If you watched the whole thing you'd also see where he looks at the studies that say fluoride is neurotoxin and explains the methodology. Yes, fluoride being used as mind softener or whatever rubbish people tout has no basis in reality. But he shows all data from both sides and even explains how some people's concerns are reasonable. Secondly, I have two degrees in scientific disciplines, and it was not echo chamber, it was research, observe, verify, disprove. Don't like a current scientific consensus, cool, disprove the law, theory, or model. If you're using it to prove anything you are practicing pseudoscience. Inability to understand or grasp basic scientific principles is not and argument against them. You're absolutely not smarter than me. Maybe a better debater, maybe you can quick site dodgy or cherry picked info faster, or maybe you feel safe here in your echo chamber where people rush to your aid. But absolutely not smarter. Sorry bud. We were encouraged in university TO challenge the established models and consensus. You speak on something you have no idea about.

Nice way to dodge the questions. Incredulity alert. Maybe actually read the process involved in fluoridated water, how it was decided when and where, and the final findings of the data after decades long research. Again site your claim or your claim is dismissed.

You're examples are a red herring fallacy, I didn't ask about that, I pointed out that it was voted on. That can't be disputed, and less than 10% was against it in the initial trials and dozens of these morons started calling in with "issues caused by the flouride" BEFORE it was even introduced.

And then how do we make decisions on public health? Only from sources you like?

The issue you're having is your ignoring the chemical reaction that takes place once it's introduced to the body. It ceases to be fluoride once the chemical reaction takes place, it becomes flouroapetite. Which is a mineralized substance. Secondly the test WAS given with the care, the trials were done in areas that did not have naturally occurring fluoride in the water wells. And it is regulated to ensure it is intact. 7 MG per liter. And finally there's no such thing as concentrated fluoride levels in juice. One liter is one liter is one liter and .7 MG etc... it took 2 decades to publish the findings which all began with a noticeable difference in Tooth decay levels from populations that already had naturally occurring fluoride in the water vs. No fluoride. It was carefully done research program done with adherence to the scientific method that underwent peer review. And finally 95% of all toothpaste sold is fluoridated which means it's safe to assume in the regulated water levels won't cause excess fluoride. Toddlers have eaten entire tunes of toothpaste which is 2,000 times more concentrated than water with no fatal effects. Dose makes the poison. Too much fluoride will kill you, yes. So will too much water without fluoride, so will too much oxygen, so will too many apple seeds. You're complete disregard that what is in your body is NOT sodium silicofluoride once the chemical reaction is complete is wilful ignorance on your part.

. 7 MG per liter of water. That's the amount. .7 MG to have a base line solidity in any persons to not cause harm while still having a detectable, testable, and verified positive effect. Secondly you are right sodium fluorosilicate is a neurotoxin. Good thing the fluoride in your water and toothpaste forms a compound called flouroapatite which is mineralizing compound that bonds to your enamel on your teeth. So I know big words scary but your misunderstanding of chemistry and siting the wrong compound doesn't help your argument.

Still waiting on you to cite your source for that Nuremberg BS you said. Stop echoing talking points you can't back up.