Those concerns are for unrealistically high doses though. The last sentence of the abstract you linked:
In conclusion, based on the totality of currently available scientific evidence, the present review does not support the presumption that fluoride should be assessed as a human developmental neurotoxicant at the current exposure levels in Europe.
Calling concerns about the safety of fluoridated water “founded” is a bit of a stretch.
It’s the editorial board that makes endorsements. The opinions section is completely separate from the news section - the news reporters don’t contribute to the editorial decisions or endorsements.
I went to elementary school when whitehouse.com was still a porn site. I remember a class in the computer lab where we were supposed to do research on the government. Our teacher was very clear about going to the .gov website and absolutely not the .com one.
Whatever adult content blocking they had set up did not work.
It’s also paywalled, but once archive.org comes back online you can find it there. I highly recommend reading the whole thing.
The main takeaway is that the family separation policy was pushed by Trump and his administration incessantly. It took a while to really start because various government officials were reluctant to do it, and kept trying to placate the White House by slow walking the whole thing.
At one point, government lawyers who process asylum claims realized that the separated children were being shipped away from the local holding facility without any documentation, effectively “losing” them in the system. The lawyers figured this was just a terrible error and began processing asylum claims by the parents faster. If they could get it done within a week or so, the children would still be held in the nearby facility and could be reunited with their parents.
The white house was furious and directed the holding facility to start “relocating” the children faster, so that they’d be lost in the system before the parents could be processed.
In 2021, Chris Gloninger, a television weatherman in Boston with a passion for climate science, was approached with an intriguing prospect. Would he consider a job as chief meteorologist at a television station in Des Moines?
It was a smaller market, and talk of global warming would be challenging in a politically conservative state. But research from 2020 showed that most Iowans were interested in news about climate change, and the state was a leader in wind energy. Mr. Gloninger’s weather forecasts could be a breakthrough.
Russia desperately doesn’t want Ukraine to join NATO or further their ties to the west. Agreeing to those terms plays direct into Russia’s hands.
There is a wide gap between “Russia stops their invasion and pulls their forces out of Ukraine” and “unconditional surrender by Russia.” No one is calling for the latter, the former is a very reasonable outcome.
I don’t think he actually thinks that, I think it’s just that he is simple-minded and once he makes a concrete connection between concepts he’s unable to stop using it.
In his 2016 campaign, his advisers were pushing him to focus on immigration reform. They had policies that would make it harder for people to illegally immigrate (and legally, tbh), and they figured that would be a winning issue with republican voters. But Trump couldn’t stay on script, and kept neglecting to talk about immigration. So his advisors told him that the policies would be “like a wall” that stopped border crossings. “The wall” was supposed to be a mental image to remind him to discuss immigration. But Trump is too literal-minded, and starts just talking about the wall. The rest is history.
Those concerns are for unrealistically high doses though. The last sentence of the abstract you linked:
Calling concerns about the safety of fluoridated water “founded” is a bit of a stretch.