Shifting viewpoints on fluoridation?

Something popped up in my social media feed that I didn't really understand but it got me thinking about paradigms.

There are a few paradigms in dentistry that are being challenged at the moment.

In the US, there seems to be a challenge to the status quo surrounding fluoride.

Meanwhile, in Australia the opposite view is being taken.

What is driving this?

Is it social media?

As dentists are we pandering to our patient population and backing away from educating them, instead, providing them with alternatives that have only emerging evidence.

Is it governments wanting to save money on infrastructure or to keep voters happy?

Is it clinicians exploring the world of developing their own toothpastes and products and challenging the big players which necessitates unique and different products?

Is it that as communities we are less altruistic and less willing to consider the needs of those parts of the community that benefit the most from water fluoridation.

Meanwhile the Cochrane Collaboration recently published this.

It's interesting that two countries' authorities can look at research and draw different conclusions.

Maybe it comes down to economic benefits of water fluoridation vs maintaining the infrastructure which does not take into consideration that those in more deprived areas benefit the most and have the smallest voice?

It will be interesting to see what the EPA in the US comes up with since they are charged with carrying out a review of the safety of water fluoridation.