.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

UK Against Fluoridation

Sunday, December 10, 2006

USA - Adamantly and enthusiastically endorses the addition of fluoride

Editorial: Add fluoride to water system
December 10, 2006
To fluoridate or not to fluoridate?
This is the question the Martin County Commission will address at its Dec. 19 meeting.
The editorial board at the News has carefully examined the issue — and adamantly and enthusiastically endorses the addition of fluoride to public drinking water in Martin County. The body of scientific evidence — as well as the number of public health organizations and dental/medical associations that support the use of fluoride — is overwhelming. This additive, when used in proper amounts (0.7-1.2 parts per million) is a proven, safe and effective means of preventing, and even reversing, preliminary tooth decay.
The opponents of fluoridating the county's drinking water have gained traction, in recent months, by appealing to emotion, by citing questionable studies and by picking and choosing select pieces of "evidence" that support their position.
Don't believe the negative hype.
"Fluoridation of community drinking water, which began in the late 1940s, and the use of fluoride products, are credited for the dramatic reduction in tooth decay experienced by U.S. residents," according to the Center for Disease Control's Web site (www.cdc.gov). "In 1999, the CDC included water fluoridation in its list of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th Century."
One of the most outspoken opponents of fluoridation, Pat Arena of Jensen Beach, has put forth a number of arguments against putting this additive in our drinking water. Some of Arena's major arguments merit attention.
Arena makes reference to a study conducted by a 2001 Harvard graduate student that purportedly found a link between fluoride and an increased risk of osteosarcoma, a rare and often-fatal form of bone cancer.
Dr. David F. Boden, a periodontist who practices in Stuart and Port St. Lucie — and lives in Palm City — puts this issue in context. Boden points out that the primary research authors subsequently published what is called a "comment letter" in Cancer Causes Control (2006) in which they cautioned that the results of the graduate student's study weren't supported by the findings in the larger body of information.
"When I, as a scientist, read this material," Boden said, "I conclude there is no smoking gun here, only ambiguity."
Arena also expresses concern that the cumulative effect of fluoride in food, toothpaste and other sources may exceed the daily consumption of 0.7 ppm proposed for Martin County.
Boden: "When we look at the 0.7 ppm concentration figure, that takes into account what we know comes in through food, toothpaste, etc. We already know about these sources, so we adjust the number accordingly."
Arena cites a Nov. 9 memo from the American Dental Association recommending that fluoridated water not be used to mix powdered baby formula.
Boden responds by pointing out that domestic producers of powdered baby formula long ago adjusted their products to take into account fluoridated water systems.
"The importation of baby formula may lead to a higher concentration of fluoride," Boden said, "but I stress, the higher concentration level is minimal."
Boden is a member of the ADA and the Florida Dental Association, the American Academy of Periodontology and Florida's representative on the ADA's Ethics Committee.
And he, along with thousands of his colleagues and dozens of nationally recognized dental, medical and health care organizations, unreservedly endorse the use of fluoride in public drinking water.

• More than 170 million U.S. residents — about two-thirds of the population — are served by water supplies in which the fluoride concentration has been adjusted to optimal levels.

• Forty-two of the 50 largest cities in the U.S. have adopted water fluoridation.

• Between 2000 and 2004, 125 U.S. communities voted to add fluoride to their water systems.

Come Dec. 19, the County Commission would be wise to add Martin County to the list.


Nine of the the 10 largest U.S. cities have fluordiated water. Here are the top 10 cities (and Florida cities in the top 50) and year fluoridation began:

Rank City Year
1 New York 1965

2 Los Angeles 1999

3 Chicago 1956

4 Houston 1982

5 Philadelphia 1954

6 Phoenix 1990

7 San Diego n/a

8 Dallas 1966

9 San Antonio 2002

10 Detroit 1967

This is the full article I printed it as it does examine some of the latest objections to fluoride. Guess we are as entrenched in our opinion as they are theirs.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home