New Scientist: letter from Canada
Fluoride flayed
24 November 2007
From New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.
James Beck, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Your report on fluoride in tea includes the sentence: "In places where people ingest too little fluoride, it is added to water supplies to strengthen tooth enamel and prevent cavities" (6 October, p 21).
This is surprising, given that in Europe the battle against fluoridation is largely won. Fluoride (in the generic sense) is not a nutrient; there is no "too little". It does not strengthen enamel or prevent cavities except for a slight topical effect.
There is now ample evidence that the reduction in tooth decay (caries) in industrialised countries in recent decades has occurred as much - or more - in non-fluoridated areas as in fluoridated ones, and that cessation of fluoridation is not followed by any increase in the incidence of caries. There is, however, much evidence associating fluoridation with bone cancer, suppressed thyroid function, lowered IQ, bone fracture, increased levels of lead and other intoxicants in body tissues, and bad effects on other body systems. All these associations hold for concentrations of fluoride comparable to those imposed in fluoridated water supplies in North America.
Aside from efficacy and toxicity, it is unethical, if not illegal, to administer a substance that has not been approved by a proper authority, that is not controlled in dosage, that is not consented to by the recipient after informed consultation, and the effects of which are not monitored by competent professionals. In North America fluoridation fails on all counts, being unapproved, unevaluated, not consented to, not controlled and not subject to refusal.
From issue 2631 of New Scientist
24 November 2007
From New Scientist Print Edition. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.
James Beck, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Your report on fluoride in tea includes the sentence: "In places where people ingest too little fluoride, it is added to water supplies to strengthen tooth enamel and prevent cavities" (6 October, p 21).
This is surprising, given that in Europe the battle against fluoridation is largely won. Fluoride (in the generic sense) is not a nutrient; there is no "too little". It does not strengthen enamel or prevent cavities except for a slight topical effect.
There is now ample evidence that the reduction in tooth decay (caries) in industrialised countries in recent decades has occurred as much - or more - in non-fluoridated areas as in fluoridated ones, and that cessation of fluoridation is not followed by any increase in the incidence of caries. There is, however, much evidence associating fluoridation with bone cancer, suppressed thyroid function, lowered IQ, bone fracture, increased levels of lead and other intoxicants in body tissues, and bad effects on other body systems. All these associations hold for concentrations of fluoride comparable to those imposed in fluoridated water supplies in North America.
Aside from efficacy and toxicity, it is unethical, if not illegal, to administer a substance that has not been approved by a proper authority, that is not controlled in dosage, that is not consented to by the recipient after informed consultation, and the effects of which are not monitored by competent professionals. In North America fluoridation fails on all counts, being unapproved, unevaluated, not consented to, not controlled and not subject to refusal.
From issue 2631 of New Scientist
posted by Bill at
5:15 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home