Talk:Water fluoridation controversy

1990 end date for fluoridation in East Germany: reason?
I notice that the article lists 1990 as the end date for water fluoridation in East Germany. Was that date due merely to the termination of the DDR as a legal entity upon unification with the BRD; was it due to the DDR's adoption, upon unification, of the BRD policy of non-fluoridation; or did the DDR abandon fluoridation pre-unification, and if the last, did it do so under the influence of the USSR, which abandoned fluoridation in the same year?

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2023
Request to add LGBT chemicals conspiracy theory under the section Water fluoridation controversy. 223.25.74.34 (talk) 13:50, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Do you have sources connecting fluoridation to that subject? It isn't mentioned in that article, so I'd suggest getting that fixed first. Then it could be added here. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 19:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2023
I'd like to include some recent citations from EPA.gov of a peer reviewed paper directly linking increase of violence in America to Fluoride in water:

https://hero.epa.gov/hero/index.cfm/reference/details/reference_id/519783

Public health is an important topic, and being able to conduction long term studies allows us to write better papers and help guide policy in the interests of public health. Inspector General Mills (talk) 07:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * This sentence from near the end of that document is critical - "This study presents a data-backed hypothesis about one possible cause of crime; it is not a definitive statement about crime causality." The difference between correlation and causation matters a lot here. HiLo48 (talk) 09:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. PianoDan (talk) 16:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2024
Removal of the recent edit which adds the text "now-debunked". The text has been added to the article is not be beneficial, for a controversial topic like this adding text like "now-debunked" is not helpful and can inflame the topic. The suggested text lacks proper citations or references to reputable sources. In Wikipedia, verifiability and reliable sourcing are essential. Without credible sources to support the claims made in the text. The article already provides historical context by mentioning the conspiracy theories from the 1950s and 1960s, which have been discredited. The topic of water fluoridation is controversial, and any additions to the article should be handled with care. Adding potentially controversial statements without solid references is not ideal. If this is to remain, I belive a more considered edit should be performed to highlight this point, but for now I belive the edit should be reverted.

Opposition to fluoridation has existed since its initiation in the 1940s. During the 1950s and 1960s, now-debunked conspiracy theorists claimed that fluoridation was a communist plot to undermine American public health. In recent years, water fluoridation has become a prevalent health and political issue in many countries, resulting in some countries and communities discontinuing its use while others have expanded it.

Original text bellow:

Opposition to fluoridation has existed since its initiation in the 1940s. During the 1950s and 1960s, conspiracy theorists claimed that fluoridation was a communist plot to undermine American public health. In recent years, water fluoridation has become a prevalent health and political issue in many countries, resulting in some countries and communities discontinuing its use while others have expanded it. 146.200.136.91 (talk) 16:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. As correctly observed, this is not an uncontroversial edit, and as such the "edit request" procedure does not apply here. PianoDan (talk) 17:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)