Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2007;335 (6 October), doi:10.1136/bmj.39357.591076.47
Fiona Godlee, editor
fgodlee@bmj.com
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
If you're interested in what BMJ editors do when they are out and about, there's a new blog on bmj.com (http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/category/comment/editors-at-large). It gives a flavour of some of the conferences we've been at and some of the people we've met: the eponymous Dr Kawasaki for one, UK public health grandee Rod Griffiths for another. I met Rod at a conference in Athens and we got talking about fluoride. No one in their right mind would get involved in the debate about water fluoridation, he said. It's a minefield. But this week we do get involved, and against his better judgment, so does Rod.
In the Analysis section (doi: 10.1136/bmj.39318.562951.BE), KK Cheng, Iain Chalmers, and Trevor Sheldon summarise the problems that bedevil reasoned discussion on whether fluoride should be added to water supplies. Highly polarised disputes are fuelled by misuse of what little evidence there is, and the
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+