Summary

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that a Trump administration would prioritize removing fluoride from public water systems, a position at odds with major health organizations like the CDC, the American Dental Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics, all of which endorse water fluoridation as safe and beneficial for dental health.

Despite Kennedy’s controversial stance on health and environmental issues, which includes previously debunked claims linking vaccines to autism, Trump has praised his passion, stating that Kennedy would have significant freedom to influence health policy if Trump were elected.

  • Nougat
    link
    fedilink
    2161 month ago

    Roe v Wade: “This should be decided by the states!”

    Fluoride in water: “This should be decided by the federal government!”

    ???

    • @floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      144
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      They’re proposing to ban vaccines too, and they’re not mentioning particular vaccines, just “vaccines”. So no healthcare for trans people or pregnant women, and no vaccines. It’s only a matter of time before someone convinces them antibiotics are the devil’s work.

      • @InverseParallax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        53
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I mean…

        At this point let’s just tell them we forbid them from drinking arsenic because, even though it massively increases testosterone production, all liberal science says most humans aren’t strong enough to handle it.

        Fucking let moron nature take its course.

        • @randompasta@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          241 month ago

          Except they’ll take a lot of us with them. We need herd immunity, clean air and water, safe roads. They’re going to fuck us all with their idiocy.

            • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝
              link
              fedilink
              English
              151 month ago

              You can actually, evolution is driven by selective reproduction, not selective survival. Yes, reproduction is usually tied to survival, but natural selection would still work even if everyone always lived to 80.

              It would not select for traits useful for survival though, it would most likely select for traits that get you laid.

              • @InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                0
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                This requires us to prevent people from reproducing, we have to pick and choose who can breed.

                Gonna put that in the “probably not a great idea” category.

              • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                -31 month ago

                You have seen Idiocracy, yes? About selective reproduction.

                I’ve seen the kind of people that reproduce well. Most of them are both immoral and not very smart.

                My cousins’ parents are a good exception, though. They are exactly the kind of people that should have children, and their daughters too. My parents, on the contrary, were the kind of people about whom I’d never say that. It’s a pure miracle I’ve turned out at least kinda similar to a human.

                On the contrary, the best people I know personally of my generation either have problems they haven’t yet solved or are gay.

                OK, then thinking about myself, I actually think I’d not be that bad of a parent, in case one of those strange creatures likes me enough, but it would be really hard.

      • Billiam
        link
        fedilink
        311 month ago

        someone convinces them antibiotics are the devil’s work.

        Antibiotics are proof of evolution, since the various microorganisms create resistances to vaccines.

      • nolannice
        link
        fedilink
        281 month ago

        Nothing says pro life like returning to 18th century childhood mortality rates 😎

      • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Antibiotics shouldn’t be used as easily as people think, though. Because, ahem, antibiotic resistance is a thing.

        It’s a responsible position to only use antibiotics when you really need it. Not when you have cold. EDIT: just in case, by cold I mean cold, not covid

        • @floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 month ago

          That’s the kind of responsible and sensible advice the Republicans would never give. It requires too much nuance.

          • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            -41 month ago

            I don’t think I’ve heard anything responsible and sensible from politicians with chances to succeed in a two party system.