found that fluoride inhibits broken bone healing, and contributes to damage from osteoporosis and abnormal collagen formation. Increased hip fractures and osteosclerosis are scientifically associated with water fluoridation. The latest research from France on the hip frature issue that, The risk of hip frature was significantly higher when fluorine concentration was higher than 0.11 mg/L. Girls 15-16 years of age had premature aging of the bones as well as the hardening of the inter osseous membranes, and irregular bone formation. Studies hve confimred a dramatic increase in bone cancer in young males exposed to fluoride during growth of the bones, and a 5% increase in all types of cancers in fluoridated communities. FDA scientists have reported that fluoride inthe drinking water adversely affects fertility rates in women ages 10-49, and increasing fluoride levels. According to two speci alists from the National Instituteof Dental Research, fluoride treatments often cause nausea and vomiting in children, and may cause renal dysfunction. Fluoride is highly toxic, quite aside from any possible tendency to cause or promote cancer. A few grams can kill you. Fluoride has been proven ineffective in reducing tooth decay. A graph by the Health Department from 1930-1990 has shown that there was a decline in cavities prior to fluoridation. Even after fluoridation, the rate of decline was approximately the same. If fluoride was effective, there should havebeen a very noticeable drop in the cavity rate. So there was a 35 year decline of children's cavities without fluoride. THe effects of less acute fluorinepoisoning range from discoloration and pitting of the teeth, which is pretty ironic considering the goal of fluoridation is to promote healthy teeth. The largest US study on fluoridation and tooth decay, US Public Health Service dental records or over 39,000 schoolchildren showed that the decay rate of permanent teeth was virtually the same in fluoridated and nonfluoridated areas. The same results have shown up in other countries such as Canada and New Zealand. With tooth decay rate droppin, the simple fact that tooth decay dropped aftert he addition of fluoride cannot be attributed to that single factor. There are so many proofs that water fluoridation is a health hazard. Should people have to put up with even a slight risk to their drinking water when the benefits of fluoridation are available from voluntary measures, such as toothpaste, mouthwashes and pills? Does the benefit of fluoride, a decreased rate in cavities, excuse tampering with community water supplies? Fluoridation seems like a fraud. We've heard so many facts that fluoride causes more risks to our health than help it. It is impossible to consistently supply any medication through the drinking water. People are very unique in their sensitivity to drugs, adn resent being medicated without their consent. Medical doctors are required by law to share both the good and the bad side of a particular treatment, and then let us make an informed decision. The decision to fluoridate should be no different. Social Issues

Death Penalty for Juveniles

Death Penalty for Juveniles In 2005, he U.S. Supreme Court voted 5-4 to outlaw the death penalty for juveniles who were under the age of 18 at the time of the crimes, calling the execution of children unconstitutionally cruel. Pros Those who favor keeping the death penalty for juveniles make the following arguments: State legislatures should determine whether or not juveniles should be executed for capital crimes, not the courts.Juries should determine the culpability of juveniles on a case-by-case basis, on the nature of the crime and the maturity level of the individual juvenile.In a society, which is experiencing an increase in violence by juveniles, banning the death penalty would remove a much-needed deterrent.What other countries do concerning executing juveniles should not be relevant to the courts consideration of what the United States Constitution demands. Cons Those who oppose the  death penalty for juveniles  make these  arguments:​ Executing children is immoral and uncivilized.Scientific research shows that juveniles are underdeveloped and immature, particularly in the areas of the brain that dictate reason, impulse  control, and decision-making, and therefore should not be held culpable.A high percentage of juveniles on death row have suffered from mental abuse, physical abuse,  sexual abuse, drug addiction, abandonment and severe poverty.The execution of juveniles is expressly forbidden in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Convention on Human Rights,  the Geneva Convention  Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.With the exception of Somalia, the United States is the only country in the world that still executes juveniles.