According to the Alzheimer society, "Current research provides no convincing evidence that exposure to trace elements of aluminum is connected to the development of dementia." [1]
Because Aluminium is extremely common in the earth, it's also impossible to avoid ingesting it.
I'm not arguing for or against this, but I'd be really hesitant to quote any organization that has large ties to the Alzeimers research industry which is famously hostile to any research that doesn't subscribe to the amyloid hypothesis. I wouldn't be surprised if the argument against certain contributing factors, like heavy aluminum exposure, were based on lack of connection to amyloid plaque. STAT News did a wonderful write-up on the tragic state of Alzeimer's research back in 2019
> The scientists described the frustrating, even career-ending, obstacles that they confronted in pursuing their research. A top journal told one that it would not publish her paper because others hadn’t. Another got whispered advice to at least pretend that the research for which she was seeking funding was related to the leading idea — that a protein fragment called beta-amyloid accumulates in the brain, creating neuron-killing clumps that are both the cause of Alzheimer’s and the key to treating it. Others could not get speaking slots at important meetings, a key showcase for research results. Several who tried to start companies to develop Alzheimer’s cures were told again and again by venture capital firms and major biopharma companies that they would back only an amyloid approach.
> “I don’t think there was a purposeful attempt to scuttle other approaches,” Selkoe added. Or as Aisen put it last week on the sidelines of the Aspen Ideas Festival, “I don’t think I’m part of a cabal.”
> It isn’t hard to understand why hundreds of academics lined up behind the amyloid model over the years, Fitzpatrick said. “Once a field commits to a particular hypothesis, the research resources — funding, experimental models, and training — all get in line,” she wrote in a 2018 analysis. That brings backers of the dominant idea accolades, awards, lucrative consulting deals, and well-paid academic appointments. Admitting doubt, let alone error, would be not only be a blow to the ego but also a threat to livelihood.
And rice produced in North America tends to concentrate arsenic.
Because something is difficult doesn't mean it's okay to rationalize more of it. Marketing something as "nontoxic" has a storied history of failure. DDT for one.
Cost/benefit analysis always. Perhaps in a survival or humanitarian crisis situation the risks of water-borne diseases would be far greater.
Because Aluminium is extremely common in the earth, it's also impossible to avoid ingesting it.
Further info at [1]: https://alzheimer.ca/en/about-dementia/how-can-i-prevent-dem...