Lead author, dentist Chester Douglass "has written reviews of the literature for several companies that sell, reimburse for, or do research on preventive dentistry products, most notably GlaxoSmithKline, Colgate-Palmolive, Dentsply, Quintile, Delta Dental Plans " according to the acknowledgment section of this study. C Hayes [co-author] "has done limited consulting with Procter and Gamble." This study has some major flaws and it seems, in my opinion, that the researchers did their best to have the outcome align with their predetermined beliefs. Here are three: 1) The controls had bone cancer also that could have been fluoride-induced (co-author, Hoover found Ewings Sarcoma in a previous fluoride study) 2) The Controls were much older than the Cases. Median age 41 and 17.6 years-old, respectively (Fluoride builds up in bone with age so this is a gross dissimilarity) 3) Osteosarcoma occurs more frequently in teenage boys. There were less than 20 controls under age 20 used in Douglass' analysis. 73 of the total cases were male and 36 of the controls were male Douglass promised that his study would be larger than that of Elise Bassin, his PhD student who found an association between fluoride and osteosarcoma; but actually Douglass' study is much smaller. This study adds nothing new. Why are dentists doing cancer research anyway? The International Association of Dental Research (IADR) fiercely protects and encourages fluoridation. The Journal of Dental Research is the IADR’s flagship publication