Texans for Accountable Government takes an ethical stance against fluoridation.
Taking an ethical stance against fluoridation is not a judgment on the efficacy of the practice itself, rather it’s a consideration of whether government should have rights that medical doctors don’t have, and whether medical treatment should be the role government at all.
It is compatible to believe in the benefits of fluoride while being against the fluoridation of public drinking water, on the grounds that it is always an individual’s right to choose his medication. Fluoridation violates this natural right.
Currently, city governments are medicating residents without their consent – if medical doctors treated patients without consent, they would lose their license and potentially face imprisonment. Outside the limited role of government to protect life, liberty, and property – what is wrong for individuals, ought to be considered bad policy for government.
It is irrational to prescribe the same dose of medication for a baby as one would for a 250lb man; or the same dose to the elderly with compromised immune systems as athletes in their prime. Fluoridation is a one-size-fits-all prescription which cannot account for the vast diversity of any given population.
If one were in favor of giving government power to mass medicate their residents, then we ask where the line may be drawn between the opinions of politicians and their lobbyists, and conclusive evidence that will show benefits for every member of a population at all times?
Politicians have used tactics to side step dealing with medical ethics by calling fluoride an essential nutrient rather than a medicine:
- Fluoride and fluoridation is intended to prevent tooth decay. Medicine is intended to prevent and treat disease – the CDC defines tooth decay as a chronic disease. It cannot be refuted that fluoride is a medicine, and that fluoridation is mass-medicating.
- If an animal or person is deprived of an essential nutrient, death or disease follows. There is no conclusive evidence that fluoride is a nutrient, rather fluoride is an ostensible intervention to fix a problem human biology couldn’t handle on its own.
When dealing with issues of serious complexity, it is always best to turn inward and use the gift of reason. Starting from the premise of self-ownership, a simple string of inferences will guide you through the fog.
Texans for Accountable Government
Nov. 2nd 2015 – Fluoride Free San Marcos Campaign.