At the moment if it comes from the US I’m not buying it. 😏
The findings have not been peer-reviewed and the author has been convicted of…a lot of crime.
Peer review is for scientific papers, not lab results. If you have reason to question the lab that produced the results, then please share it.
There are many different ways to collect the sample that was sent to the lab…
We can fix this! Quick, destroy the FDA so the problem will never be seen again!
So long story short what adult toothpastes and children’s toothpastes are ok to use
Rubin said the contamination seems to lie in some ingredients added to toothpaste, including hydroxyapatite, calcium carbonate and bentonite clay.
Several children’s toothpastes, like Dr Brown’s Baby Toothpaste, did not test positive for any metals and did not contain the ingredients in question.
Send directives to retract the word lead from all communications, done
They had to stop putting lead into fuel years, and now even lead water pipes are under threat, so they need another way to lower peoples IQs to keep them mallable.
Don’t worry. Chronic underfunding of education coupled with social media means we can save money on expensive lead!
back in my day they even leaded the wine!
that’s where the phrase, “get the lead out”, became so popular.
invite some friends over for dinner, break out the wine and one of the servants would say, “this wine is vinegar!” and then you’d whip them and scream, “get the lead out!”
Back when I hunted mammoth, lead was not a concern.
mallablemalleableThanks. But I definitely remember having read “mallable” before. Could that be a British vs. American thing?
The word “Docile” is better suited here
The way they hit you, malleable fits, too.
Wait…US is still doing research?!
I mean, it depends what you’re willing to call “research”.
The testing, conducted by Lead Safe Mama, also found concerning levels of highly toxic arsenic, mercury and cadmium in many brands.
I’m not sure I would put this on the same level as a controlled, reproducible double-blind peer-reviewed study by Harvard and MIT published in a prestigious journal, but I’m sure it’s really close. /s
Edit: Ok, so people argue she’s at least a little legitimate, but why the fuck can’t we use actual scientific institutions anymore? We have a scientific method for a reason. Where’s the peer review? Where’s the people reproducing her results?
How do you think we get to the point where a researcher can get funding to do actual peer reviewed research? In the state the USA is in they won’t until something like this gets the publics attention.
Part of the reason the USA has gotten to this state is because we allow unverified sensationalist slop like this to get the public’s attention and be used against them. We’ve already seen 1 bullshit study linking vaccines and autism that is STILL being widely circulated and used to this day to convince people not only that vaccines are bad but that the whole GOVERNMENT is bad. Look at the results.
Now we’re going to convince people toothpaste is bad using the same quality of “independent research”?
I did not interpret this to mean toothpaste is bad. All I see is greedy corporations not doing their due diligence in making sure their product safe.
I agree that the reason we’ve gotten to this state is due in part to sensationalist media using bad research to promote claims that get clicks/views that earn them money.
But I don’t think that’s the same thing at all as someone paying independent labs to test consumer products for toxins.
There are plenty of sensationalist articles about pseudo-science to get upset over. But someone who’s paying for independent testing of consumer products for heavy metals is not it.
They keep losing their stuff and brain due to lead poisoning, so they have to keep re-searching.
How else can the US learn how to inflict the maximum amount of pain on people it doesn’t like?
So I’m all for substances to be routinely measured for lead concentration. I wouldn’t be surprised if lead and fascism have a link.
But, because of leaded gasoline and widespread use of lead in other products historically we cannot escape 0 lead.
I wouldn’t be surprised if you took a plate of food from a randomized selection of restaurants, you would find lead in every meal.
Lead is dense, and leaded gasoline absolutely fucked our planet. We know the safe level is 0.
We cannot say that any measurement of non-zero is worse than what we can ultimately control for. We need to be measuring these things over decades, to verify the amount continues to decrease with the ultimate hope of 0 (though, that’s unlikely).
It’s no surprise, they find lead in there. Our analytics have become crazy sensitive, we can detect the tiniest amounts of chemicals nowadays.
That’s why it’s very important to check articles like this one for what actually was found in order to avoid uninformed sensationalizing.
Reading through this article makes you wonder how Washington came up with their regulation for lead levels and why it differs so much from the FDA’s standards.
Even if we know, that no amount of lead can be considered ‘safe’, we have to have a regulation, of what is allowed and what we deem acceptable. Routinely testing products against these standards of course has to happen, otherwise, they’d be pretty useless.
For me, the crazy takeaway of the article was just how high the acceptable level of lead is for toothpaste (the current FDA limit is 20,000ppb for fluoridated toothpaste).
So that’s why there is a warning on the label about swallowing toothpaste.
I can’t tell from the article if there’s a real problem. None of the levels exceed FDA thresholds, and it sounds bad, but there’s also no definite claim of harm.
Yeah, I wish we had a list of stuff that does the most harm to people so we could address those problems from the top down.
The tooth has spoken
[Facepalm]
I posted this in total ignorance of my name.
lol I’m sorry I just couldn’t resist.
I was tempted to go for
The tooth has spoken the truth.
or even
The tooth has spoken the twooth
That was great. I got a really good laugh out of it.
Is this a secondary account for Duke Atreides or Dr Yueh?
Actually, this is Shaddam Corrino IV. I’m still pretty bitter about the events on Arrakis, but I’m effectively backed into a corner in exhile. I don’t have many ways to get back at Paul Atreides, so I’ve taken to spreading petty, hurtful references online. There’s not much else to do here on Salusa Secundus aside from going on maneuvers with my sardaukar.
That’s a pretty healthy outlook. A little bit more therapy and you might even stop wanting revenge.
Hmm. I’ll consider it, but I’ll probably just smuggle a bunch of Sardaukar to Arrakis disguised as Guild member to try for an assassination.
Yes Leto I’ve betrayed and effectively killed you, but the tooth! Be sure not to brush with hydroxyapatite and stick to melange based paste.
I don’t get the impression that Vladimir Harkonnen was a good enough host to supply Leto with toiletries during his brief stay.
I mean, dying seems to do a lot of harm, we should work on that first
Good point. What’re the leading causes of death?
Dying, for one. I always tell people, ‘just don’t die’, but nobody listens to me…
That sounds like a disturbing correlation centered around you.
Cars, heart disease, and guns in the USA. If I recall correctly.
Maybe we should work on mitigating those risks first, then.
The highest levels detected violated the state of Washington’s limits
https://tamararubin.com/about/
Tamara Rubin is an internationally recognized, multiple federal award-winning Lead-poisoning prevention advocate, documentary filmmaker, and mother of four sons (ages 26, 20, 17, and 14). She took on the cause of childhood Lead poisoning and consumer goods safety advocacy after her sons were acutely Lead poisoned by the work of a painting contractor in 2005. Tamara lives in Portland, Oregon with her husband and two youngest sons (who each have permanent disabilities from Lead exposure as infants).
She does this work specifically because it can cause permanent harm. Her family literally are victims of it.
Also, as the article notes, Washington State has much stricter standards than the Federal government.
More on Rubin:
If her youngest sons with permanent lead exposure injuries were 14 and 17 in 2023, and the lead exposure event took place in 2005, when her older children were young, some of the math isn’t mathing for me.
When it comes to lead, there is no “safe” level of lead in ones body. I think the reason the FDA has a limit is because we know it’s everywhere, so having a standard limit lower than where the average person may begin to see noticeable side-effects is important. Although, as everyone’s body chemistry varies, what is “safe/tolerable” for one individual may not be for another.
Lead is also one of those things that from research I have read affects children to the greatest degree while their little brains are growing. In children it can cause things like aggression, learning disabilities, and slow growth and development amongst other things.
Also this is only one source of lead children (or any of us) may be absorbing, which would make you wonder about a compounding affect when looked at in aggregate. We know it’s in a LOT of chocolate, spices (cinnamon being the current one doing kids in), toys, and environmental things like paint in places like old homes and schools (read a story not long ago about a kid they figured out was being poisoned from lead paint dust on a windowsill at school).
The max thresholds don’t mean it’s fine if it’s lower, just that at some point it becomes difficult to both detect the presence of things and there’s a limit on how much can be prevented. If we were progressing in time correctly we should be lowering these maximum levels both in the ability of detection and in the beginning sources. Especially in cases like this where either the metals are being added or are part of specific ingredients that would cost more to process and remove the metals.
And wow, they said Washington State was lower than the FDA, but that’s a magnitude less! Good job, Washington!
Per the FDA, there is no known safe amount of lead exposure. If it’s in something you want to minimize your exposure to it.
The article told you. There is NO safe level of lead. The legal limits are not appropriate for health.
Low level mass lead poisoning makes the world make a lot more sense now.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I don’t dispute her lead findings, but her statement about Hydroxyapatite shows she’s willing to give comment on things she knows nothing about.
Hydroxyapatite is extracted from cow bone and added because it allegedly helps teeth absorb calcium, though Rubin said she doubts it does.
Hydroxyapatite is used as an alternative to flouride, as it’s able to attach to the enamal and act as a barrier similar to how flouride does.
Research has shown it’s less effective than flouride overall (it can’t withstand as low a pH/acidity before dissolving), but it’s not added to increase calcium absorption, like she claims.
Tamara Rubin is a grifter with no expertise who bought an XRF gun to use to scan random objects as fodder for her blog where she gets money from affiliate links. Her wikipedia page talks about a few of her financial crimes. I wouldn’t worry anything she puts out.
Holy cow you weren’t kidding, she has been convicted of tons of crimes. Immediately discredited her findings for me
Hydroxyapatite is basically bone without the last calcium ion, which is calcium apatite
Hydroxyapatite is present in bones and teeth; bone is made primarily of HA crystals interspersed in a collagen matrix—65 to 70% of the mass of bone is HA. Similarly HA is 70 to 80% of the mass of dentin and enamel in teeth.
I think you may want to reconsider, it might not be used for calcium absorbtion (that’s via preferential binding and transport pathways in the gut lumen), the apatite is absorbed by the collagen matrix for the outer coating, effectively regenerating the tooth.
Flouride is a stronger, but worse version of this (strengthing apatite without the Ca++ ion), though both together could theoretically be optimal, I don’t know of any studies looking into this, and we should be wary of making such claims barring evidence.
I’m not suggesting hydroxyapetite is without merit for dental purposes, it absolutely is useful, and I agree combining it with flouride would likely be optimal (I recall reading a study that seemed to suggest HA can actually remineralize deeper into the tooth than flouride can).
I was just pointing out that the woman in the article didn’t seem to know what hydroxyapetite is actually used for, despite trying to seem like a source of knowledge.
I don’t know the woman, I’m just against improper use of science.
Most of the Flouride studies are a century old, I consider all medicine of that era to be effectively meaningless.
Let’s do some new studies and put this stupid shit to bed.
Id love studies with apatite and fluoride combined, I’d also like to see the efficacy of Flouride mouthwash and toothpaste vs in water, no reason to treat systemically if we can treat topically.
We’re practicing voodoo medicine based on tradition, let’s see if we can come up with something even better now that we’re not illiterate morons.
There are many recent studies on the efficacy of flouride, both mouth rinse and paste from the last two decades, as well as studies on the efficacy of essential oil rinses (Listerine) and stabilized chlorine (Closys).
There have been developments in flouride compositions as well, such as Stannus flouride, which has been fully stabilized and no longer stains the teeth like it once did. It brings with it advantages over the older Sodium Flouride, such as better resilience against low pH, reduction of temperature sensitivity from its ability to fill in the microtubules of the teeth, and an antibacterial effect from being stabilized to zinc, which remains on the teeth and kills caries causing bacteria for many hours after use.
I highly disagree that science is not advancing regarding dental solutions, we are very much not playing with voodoo. I would suggest instead that advancements in dental technology and science is not pushed harder due to financial interests, as wide adoption would drastically reduce the income of dentists. It’s capitalism, basically.
To give a highly encapsulated version of an ideal dental regimen based on modern science, it would be thus:
- Begin with a small rinse of Closys, which is effective at penetrating biofilm in the mouth, and raises the pH of the mouth to protect the teeth from abrasion for the next step (teeth enamel becomes softened in an acidic environment).
- Brush with a Stannus flouride toothpaste. The action of brushing itself even without toothpaste is beneficial, as it mechanically disturbs the colonies of bacteria on the teeth, which mouthwash alone cannot achieve. Leave the toothpaste on for a couple minutes if possible.
- Without rinsing with water, spit out the remaining toothpaste and begin a rinse of classic Listerine (or off brand). The essential oils will finish off all the bacteria that the brushing dislodged, as well as get between the teeth to act as a liquid flossing.
- Finish, again without rinsing with water, with a standard ACT mouth rinse (or off-brand).
This last step is is important for a few reasons.
- First, it is a high pH, and will neutralize the acidic nature of the Listerine.
- Second, it rinses out the alcohol of the Listerine, which if left in would have a detrimental effect on saliva production and dry mouth, which prevents the teeth from remineralizing from the phosphorous and minerals in your saliva.
- Third, it introduces yet another source of flouride after the acidity of the Listerine etches the enamel, which strangely increases the absorption of the flouride (flouride is most effective in an acidic environment, but that can only be taken advantage of with a liquid, as the brush would be harmful in that environment).
- Fourth, the ACT type rinse contains another antibacterial (cetylpyridinium chloride) that studies have shown stick to the enamel, killing yet more caries creating bacteria.
If this protocol is followed diligently twice a day, you will effectively entirely prevent caries causing bacteria from being able to proliferate enough to actually cause plaque buildup whatsoever, and you will likely never get another cavity for the rest of your life. Especially if combined with xylitol mints after meals, which caries causing bacteria uptake thinking it’s a sugar they can digest and use as fuel, but in fact cannot be, causing them to die. It also promotes saliva production, which increases pH and flushes the teeth with minerals.
Lastly, the reason we treat water with flouride is for the sake of those unable to afford access to, or proper knowledge of, flouride containing dental products as described above. If everyone did the above protocol, there would be no need to fluoridate water, but as that is unlikely, water fluoridation is a compromise.
I would suggest instead that advancements in dental technology and science is not pushed harder due to financial interests, as wide adoption would drastically reduce the income of dentists. It’s capitalism, basically.
See, I’m willing to go with you on your other points, but I don’t buy this at all.
Dentistry in America is ludicrously broken, but Europe has had its own way for decades, and diverged in many important ways, while having a far smaller economic incentive. My wife insisted on flying back home for all her dentistry after a catastrophic incident in the US (bad infection after unneeded root canal almost lead to sepsis). Personally I have nearly perfect teeth, or I did until recently. After the first examination I mentioned I had changed dental insurance, the dentist stepped out for a moment, came back, and suddenly I had 4 cavities that must be drilled at once. That was an eye-opening experience. My next dentist found nothing of course.
I don’t like the theory of adding compounds to water without a very, VERY compelling reason, particularly one with no alternatives. Providing free dental rinses to kids at school seems like it would solve this better, but adding it to water? If the state can add compounds to water, why not other compounds that reduce aggression? That’s actually not bad either, but can lead down a slippery slope. It’s less a concern for America, but I can imagine a communist country doing that with 0 reflection.
I’ll take up closys, I use a hydroxyapetite toothpaste that I find very powerful, alongside listerine.
There are a lot of things we could add to water that would help everyone, magnesium is at the very top of that list (as someone who grew up with rural water, city water is horrifically deficient here), but let’s just add that as a secondary supplement, it gets better scrutiny, but mostly, and here’s the real kicker:
IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THE FORMULATION, WE DON’T HAVE TO CHANGE EVERYONE’S WATER INFRASTRUCTURE!
Dentistry in America is ludicrously broken, but Europe has had its own way for decades, and diverged in many important ways, while having a far smaller economic incentive.
I don’t disagree with that at all. The amount of false dental procedures done in the US for monetary gain is quite high, making it a hassle to find an ethical dentist.
Providing free dental rinses to kids at school seems like it would solve this better
I think that would be a better solution in theory, but the cost of doing that en-masse across the country would be quite a bit higher than putting it in the drinking water (Single bulk purchase of fluoride with only a single person needed to be hired to add it to the water supply Vs. Millions of bottles of fluoride rinse being either being created by the government or contracted out to a company, which is then regularly distributed to schools, likely via truck, requiring hundreds to thousands of new employees to manage and run an operation of that size).
I can’t imagine a bill for that program being passed in this political climate. I mean, we can’t even get lead out of the water in many communities, and that’s far, FAR more dangerous. Not to mention PFAS now being in the water supply. Also, while that solution would help children, what about adults who cannot afford to buy fluoride rinses?
We have pretty solid evidence that shows when a community stops fluoridating their water, the poorest in that community have a pretty steep increase in preventable dental and oral health outcomes.
There is also some tentative evidence that high levels of fluoride could have negative effects to pregnant women, babies, and small developing children (potential lowering of IQ), but it’s pretty weak evidence that hasn’t been verified, and there is no evidence that it is harmful to adults.
So we have to choose between a 100% known bad outcome for poor people and a potential bad effect for young people from a poorly done study. I don’t think it’s too crazy of a decision to go with the option that does a significant amount of known good to the most disenfranchised part of the population, personally.
The places that do fluoridate their water do so publicly, is regulated and tested (and can be personally verified at home with a test kit), and adds the least amount possible to achieve the positive outcome, which comes out to a very small dose (many communities have naturally occurring fluoride in their water at higher levels)
If the state can add compounds to water, why not other compounds that reduce aggression?
That part is going a bit too far into conspiratorial thinking, IMHO, coming from someone who used to be a full on religious conspiracy theorist prepper. If we begin to assume that the government is going to start manipulating the water supply secretly, you would then have to assume that any water that you didn’t personally purify is suspect, and at that point water fluoridation is the least of your concerns.
The risk to a government doing that is absolutely immense, as the now modified water would be accessible and testable by the entire population that drinks it, and unless there are suddenly new chemicals that are undetectable by known scientific methods, the chances of a government being able to pull that off are below nill, and detection would result in a scandal beyond imagining.
Btw, asked gpt4o this question:
Fluoridation Coverage and Socioeconomic Status
Lower Access in Disadvantaged Areas: Studies have found that areas with greater socioeconomic disadvantage often have less access to fluoridated water. This disparity is attributed to factors such as limited infrastructure, political opposition, and logistical challenges in implementing fluoridation programs in these communities .
Variability Across Income Levels: In the United States, data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) revealed that children from families with low income—but not those living in poverty—were less likely than other income groups to reside in predominantly fluoridated counties .
So your argument is somewhat flawed, poor people tend to be less flouridated, so the people who need it get it the least.
This is the wrong way to distribute this, please stop and find a better way, MOST IMPORTANTLY A CONTROLLED WAY, and work out a precise dosage schedule while you’re at it, none of this ignorant yeehaw cowboy shit where each town rolls a dice.
So we have to choose between a 100% known bad outcome for poor people and a potential bad effect for young people from a poorly done study. I don’t think it’s too crazy of a decision to go with the option that does a significant amount of known good to the most disenfranchised part of the population, personally.
I disagree with your risk calculus. We are talking about something so 100% fundamental to human life, water. This is something we should consider absolutely sacrosanct, and a human right to all. It should be unthinkable to alter or modify it in any way imho.
I’m not trying to “Precious bodily fluids” here.
, but this is one thing we all should have personal choice over.You’re right it’s more expensive and the logistics are worse, but at the same time you could inculcate better habits in your population, and even subsidize proper mouth rinses.
If we begin to assume that the government is going to start manipulating the water supply secretly, you would then have to assume that any water that you didn’t personally purify is suspect, and at that point water fluoridation is the least of your concerns.
I agree, which is why I don’t want any tampering or adultering of water to begin with. I trust now that the levels are appropriate, but your whole argument boils down to “we’re adding stuff to water because it’s convenient”, which is true, but a lot of things are convenient.
Let’s have people take new referenda on adding them, flouride was added in the early 1900s without any political process.
I say this as someone who grew up in areas with truly horrible water quality from agricultural and industrial runoff, that was still declared “perfectly fine” by a dramatically corrupt local government. I also lived near the town where “A Civil Action” took place, and the water tasted funny there too (not terribly bad, but still weird).
Finally a benefit to not brushing my teeth! My ADHD finally gets a win!
/s
Now hold still as I apply this giant drill to Number Whatever.
My uncle always used to say that his goal in life is to have all his teeth replaced with implants.
He died at 51 from a heart attack.
I have a single implant. One. I fucking hate it. Not to speak of the dentist because he’s fantastic, but the structure of the things drives me nuts.
If anyone’s unaware, they don’t go into the socket like a normal tooth. There’s an anchor, but they’re kinda T-shaped and leave a miniscule gap between the “tooth” and the gum. SO MUCH SHIT GETS TRAPPED IN THERE! I carry metal toothpicks with me everywhere (“weapons” according to every security guy ever) because I constantly have to dig shit out.
There’s other problems too, but that’s the most annoying one.
Good to know that I should avoid implants.
I have three ceramic crowns and they do not have that issue at all. I was bad at my luxury bone maintenance when I was younger so I will probably have to get many more crowns in the future.
Hmm. I also have one but it’s the opposite experience for me. Getting the old tooth yanked out and then the drilling into the upper jaw was a weird experience. But I really can’t complain, I actually use that as the dominant ripping and chewing side now.
I’m 40% lead and other metals! *klongk klongk*
Don’t worry, we’ll just cut the FDA funding and stop testing… problem goes away just like that
Just like COVID testing in 2020!
it seems alot of themse are kids toothpaste, and SLS-free ones. they might be less regulated, because different companies may produce it, and alot of them base the manufactering in china. i also notice some of them sls-free can cause allergic reactions too.
