Let's talk about water fluoridation this week. And, being that I'm a dentist, you'll probably be a little surprised by my stance on it. At least in terms of it being included in water.
As you likely know, fluoride is a chemical that is commonly found in most toothpaste brands. People use fluoridated toothpaste as a means to strengthen teeth (i.e. prevent cavities) and normally don't think much further about it. Which is fine -- that's pretty much how it's marketed.
Since the late 1990s, the United States Food and Drug Administration has made it mandatory for toothpastes to carry a warning in regards to fluoride usage. But why would the FDA post a warning on a toothpaste ingredient? Doing research on what fluoride is reveals that the chemical is now considered a potential toxic drug, and ingesting enough of the ingredient could be harmful.
Now, I don't want to scare you -- brushing your teeth with fluoride toothpaste isn't harmful. Nor is a dentist using a gel-type fluoride treatment when you get your checkup. Uses like that are topical usages -- you don't ingest it. And even if you do ingest some toothpaste (etc), the levels of fluoride aren't going to pose any threat. And it does prevent cavities.
But in terms of it being added to water, I'm not so sure that's a good thing. Adding fluoride has been a standard in many countries for years. However, several countries (mainly Europe) have taken an active stance on banning fluoride from their drinking water. And I'm with them -- I do not see the good in fluoridating our drinking water. I definitely see the reasoning why countries would add it -- it helps prevent cavities. But as a dentist, I think cavity prevention can be done just as effectively without putting fluoride in our water. To me, the "bad" it can (potentially) do outweighs the good.
So what is the bad?
Well, I'll be the first to tell you that research is not all-encompassing. Since fluoride does prevent cavities, it's a popular chemical. However, studies have been done that seem to equate fluoride with weakened bones, primarily the hips . There is also a known condition called fluorosis, which occurs when a child gets too much fluoride when teeth are developing. Well, if there is fluoride in the water, wouldn't you come to the conclusion that this could contribute to "too much fluoride?" I would. Even more disturbing, there was a study done in China on children with fluorosis, and the findings were that children with the affliction had, in overall terms, lower IQ scores. These findings were echoed in an American study that came to the same findings using animals: The study concluded that fluoride would accumulate in specific areas of the brain, which then affected the ability to learn. This does not constitute irrefutable proof, but it does make one think.
In addition, recently, the National Kidney Foundation (NFK) withdrew its long-held support for fluoridated water. Now, they didn't radically reverse their opinion, they just went from endorsing it to having no opinion at all. That's a little telling.
However, in all of this, I do need to point out that I am in the minority, and there are plenty of studies that refute what I am saying here. In other words, my "side" of this is far from proven. But, in my years of being a dentist, I've found enough to make me feel that fluoride in the water just isn't worth it. Even if some research is scoffed at, the question itself is enough to make me pause. Especially because I do feel we have enough education on oral health that everyone should be brushing their teeth. And trust me, if you are brushing like you should be (and your dentist is using a topical treatment every so often), then I feel you don't need fluoride in your water. I'm not a fan of inserting a chemical into our water that most of us simply don't need to help the few that won't help themselves.
Ok, you say, "how can I remove fluoride from my water? Fluoride can be removed from a person's drinking water through various filtration methods. Reverse osmosis, distillation and alumina defluoridation can help to remove unnecessary impurities. Methods such as boiling or freezing water do nothing but concentrate the fluoride source, and should be avoided.
While uncovering the truth behind fluoride's origins can be a frightening concept, there is some discussion in regards to removing its presence from our water supply (like I said earlier, most of Europe has already done so). If this interests you, I urge you to do some research, draw your own conclusions, and then write your congressperson.
Until next time, keep smiling.
Follow Thomas P. Connelly, D.D.S. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dr_connelly
Thomas P. Connelly, D.D.S.: Cheek Biting: Why You Bite Your Cheek and How to Stop
Dr. Joseph Mercola: The Health Hazards of Water Fluoridation (VIDEO)
what is filtered......does the fluoride stay in the water........
i always hope for the sake of my pets teeth.
all i know is that dental care should be ..........covered as health care.
and not a separate insurance,.
Flouride is a mineral, and naturally occurs in many water supplies. Yes, it can be harmful...in LARGE amounts! The amount in drinking water is minute.
Too much water can be fatal. Please, stick to the primary literature and stop getting all your misinformation from the intertubes.
National Research Council's (NRC) first-ever published review of the
fluoride/thyroid literature.
"Many Americans are exposed to fluoride in the ranges associated with
thyroid effects, especially for people with iodine deficiency," says
Kathleen Thiessen, PhD, co-author of the government-sponsored NRC
report. "The recent decline in iodine intake in the U.S could
contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals,"
says Thiessen.
Robert Carton, PhD, an environmental scientist who worked for over 30
years for the U.S. government including managing risk assessments on
high priority toxic chemicals, says "fluoride has detrimental effects
on the thyroid gland of healthy males at 3.5 mg a day. With iodine
deficiency, the effect level drops to 0.7 milligrams/day for an
average male." (1.0 mg/L fluoride is in most water supplies)
Reference: "Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's
Standards," Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, Board on
Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Division on Earth and Life
Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies of
Science. March 2006 Chapter 8
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571
www.vitaminsforlife.co.uk/Water_Ionisers
My mother drank fluoridated water, and I drank fluoridated tap water from birth, and it's what I drank almost exclusively and copiously. No cavities, but also no fluorosis. And I mostly avoided dentists growing up, so I never received concentrated fluoride treatments. The reason people get fluorosis is either from eating toothpaste as a kid (companies flavor it and make it mouth-watering), combined with the bill-padding topical fluoride treatments dentists sell which kids then accidentally ingest or absorb sublingually.
If there is too much fluoride in our diet, then tap water would be the last thing to cut, not the first as Dr. Connelly is suggesting.
The Wiki also cites: "The U.S. Centers for Disease Control listed water fluoridation as one of the ten great public health achievements of the 20th century"
But it really doesn't surprise me a dentist might come out against fluoridated water since it is better for their bottom line, first by making them more exclusive retail agents for it, and second by making the general population a little more susceptive to cavities which also pumps up their revenue with fillings.
So the American Dental Association would rather than you and I contribute to the millions of dollars it costs to fluoridate the water than to short-change themselves by giving care to Medicaid patients. The GAO estimates that 6.2 million children on Medicaid are suffering with untreated tooth decay. Two children that we know about died in recent years from the consequences of untreated tooth decay - one lived in a fluoridated area. What good did that do?
No one is fluoride deficient. But too many Americans are dentist-deficient.
And the CDC does not study fluoridation. It's the CDC's job to promote fluoridation and tell you it's safe. They aren't charged with studying it. In fact, no government agency is responsible for fluoridation. All roads lead back to the American Dental Association - a union that represents the best interests of dentists.
But the definitive study by the federal government shows no benefit to fluoridation and that fluorosis rates go up along with fluoride levels in the water
New York State Department of Health dentist J. V. Kumar published national statistics in the July 2009 JADA which show similar cavity rates regardless of water fluoride content, However, dental fluorosis rates increased along with water fluoride levels. See analysis “Fluoridation No Benefit; Definite Harm,” by Kathleen M. Thiessen, Ph.D., SENES Oak Ridge, Inc., Center for Risk Analysis here:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/Clinch_2009_No_Benefit_Definite_Harm.pdf
It's no conspiracy theory that fluoride is toxic waste and poison. I've seen a brilliant government scientist state that the only reason he can see to use fluorides and chlorides (which have been linked to arterial plaque) in a public water supply would be to deliberately shorten people's life spans. He then mentioned Social Security payouts, lol.
Beware.
Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats.
Mullenix PJ
Toxicology Department, Forsyth Research Institute
Abstract
Fluoride (F) is known to affect mineralizing tissues, but effects upon the developing brain have not been previously considered. This study in Sprague-Dawley rats compares behavior, body weight, plasma and brain F levels after sodium fluoride (NaF) exposures during late gestation, at weaning or in adults. For prenatal exposures, dams received injections (SC) of 0.13 mg/kg NaF or saline on gestational days 14-18 or 17-19. Weanlings received drinking water containing 0, 75, 100, or 125 ppm F for 6 or 20 weeks, and 3 month-old adults received water containing 100 ppm F for 6 weeks. Behavior was tested in a computer pattern recognition system that classified acts in a novel environment and quantified act initiations, total times and time structures. Fluoride exposures caused sex- and dose-specific behavioral deficits with a common pattern. Males were most sensitive to prenatal day 17-19 exposure, whereas females were more sensitive to weanling and adult exposures. After fluoride ingestion, the severity of the effect on behavior increased directly with plasma F levels and F concentrations in specific brain regions. Such association is important considering that plasma levels in this rat model (0.059 to 0.640 ppm F) are similar to those reported in humans exposed to high levels of fluoride.
Ingested fluoride doesnt work. Non-fluoridated areas the same cavity rates as fluoridated areas.
See the reference below on the effect fluoride has on IQ, for starters. The adverse effects on IQ are observed at levels far below 20 ppm.
Fluoride and children's intelligence: a meta-analysis.
Tang
This paper presents a systematic review of the literature concerning fluoride that was carried out to investigate whether fluoride exposure increases the risk of low intelligence quotient (IQ) in China over the past 20 years. MEDLINE, SCI, and CNKI search were organized for all documents published, in English and Chinese, between 1988 and 2008 using the following keywords: fluorosis, fluoride, intelligence, and IQ. Further search was undertaken in the website www.fluorideresearch.org because this is a professional website concerning research on fluoride. Sixteen case-control studies that assessed the development of low IQ in children who had been exposed to fluoride earlier in their life were included in this review. A qualitative review of the studies found a consistent and strong association between the exposure to fluoride and low IQ. The meta-analyses of the case-control studies estimated that the odds ratio of IQ in endemic fluoride areas compared with nonfluoride areas or slight fluoride areas. The summarized weighted mean difference is -4.97 (95%confidence interval [CI] = -5.58 to -4.36; p < 0.01) using a fixed-effect model and -5.03 (95%CI = -6.51 to 3.55; p < 0.01) using a random-effect model, which means that children who live in a fluorosis area have five times higher odds of developing low IQ than those who live in a nonfluorosis area or a slight fluorosis area.
Magnesium is the most common mineral deficiency, and it casues cardiovascular disease, brain problems and kidney problems. Yet about 80% of the US public does not even obtain the inadequate RDA. And the FDA is stonewalling efforts to require bottled water manufacturers to provide a mere 25mg per liter of bottled water.
Water used to be the primary source of magnesium for people, before the days of water softeners and a nonsensical bias against mineral water.
If magnesium instead of fluoride was added to the water, there would be a noticable improvement in public health.