|
10 Facts about Fluoride
Fluoride Action Network | December
2006 |
Printer-Friendly Version
http://fluoridealert.org/fluoride-facts.htm
1) 97% of western Europe
has chosen fluoride-free water .
This includes: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France,
Germany, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Northern
Ireland, Norway, Scotland, Sweden, and Switzerland. (While some
European countries add fluoride to salt, the majority do not.)
Thus, rather than mandating fluoride treatment for the whole
population, western Europe allows individuals the
right
to choose, or refuse, fluoride.
2) Fluoride is the only chemical
added to drinking water for the purpose of medication (to
prevent tooth decay). All other treatment chemicals are
added to treat the water (to improve the water's quality and
safety - which fluoride does not do). This is one of the reasons
why most of Europe has rejected fluoridation. For instance:
In
Germany,
"The argumentation of the Federal Ministry of Health against a
general permission of fluoridation of drinking water is the
problematic nature of compulsion medication."
In
Belgium, it is "the fundamental position of the drinking
water sector that it is not its task to deliver medicinal
treatment to people. This is the sole responsibility of
health services."
In
Luxembourg, "In our views, drinking water isn't the
suitable way for medicinal treatment and that people needing
an addition of fluoride can decide by their own to use the most
appropriate way."
3)
Contrary to previous belief, fluoride has minimal benefit
when swallowed. When water fluoridation began in
the 1940s and '50s, dentists believed that fluoride needed to be
swallowed in order to be most effective. This belief, however, has
now been discredited by an extensive body of
modern research (1).
According to the Centers for Disease Control,
fluoride's "predominant effect is posteruptive and topical" (2).
In other words, any benefits that accrue from the use of fluoride,
come from the direct application of fluoride to the outside of
teeth (after they have erupted into the mouth) and not
from ingestion.
There is no need, therefore, to expose all other tissues to
fluoride by swallowing it.
4)
Fluoridated water is no longer recommended for babies.
In November of 2006, the
American Dental Association (ADA) advised that parents should
avoid giving babies fluoridated water (3). Other
dental
researchers have made similar recommendations over the past
decade (4).
Babies exposed to fluoride are at high risk of
developing
dental
fluorosis - a permanent tooth defect caused by fluoride
damaging the cells which form the teeth (5). Other tissues in the
body may also be affected by early-life exposures to fluoride.
According to a recent review published in the medical journal
The Lancet, fluoride may damage the developing brain, causing
learning deficits and other problems (6).
5) There are better ways of
delivering fluoride than adding it to water. By
adding fluoride to everyone's tap water, many infants and other
at-risk populations will be put in harm's way. This is not only
wrong, it is unnecessary. As western Europe has demonstrated,
there are many equally effective and less-intrusive ways of
delivering fluoride to people who actually want it. For example:
A) Topical fluoride products such as
toothpaste and mouth rinses (which come with explicit
instructions
not to swallow) are readily available at all grocery stores
and pharmacies. Thus, for those individuals who wish to use
fluoride, it is very easy to find and very inexpensive to buy.
B) If there is concern that some people in the
community cannot afford to purchase fluoride toothpaste (a
family-size tube of toothpaste costs as little as $2 to $3), the
money saved by not fluoridating the water can be spent
subsidizing topical fluoride products (or non-fluoride
alternatives) for those families in need.
C) The vast majority of fluoride added to
water supplies is wasted, since over 99% of tap water is not
actually consumed by a human being. It is used instead to wash
cars, water the lawn, wash dishes, flush toilets, etc.
6)
Ingestion of fluoride has little benefit, but many risks.
Whereas fluoride's benefits come from
topical contact with teeth, its
risks to health
(which involve many more tissues than the teeth) result from being
swallowed.
Adverse effects from fluoride ingestion have
been associated with doses attainable by people living in
fluoridated areas. For example:
a) Risk to the brain. According to
the National Research Council (NRC), fluoride can damage the
brain.
Animal studies conducted in the 1990s by EPA scientists found
dementia-like effects at the same concentration (1 ppm) used to
fluoridate water, while human studies have found adverse effects
on IQ at levels as low as 0.9 ppm among children with nutrient
deficiencies, and 1.8 ppm among children with adequate nutrient
intake. (7-10)
b) Risk to the thyroid gland.
According to the NRC, fluoride is an
“endocrine disrupter.” Most notably, the NRC has warned that
doses of fluoride (0.01-0.03 mg/kg/day) achievable by drinking
fluoridated water, may reduce the function of the thyroid among
individuals with low-iodine intake. Reduction of thyroid
activity can lead to loss of mental acuity, depression and
weight gain (11)
c) Risk to bones. According to the
NRC, fluoride can diminish bone strength and increase the risk
for
bone fracture. While the NRC was unable to determine what
level of fluoride is safe for bones, it noted that the best
available information suggests that fracture risk may be
increased at levels as low 1.5 ppm, which is only slightly
higher than the concentration (0.7-1.2 ppm) added to water for
fluoridation. (12)
d) Risk for bone cancer. Animal and
human studies – including a recent study from a team of Harvard
scientists – have found a connection between fluoride and a
serious form of
bone cancer (osteosarcoma) in males under the age of 20. The
connection between fluoride and osteosarcoma has been described
by the National Toxicology Program as "biologically plausible."
Up to half of adolescents who develop osteosarcoma die within a
few years of diagnosis. (13-16)
e) Risk to kidney patients. People
with kidney disease have a heightened susceptibility to fluoride
toxicity. The heightened risk stems from an impaired ability to
excrete fluoride from the body. As a result, toxic levels of
fluoride can accumulate in the bones, intensify the toxicity of
aluminum build-up, and cause or exacerbate a painful bone
disease known as
renal osteodystrophy. (17-19)
7)
The industrial chemicals used to fluoridate water may
present unique health risks not found with
naturally-occurring fluoride complexes . The chemicals -
fluorosilicic acid, sodium silicofluoride, and sodium fluoride -
used to fluoridate drinking water are industrial waste products
from the
phosphate fertilizer industry. Of these chemicals,
fluorosilicic acid (FSA) is the most widely used. FSA is a
corrosive acid which has been linked to
higher blood lead levels in children. A recent
study from the University of North Carolina found that FSA can
- in combination with chlorinated compounds - leach lead from
brass joints in water pipes, while a recent study from the
University of Maryland suggests that the effect of fluoridation
chemicals on blood lead levels may be greatest in houses built
prior to 1946. Lead is a neurotoxin that can cause learning
disabilities and behavioral problems in children. (20-23)
8) Water fluoridation’s benefits
to teeth have been exaggerated. Even proponents
of water fluoridation admit that it is not as effective as it was
once claimed to be. While proponents still believe in its
effectiveness, a growing number of studies strongly question this
assessment. (24-46) According to a systematic review published by
the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, "The magnitude
of [fluoridation's] effect is not large in absolute terms, is
often not statistically significant and may not be of clinical
significance." (36)
a) No difference exists in tooth decay between
fluoridated & unfluoridated countries. While water
fluoridation is often credited with causing the reduction in
tooth decay that has occurred in the US over the past 50 years,
the same reductions in tooth decay have occurred in all
western countries, most of which have never added fluoride to
their water. The vast majority of
western Europe has rejected water fluoridation. Yet,
according to comprehensive
data from the World Health Organization, their
tooth decay rates are just as low, and, in fact, often lower
than the tooth decay rates in the US. (25, 35, 44)
b) Cavities do not increase when fluoridation
stops. In contrast to earlier findings, five
studies published since 2000 have reported no increase in tooth
decay in communities which have ended fluoridation. (37-41)
c) Fluoridation does not prevent
oral health crises in low-income areas. While some
allege that fluoridation is especially effective for low-income
communities, there is very little evidence to support this
claim. According to a recent systematic
review
from the British government, "The evidence about [fluoridation]
reducing inequalities in dental health was of poor quality,
contradictory and unreliable." (45) In the United States,
severe
dental crises are occurring in low-income areas irrespective
of whether the community has fluoride added to its water supply.
(46) In addition, several studies have confirmed that the
incidence of severe tooth decay in children (“baby bottle tooth
decay”) is not significantly different in fluoridated vs
unfluoridated areas. (27,32,42) Thus, despite some
emotionally-based claims to the contrary, water fluoridation
does not prevent the oral health problems related to poverty and
lack of dental-care access.
9) Fluoridation poses added
burden and risk to low-income
communities. Rather than being particularly
beneficial to low-income communities, fluoridation is particularly
burdensome and harmful. For example:
a) Low-income families are least
able to avoid fluoridated water. Due to the high
costs of buying bottled water or expensive water filters,
low-income households will be least able to avoid fluoride once
it's added to the water. As a result, low-income families will
be least capable of following ADA’s recommendation that infants
should not receive fluoridated water. This may explain why
African American children have been found to suffer the
highest rates of disfiguring dental fluorosis in the US.
(47)
b) Low-income families at greater
risk of fluoride toxicity. In addition, it is now
well established that individuals with inadequate nutrient
intake have a significantly increased susceptibility to
fluoride’s toxic effects. (48-51) Since nutrient deficiencies
are most common in low-income communities, and since diseases
known to increase susceptibility to fluoride are most prevalent
in low-income areas (e.g. end-stage renal failure), it is likely
that low-income communities will be at greatest risk from
suffering adverse effects associated with fluoride exposure.
According to
Dr. Kathleen Thiessen, a member of the National Research
Council's review of fluoride toxicity: “I would expect
low-income communities to be more vulnerable to at least some of
the effects of drinking fluoridated water." (51)
10)
Due to other sources, many people are being over-exposed to
fluoride . Unlike when water fluoridation first
began, Americans are now receiving fluoride from many
other sources*
besides the water supply. As a result many people are now
exceeding the recommended daily intake, putting them at elevated
risk of suffering
toxic effects.
For example, many children ingest more fluoride from
toothpaste
alone than is considered “optimal” for a full day’s worth of
ingestion. According to the Journal of Public Health
Dentistry:
"Virtually all authors have noted that some children could
ingest more fluoride from [toothpaste] alone than is recommended
as a total daily fluoride ingestion." (52)
Because of the increase in fluoride exposure
from all sources combined, the rate of
dental
fluorosis (a visible indicator of over-exposure to fluoride
during childhood) has increased significantly over the past 50
years. Whereas dental fluorosis used to impact less than 10% of
children in the 1940s, the latest national survey found that it
now affects over 30% of children. (47, 53)
* Sources of fluoride include: fluoride
dental products, fluoride pesticides, fluorinated pharmaceuticals,
processed foods made with fluoridated water, and tea.
References
To access the references,
click
here
Fluoride Action Network | 802-338-5577 |
info@fluoridealert.org |