Fluoride – a saga (part three)




So by this stage I bet you’re wondering what fluoride is! Either that or you’ve just landed here from twitter at exactly the right moment….

Fluoride is actually represented in a collection of simple chemicals (fluorides) naturally occurring in all bodies of water. 

Evidence for fluoridation stems from research by Dean et al (1942) who showed low doses of fluoride protect against tooth decay. The fluoride concentration of samples was no greater than 2 ppm and most fluoridation programs operate to 1 ppm. To put this into perspective two foods naturally concentrated with fluoride, tea (1-2 ppm) and seafood (1-3ppm) can have more fluoride than fluoridated water. Whereas vegetables can also have notable fluoride content, this may not be independent of the area having a fluoridation system in place. 

Fluoride stops tooth decay by strengthening the surface of teeth during childhood when the second set of teeth are still inside the gums and by preventing the bacterial growth inside the mouth, allowing recovery of weak points.

It is true that care should be taken in the first eight years of life to not over-consume fluoride as the Enamel can be damaged causing permanent mottling of teeth. While most toothpastes contain up to 1000ppm, there are newer child-friendly products aimed at children who commonly over-use tooth pastes. These often have a limit of 400ppm fluoride. 

Keep in mind that non-fluoridated bottled water is responsible for 50% of tooth decay in 6yos; there is a place for less fluoridated products and potential users may want to seek advice from a dentist. (For more information regarding fluoride and dental hygiene see the Australian Dental Association Inc. and the British Fluoridation Society including expert opinion on fluoride use.) 



Political Action

In the NSW parliament the opposition introduced a Bill (last year) which would have given control of water fluoridation to the Government. It was hoped this would quash debates in the municipal council chambers of Lismore and Byron Bay Shire, yet the Bill was rejected and the decision to fluoridate still rests with local councils. The QLD parliament seems to have gotten to the same point but from the opposite direction. The previous Labor government under Anna Bligh brought all fluoridation matters under state-control, only to have the incoming Liberal government reverse the decision back to the local level. QLD has had historically low levels of fluoridation but is now on par with other states.

It is interesting that nutritional guidelines be delayed for 40-some years after fluoridation of drinking water commenced in 1945 (US, Michigan), 1954 (NZ, Hastings), and 1953 (AU, Beaconsfield HOBART). US/Canada were first to adopt recommended daily intake guidelines for fluoride in 1997, followed by Europe (2001/2002) then  Australia/New Zealand (2005). Despite its benefit authorities have been slow to classify fluoride as an essential nutrient owing to the fact that it isn’t necessary for life. Fluoride does save lives, although indirectly as it prevents tooth decay which can lead to septicaemia / septic shock causing multi-organ failure and death! A less dramatic reason for its acceptance as an essential nutrient could be the great improvement to quality of life when taken as a preventative agent (as is the case when drinking water is treated).




Maybe supporters of water fluoridation need not be so fearful of a dramatic increase in dental caries. This is certainly the picture painted by the UK which has 10% fluoridation and has dental caries rates much lower than previous generations thanks to fluoridated toothpastes and topical treatments offered by dentists. This would require conscious and responsible action by the public to purchase fluoridated tooth pastes and visit their dentist regularly. Oh and people who cannot afford the dentist will be left without the public health  safety net that cheap water fluoridation currently provides.

If lobbyists want public justice on issues important to them they need to highlight were the lack of evidence lies and fight for a mandate for scientific clarification. This is a long road and seems beyond the capacity of many entrants to the anti-fluoride camp.




Please remember that I’m a dietetics STUDENT, so none of my opinions should be trusted! PLEASE consult an Accredited Practicing Dietitian (APD) or your GP before applying anything discussed in this blog to your diet or exercise regime


One thought on “Fluoride – a saga (part three)

  1. There has been no research to show using bottled water causes tooth decay,” reports American Dental Association spokesman Dr. Johnathan Shenkin in a Healthday.com article.

    Dr. Burton Edelstein agrees. He is president of the DC-based Children’s Dental Health Project and Columbia University dentistry professor who describes the increasing prevalence of tooth decay among young children as “alarming.”

    No US child is fluoride-deficient. But up to 60% show signs of fluoride-overdose (dental fluorosis), Tooth decay rates are soaring despite decades of fluoridated water and toothpaste, a glut of fluoridated dental products, and a fluoride-saturated food supply.

    The U.S. Surgeon General reports that excessive fluoride actually increases susceptibility to cavities.

    The Iowa Fluoride Study’s principal investigator, Steven Levy, found that some babies ingest 6 milligrams fluoride daily. Furthermore, Levy found 90% of 3-month-olds consumed over their recommended fluoride levels. “There is no specific nutritional requirement for fluoride…,” Levy et al. admit.

    Levy also found:

    — 77% of soft drinks had fluoride levels greater than 0.60 ppm
    — two ounces of baby chicken food provides baby’s maximum dose
    — foods high in fluoride — teas, dry infant cereals, dried chicken, and
    — grape juice, especially white, contains very high fluoride levels
    — 42% of juice and juice drinks tested revealed unlabeled fluoride levels
    greater than 0.60 ppm
    — cereals processed in fluoridated areas contain from 3.8 to 6.3 ppm

    Levy did another study which concluded: “While bottled water users had significantly lower fluoride intakes, this study found no conclusive evidence of an association with increased caries.” (J of Public Health Dentistry 2007)

    Reports that bottled-water drinkers risk more cavities are
    unsubstantiated. The Wall Street Journal reported, “Little research has been done on the use of bottled water and risk of tooth decay, dental experts concede.

    Even when fluoridated water is the most consumed item, cavities are extensive when diets are poor, according to Caries Research.

    Burt and colleagues studied low-income African-American adults, 14-years-old and over, living in Detroit, Michigan, where water suppliers add fluoride chemicals attempting to prevent cavities. Yet, 83%of this population has severe tooth decay and diets high in sugars and fats, and low in fruits and vegetables.

    “The most frequently reported food on a daily basis was [fluoridated] tap water,” write Burt’s research team. Second were [probably fluoridated] soft drinks and third were potato chips.

    Tooth decay in fluoridated Detroit’s toddlers’ teeth is also shocking. Almost all of Detroit’s five-year-olds have cavities; most of them go unfilled.

    The scientific literature now tells us that ingesting fluoride does not reduce tooth decay so it’s no surprise that drinking fluoride-free bottled water is not linked to higher rates of tooth decay and that people who drink fluoridated tap water are not experiencing less tooth decay.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s