Embed Notice

HTML Code

<blockquote style="position: relative; padding-left: 55px;"><section><a href="https://mstdn.social/users/JohnMashey/statuses/113416432034061496">JohnMashey (johnmashey@mstdn.social)'s status on Sunday, 03-Nov-2024 10:33:12 JST</a><a href="https://mstdn.social/@JohnMashey" title="johnmashey@mstdn.social"><img src="https://gnusocial.jp/avatar/253004-48-20240331203003.webp" width="48" height="48" alt="JohnMashey" style="position: absolute; left: 0; top: 0;">JohnMashey</a><div><a href="https://federate.social/@mattblaze/113416250101619372" rel="in-reply-to">in reply to</a><ul><li></ul></div></section><article><p><a href="https://federate.social/@mattblaze">@mattblaze</a> <br>Of course, at this point, removing fluroidation is dumb ...<br>but strangely, some UCSF friends of mine found that among the biggest pushers of fluoridation were NOT communists, but Big Sugar... to deflect from the awful possibility of reducing tooth decay by reducing sugar intake.<br><a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001798" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001798</a></p></article><footer><a rel="bookmark" href="https://gnusocial.jp/conversation/3926916#notice-7672405">In conversation</a><time datetime="2024-11-03T10:33:12+09:00" title="Sunday, 03-Nov-2024 10:33:12 JST">about 7 months ago</time> <span>from <span><a href="https://mstdn.social/@JohnMashey/113416432034061496" rel="external" title="Sent from mstdn.social via ActivityPub">mstdn.social</a></span></span><a href="https://mstdn.social/@JohnMashey/113416432034061496">permalink</a><h4>Attachments</h4><ol><li><article><header><div>Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: storage.googleapis.com</div><h5><a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001798">Sugar Industry Influence on the Scientific Agenda of the National Institute of Dental Research’s 1971 National Caries Program: A Historical Analysis of Internal Documents</a></h5><div></div></header><div>In a historical analysis of internal documents, Stanton Glantz and colleagues examine the sugar industry influence of the National Institute of Dental Research's 1971 National Caries Program.</div><footer></footer></article></li></ol></footer></blockquote>

Corresponding Notice

Embed this notice
JohnMashey (johnmashey@mstdn.social)'s status on Sunday, 03-Nov-2024 10:33:12 JSTJohnMashey
in reply to
- Matt Blaze
@mattblaze
Of course, at this point, removing fluroidation is dumb ...
but strangely, some UCSF friends of mine found that among the biggest pushers of fluoridation were NOT communists, but Big Sugar... to deflect from the awful possibility of reducing tooth decay by reducing sugar intake.
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001798
In conversationabout 7 months ago from mstdn.socialpermalink
Attachments
1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: storage.googleapis.com
  Sugar Industry Influence on the Scientific Agenda of the National Institute of Dental Research’s 1971 National Caries Program: A Historical Analysis of Internal Documents
  In a historical analysis of internal documents, Stanton Glantz and colleagues examine the sugar industry influence of the National Institute of Dental Research's 1971 National Caries Program.

Public

Embed Notice

HTML Code

Corresponding Notice