Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on cancer in the bone
areas were lower than expected based on rates found in non-fluoridated areas (Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Fluoride). This study ultimately does not prove a connection between fluoride and osteosarcoma, it merely consists of trends with unknown causes. Other studies done on the topic do not find a connection between fluoride intake and osteosarcoma. The U.S. Public Health Service, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer, and the International and American Associations for Dental Research, have all reviewed data or done studies on fluoride and cancer and they all came to the conclusion that there is no evidence to suggest that fluoride causes cancer (“Does Fluoride Cause …show more content…
It’s illogical for Connett to look at one lone study and decide that because there was no explanation for a trend, it must be fluoride to blame. Instead of making assumptions, we can logically conclude that fluoride doesn’t cause bone cancer because of the several studies that have disproven this conspiracy. It’s important that the truth about fluoride is known by everyone because fluoridated water affects everyone. Everyone needs to drink water to survive and we shouldn’t have to be confused or scared about whether our water is safe. When people believe the conspiracies and misinformation surrounding fluoride that are spread by supposed experts who they think they can trust, it affects their decisions. Fear of fluoridation can cause people to distrust the government and the scientific community, which makes it harder for these organizations to get people to believe the truth about fluoride. This mistrust also makes it hard for these organizations to establish reliability with
Thesis Statement: Concerns for water fluoridation stem from the toxicity of fluoride, the dangers fluoride pose to the body, and equal declining tooth decay seen for fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries.
We often say how lucky we are to live in a place where we have access to safe water at any time but what if that was questioned? What if our water isn’t safe; it’s just that now we can’t see the dangers? Throughout the world 25 first world countries fluoridate some amount of their water artificially; almost half of these countries have the majority of their population drinking this chemically enhanced liquid every single day. In the UK 11% of us only have access to fluoridated water [70% in Ireland], and in the USA its 60%. After a quick browse on Google, the information about fluoride that can be learned from the NHS is mainly about teeth and tooth decay as fluoride is put in our toothpaste due to its claimed abilities to help tooth enamel fight attack [nothing has ever alluded to supporting this claim]. What can’t be seen at
My first reason on how it’s is most critical for the children of the Flint water crisis, is that they make sure that the kids are not drinking the lead water, and
Few object to the therapeutic use of fluoride to stop tooth decay, but fluoridation, the addition of fluoride to the public water supply, can spark avid controversy. Most dentists, medical groups, and government officials argue that fluoridation is a cheap and risk-free venture that doubles cavity prevention. In contrast, a small minority of dentists and conservative political groups argue that fluoride is a hazardous, poisonous substance that should not be consumed. Some antifluoridationists even claim that fluoridation is an untrustworthy form of socialized medicine. But rather than just attacking fluoridation as socialized medicine, opponents originally claimed that it was a conspiracy to poison or brainwash Americans through the water supply. This theory arose in the 1940s when the scientific community refused to endorse or reject fluoridation, thus allowing the debate to expand into the social sphere. While fluoridation opposition may be subconsciously inspired by naturalism, the social development of fluoridation into a Communist or fascist conspiracy resulted from a conscious effort by conservatives to suppress a growing government.
Fluoride is a trace of nutrients that occurs naturally in water and foods (Wilson). Fluoride has been a problem in the US for quite some time now. And as time goes along, it gets more worse. The only way to fight this problem off is to use less fluoride in our daily lives. This is something everyone should know about because it is getting to the point where it is affecting people's health. The question is, is fluoride being overused in the US? Many people are getting little benefits by the naturally occurring fluoride, plus they are getting more fluoride from the dentist office. There is only a certain amount of fluoride you should intake per day, and these days those numbers are higher than they should be. Fluoride is shown that is it being overused in the US by health issues, chemical intake, and children concerns.
Despite ongoing research, the cause of osteosarcoma is still unknown. Occurring in 2 persons per million per year (Michael et al., 2006) osteosarcoma is the most common primary tumor of the bone, but yet its incidence amongst malignant tumors is rare. However there are numerous factors that have been shown to effect prevalence. Osteosarcoma occurs predominantly in males, although the tumor does have a tendency to develop earlier in females (American Cancer Society, 2014). The risk of osteosarcoma is highest for people who are aged between 10 and 30. Most common however is during the teenage growth spurt, due to the rapid bone growth and higher chance of a mutation occurring in DNA replication. Height can also be a risk factor. Children with osteosarcoma are generally tall for their age, which again indicates a link to rapid bone growth. Osteosarcoma also appears to have a slightly higher prevalence in African Americans than other races. There is also evidence of genetic predisposition being a risk...
Fluoride added in our waters would also add other toxics that we may not know about. “The CDC admits that that 43% of fluoridation chemicals tested from contain arsenic, 2% contain lead and 3% contain copper” (12 Reasons). How is that supposed to help our bodies or decrease tooth decay? Scientist say, that the level of them are too low to do any damage to our bodies. The Environmental Protection Agency however, states that arsenic and lead have incre...
Roslin (August 14, 2013). Studies link dental X-rays to brain tumours, thyroid cancer, and low birth weight. www.straight.com
Yang, M. (2011). A current global view of environmental and occupational cancers. Journal Of Environmental Science And Health. Part C, Environmental Carcinogenesis & Ecotoxicology Reviews, 29(3), 223-249. doi:10.1080/10590501.2011.601848
In the United States, starting from the first breast cancer case in 1930s to today, a woman's lifetime risk of breast cancer increases to one eighth (Gray et al.). Continuously increasing breast cancer rate has caused a lot of concerns among not only ordinary people but also scientists. For decades, scientists have been working on the causes of breast cancer in order to find the corresponding methods of treatment. However, only about 25% of the breast cancer cases got explained (Brody et al.); till today, heredity, lifetime exposure to environmental estrogen (the female sex hormone), and the dietary fat are the only major known causes (“Cover Story: Breast Cancer and Environment”). For the 75% unexplained breast cancers cases, scientists, through various of researches, have come up with several hypothetical breast cancer causes, in which synthetic chemicals and environmental radiations are the major ones.
While women in this region continue to be diagnosed with breast cancer at an alarming rate, it is only normal for residence to want answers. Many years of research have found a couple of possibilities for this tragic problem. According to researchers at Silent Springs Institute in Newton Massachusetts, a possible reason behind the high cancer rates is the use of pesticides in marshes, cranberry bogs, golf courses and residential areas. Researchers are also looking into the possibility that synthetic chemicals found in common household products are to blame. Cheryl Osimo, Silent Springs Cape Cod coordinator, called the study's discoveries an important step.
Epidemiologists had identified many important causes of cancer by the early of 1980s. Many types of cancer vary in incidence by more than an order of magnitude between different populations and every type is rare in some part of the world. Many specific causes cancer are now known, the most common are by smoking, obesity and a few oncogenic viruses, but a large proportion of global variation for common cancers such as breast, prostate, colon and rectum remains unexplained (Peto J. , 2001). According to Richard Doll and Richard Peto, pollution accounts for 2% of all cancer cases and geophysical factors account for another 3% while 80% to 90% of cancers are caused by “environmental factors”. Environmental factors are the non-genetic factors which are smoking, diet, occupational exposure to chemicals and geophysical factors (naturally occurring radiation, man-made radiation, medical drugs and radiation and pollution.
Cancer directly affects the lives of approximately 13.7 million Americans. In 2014 alone it is estimated that there will be 1,665,540 patients diagnosed with cancer (Jones). Of these people, 43, 250 people will be diagnosed with oral cancer (Douglas). 585,720 Americans are expected to die of cancer in 2014 at a rate of almost 1,600 people per day. Cancer has become the second most common cause of death in the US. It accounts for 1 in every 4 deaths despite having an 80 to 90% survival rate for oral cancer (Jones).
For years people have tried to figure out one big question. What is the real cause of cancer? After much research, the statistics say that cancer is a disease of the modern world (Stevenson 1). A few main factors that cause cancer are the use of tobacco, industrial agents, and a person’s weight and diet. (Landau 2-4). The modern environment and everyday lifestyle of people contain factors that cause cancer.
The documentary uses correlation as causation which isn’t true. It stated many times throughout the film that there is a correlation with protein consumption and tumor growth. They use many examples like that within this film. Forks Over Knives (2011), “During the same time the way American ate was changing, again, the number of fast food franchises was exploding as more and more over scheduled Americans began using them as a convenient way to feed themselves and their families. While the fast food revolution was sweeping the nation the rate of cancer deaths in America was continuing to rise.” They don’t state what types