The National Fluoridation Information Service - Assignment Example

Nevertheless, there are three things I have learned from the lecture Nokes. One of these is that the claims to the negative effects of fluoride on the human body – weakening of bones, Down syndrome, cancer, birth defects, reproductive effects, renal and gastrointestinal effects, lower IQ, and other bone disorders – basically have no scientific bases (Nokes). Moreover, these claims may have only been due to traditional knowledge about the harmful effects of fluoride as raw material and in large amounts.

I have also learned from this that I should not believe advertisements or negative propaganda or any type right away. Furthermore, I believe that the best thing to do with something confusing is to deal with it logically, specifically by using “What, Why, When, How, Where, Who” (Nokes). Through this logical investigation on fluoridation as explained by Nokes, one can find out that much of the claims that other people have against fluoride are unsubstantiated by scientific evidence and logic.

         The second thing I have learned is that the potential harm from fluoride is least likely to happen because although fluoride can be harmful in large amounts, the government has set a limit to this. This limit values at 0.01 g/mL while the actual amount of fluoride added by the city government to water is 0.001 g/Mr. This is just a mere 10% of the actual threshold value, which means that it is impossible that the fluoride will ever cause any harm.

However, I would still like to think that the harm that fluoride causes may not exactly depend solely on the amount. Sometimes, I would like to think that fluoride is like acid that no matter what the amount, will cause some damage to the material.          The third thing I have learned from Nokes’ lecture is that just a small amount of fluoride is added to the water and that even this amount relative to water is much smaller in concentration. For example, although fluoride is 134,000 mg in 1 kilogram of the HFA compound, this seemingly large amount of fluoride only translates as 7.

46 x 10-6 kg/L when mixed with water (Nokes). This means that water is a great neutralizer of chemicals as it is the universal solvent. The fluoride in water, therefore, if water fluoridation is to be carried out soon, is much lower than what can charm. However, as I have explained earlier, sometimes some chemical reactions may kill someone regardless of the amount of the reactants involved. This means that a small amount of fluoride may stiller which is just as intense as when it is caused by fluoride above safe levels.

Moreover, sometimes I would like to think that some damage caused by fluoride may accumulate in the human body as more and more fluoride is being ingested through fluoridated water. Furthermore, there could also be some complications that will take some time before it can take effect as a disease. In fact, although I am Although’ lecture, he did not shed light on all the aspects of the fluoridation of water.          I would therefore like to suggest that there should be a more thorough investigation of the case of the fluoridation of water in Hamilton City.

All aspects should be answered especially those involved in the process of the fluoridation of water. One of the theses the nature of diseases caused by fluoride, and whether toxicity to fluoride can indeed take place if the chemical has accumulated in the body. However, if one considers the logic behind the explanations of Nokes, then I would like to say that I am convinced that water fluoridation is a good thing. My doubts are mere assumptions. Everything could be fine, as long as the toxicity of fluoride depends on the amount, but it is, therefore, another story if fluoride exhibits long-term effects like the behavior of some cancer-causing chemicals or can accumulate in time and came to disease later on, like the behavior of eye cataract or cancer.