Why do you brush and floss your teeth?

Why do you brush and floss your teeth? Because you have always been told that you have no choice. Toothbrushes, dental floss, and fluoridated toothpaste are considered essential items for good dental health. Likewise, the fluoride in your drinking water (which was added without your consent) is, according to officialdom, a necessary preventive measure against tooth decay. But what if I told you that the individuals with the healthiest teeth and gums have never brushed or flossed their teeth or drunk fluoridated water? It is has long been demonstrated that residents of non-Western, undeveloped countries such as Kenya who stick to their native diets suffer little or no tooth decay. Dr. Lendon Smith discussed this in his article, "Nutritional Supplements, ADD & Children's Health." (Well Being Journal Vol. 7, No. 3 ~ May/June 1988): Smith writes, "...Dr. Weston Price...went around the world in the 1930s hoping to find the cause of tooth decay. He examined the teeth of Masai in Kenya, Maoris in New Zealand, Aborigines of Australia, New Guinea people, North Canadian Indians, Eskimos, and people living in the isolated valleys of Switzerland. He found these people had decay-free teeth if they stuck to their native diets. They retained their teeth. Skulls showed perfect teeth with no crowding and no cavities. (In Western, developed countries most of us have cavities, and after age 60 about half the population is edentulous.) Once they had access to sugar and white flour, and they deviated from their native diet, they developed cavities..." (Link: http://www.wellbeingjournal.com/add-adhd.htm) Consider the extraordinary financial (about $70 billion a year) and human cost of tooth decay in the United States -- more than 40 million Americans wear full or partial dentures, and approximately 1/3 of Americans over the age of 65 have lost all of their teeth. And our teeth rot and die for the same reason we are chronically overweight and diseased: we eat "foods" that were produced artificially in laboratories and factories rather than grown naturally from the earth. Most of us have been "trained" to eat this way all of our lives. In our publicly-funded schools, we were fed meals in strict accordance with the Government decreed "four food groups" -- heavily processed meat, dairy, starch, and canned produce have long been the staples of public school lunches. Throughout childhood, our parents, who only wanted the best for us, fed us what was available at the neighborhood grocery store. In adulthood, we have continued eating foods that we've always been told are part of a nutritious diet. We have been eating ourselves to death for the last hundred years or so because we make dietary choices based on fallacious and/or limited beliefs.

USA - No. 5: State workers often edit Wikipedia

No. 5: State workers often edit Wikipedia
WikiScanner, which tracks use of the semi-public Web encyclopedia Wikipedia, showed that state workers' computers in the Olympia area were used to make 531 changes to the site.
Some of the changes were controversial: A Department of Health worker apparently deleted an entry stating that high doses of fluoride can be fatal, and someone in the Legislative Services Center deleted information about a sexual-harassment lawsuit against state Sen. Chris Marr. Someone else later restored that information.
State workers can be fined or fired for using government computers to do personal business, but the state Executive Ethics Board's leader said cases have shown minor Web surfing on the job is OK.

Florida - Letter: Evidence of effectiveness of fluoridation is lacking

Letter: Evidence of effectiveness of fluoridation is lacking
Sunday, December 30, 2007
As a dentist with a master’s degree in public health for more than 25 years, I promoted water fluoridation and fluoride supplements. Current research has shifted, finding fluoridation in developed communities is unnecessary. Most European dental associations no longer recommend it.
Dentists are puzzled and can’t explain why fluoridation no longer appears to reduce dental decay. One theory is the total fluoride intake from all sources, such as pesticides, dental and medical products and post-harvest fumigants, has reached high enough levels to provide the so-called “optimal” dose.
Significant increase in dental fluorosis in children, from 22 percent to 32 percent, supports this theory. Another theory is fluoridation never did reduce tooth decay, and flawed historical studies are at fault. The evidence is strong — fluoridation no longer reduces tooth decay. Evidence for fluoridation intervention is lacking.
Dental expenses are a good example. After 60 years of fluoridation, people fluoridated should show a reduction in dental expenses if fluoridation were effective. Several studies have shown either no reduction in dental expenses or slight increases.
Non-fluoridated Portland, Ore. (19 percent of Oregon is fluoridated) had $210 average, annual dental expenses per person. Across the river, fluoridated Vancouver, Wash. (46 percent of Washington was fluoridated at the time) had $215. Add the cost of bottled water for infants and those who choose not to have fluoridated water, medical risks and cosmetic treatments for dental fluorosis damage, fluoridation equipment, chemicals and maintenance, and fluoridation makes no cents or sense, unless you own the company profiting.
Public health agencies are marching soldiers and do not question their orders. They have been told to “promote fluoridation,” and they do so, regardless of the evidence. 
Bill Osmunson DDS, MPH

Florida wants fluoride in city’s water

Florida wants fluoride in city’s water
Friday, December 28, 2007
city council decided the injection system was too old and unreliable.
The Department of Health grant will pay for a new injection system, to be ready by spring 2008, as well as a year’s supply of fluoride.
The city’s supply comes from six wells, which will all be equipped to receive injections of fluoride.Local dentist Noel Spurlock has been practicing dentistry for 30 years. He said in the story, “[Fluoride] has made more of a difference in my profession than anything.”According to the article, the state Department of Health said last year that 77.6 percent of the state’s population received “optimally fluoridated water.”

Fluoride Debate 2

Part 2, originally posted by fluoridealert

UK - Cost probe on fluoride in water

Investigations are under way into the cost of adding fluoride into drinking water in central Lancashire.
The Lancashire Evening Post told a few months ago how health chiefs were looking into the possibility of putting fluoride into tap water in the area to tackle the high levels of tooth decay.It has now been confirmed large-scale water fluoridation can be done but a probe into the costs and benefits will still be carried out.Children in Preston have some of the worst levels of tooth decay in the country and more than half of five-year-olds in the city have had experience of tooth decay.Dental health specialists at Central Lancashire PCT are supporting the idea of water fluoridation, but want to know the benefits, costs and practicality of the move.Anna Delves, project manager for the North West Fluoridation Evaluation Group, said: "We are a group of people representing all the PCTs in the North West and are a selection of dental consulta
nts, public health specialists and communication leads."We are evaluating the idea of water fluoridation and are looking into the operability and the cost implications."We are working with United Utilities and are looking at whether it can be done and how it can be done."The aim is to put together a report and present it to all the PCTs to allow them to decide whether they want to go forward with it."We will not be dictating to the PCTs what they should do."It will be an unbiased report giving them all the information they need to make up their own mind."But it is not just a question of cost, but about how it will be funded and who is going to pay for what."Fluoride has been added to water in some parts of the country since 1964 and it is proven to improve dental hygiene.However, some people are opposed to the idea and fear it may have health implications.
Last Updated: 27 December 2007 8:59 AM

USA - Man, 81, ceases crusade

Man, 81, ceases crusade
Published: Wednesday, December 26, 2007 10:28 PM
Alan Lewis Gerstenecker, EditorRobert Stewart, the 81-year-old widower who has asked the city to remove fluoride from the city’s drinking water supply, says he’s giving up the fight.On two occasions, Stewart has approached the City Council to take action on removing fluoride from the city’s water supply, most recently during its last meeting.
“Is there no one here who will stand up for the citizens of Rolla in this regard?” Stewart asked City Council members. “This fluoride is poisoning our water and our children.”Stewart, almost single-handedly, has been crusading to have the city remove fluoride from its drinking supply.Stewart points out on the back of a tooth paste tube box there are clear warnings that tooth paste, which contains fluoride, should not be swallowed.
“Clearly, its poison. It has benefits as long as it’s not ingested,” Stewart said. “It’s in all of our tooth pastes, clearly then it doesn’t need to be in the water.”Rolla Municipal Utilities Public Relations Coordinator Rodney Bourne countered Stewart’s concerns, while admitting there is opposition to fluoride, a vast number of federal agencies endorse adding fluoride to drinking water, namely the American Medical Association, the Centers for Disease Control and the World Health Organization.Fluoridation has been added to public water systems in North America since 1945.
Fluoride is the ionic, or electrically charged form of the element fluorine. It is reactive and strongly attaches itself to other elements, making them hard and brittle.According to Webster, sodium fluoride and its derivatives are used in insect and rat poisons. However, because it has a tendency to easily adhere to substances, it has hardening properties.It is added to drinking water to strengthen teeth from decay. Approximately 70 percent of public drinking water is fluoridated.
Health officials have maintained that low doses of fluoride are safe and good for children’s teeth.Rolla, acting through its Board of Public Works, has authorized and directed to add fluoride into the public water supply. The fluoride concentration is approximately one part per million parts of water.Stewart, a retired assistant personnel officer of the U.S. Geological Survey, passed numerous documents citing the detriments of fluoride, including an excerpt from “The Lancet,” a leading English medical journal, that states sodium fluoride inhibits or destroys the crucial neurotransmitter Acelylcholine, which is imperative for the process of learning and memory.
“I’m old, so I guess I can keep on drinking it, but I am concerned about the children,” Stewart said. “I couldn’t get one person on the council to make a motion to take the poison out of the water.“I guess I’m done with it. I’m probably seen as a trouble maker, but it’s something I felt I had to do,” Stewart said. “I really didn’t want the publicity... It’s just something I had to do it for the children. It’s in our tooth paste. It doesn’t need to be in our water, too.”

USA - Letter: Vote to keep fluoride out of city of Stuart’s water supply

Letter: Vote to keep fluoride out of city of Stuart’s water supply
Friday, December 28, 2007The “Our View” editorial, “Add fluoride to water system” (Dec. 10, 2006), stated that the opponents of fluoridation have gained traction, “by appealing to emotion, by citing questionable studies and by picking and choosing select pieces of ‘evidence’ that support their position.”
The “Our View” editorial, “Stuart up soon; who is next?” (Dec. 21, 2007), stated that fluoride opponents have garnered some support, “by appealing to emotion, citing questionable studies and picking and choosing select pieces of ‘evidence.’ ”
Can anyone imagine a more anti-intellectual or lazier effort than repeating the same editorial language of a year ago? This year’s editorial couldn’t even get the date of the county commissioners’ anti-fluoride vote correct; it was Dec. 19, 2006 — not “December 2007” — as stated in the Dec. 21 editorial.
The magnum opus on the fluoride issue is the 2006 National Research Council of the National Academies’ 449-page report, “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards” (www.nap.edu). References and appendices begin on page 301. Appendix A provides biographical sketches of the 12 authors, all very impressively qualified.
A shorter work, “Second Thoughts about Fluoride,” by Dan Fagin in the January 2008 Scientific American,” pages 74-81 (www.SciAm.com), fairly presents both sides of the fluoride debate.
There is no emotionally charged language in either of these pieces.
Would that the News had just an inkling of fairness and did not have to further degrade their retreaded editorial by relying on desperation phrases such as “anti-fluoride fearmongers.”
Vote a big “no” on Jan. 29, 2008. The county rejected fluoride on Dec. 19, 2006. Now let’s also vote to keep fluoride out of the city of Stuart’s water. 
Andrew Treacy
Stuart

Australia - Fluoride costs slammed27.12.2007

Fluoride costs slammed27.12.2007
RATHER than fluoridating the whole water supply, the state government should introduce fluoride at drinking taps supply if it was concerned about childrens teeth, according to the Calliope Shire Council.
The council discussed the governments decision to fluoridate the states water supplies during its final meeting for the year.
It said fluoridating the whole supply would be wasteful and costly as less than one per cent of the water would be consumed by residents.
The council argued that most of the water, particularly in Gladstone region where industry was a major user of treated water supplied by the Gladstone Area Water Board, would be used for purposes other than consumption by humans.
Councillors pointed out that many people drank bottle water rather than tap water and others used filtering devices which removed fluoride from the water.
They agreed the government should put more emphasis on oral health rather than fluoridating water supplies by increasing the number of dentists, providing free fluoride tablets or introducing fluoride to the schools water supply.
The council noted that although the government had allocated $35 million across the state to fluoridate the water supply, the ongoing costs would have to be funded by the councils and, ultimately, by the ratepayers

USA - Rogers' work with Tiny Teeth recognized

Rogers' work with Tiny Teeth recognized
At its recent annual conference, Oral Health Kansas, the statewide oral health coalition of approximately 200 individuals and organizations, recognized an area dentist for his efforts to improve children's oral health.Dr. Nick Rogers, of Arkansas City, was honored with the organization's annual Excellence in Oral Health award as an Outstanding Community Leader. Several years ago, Rogers began to notice that the number of three year olds entering his practice with extreme decay was increasing drastically, and he wanted to do something to stop the disturbing trend. He called a group of community members together to discuss the problem, and with his continued leadership, the result was a parent education campaign called Tiny Teeth. According to the Legacy Foundation, which funds the program along with the United Methodist Health Ministry Fund of Hutchinson, Tiny Teeth has saved Cowley County about $85,000 per year in treatment costs and has even more importantly, saved a lot of children from needless pain and suffering. "Dr. Rogers gave of his time, expertise and his influence with other medical and dental providers to help Tiny Teeth become successful," said Pam Moore, Legacy's executive director. "He stepped out of his dental office to lead a community-wide effort that truly makes a difference for children in Cowley County." Tiny Teeth materials are designed to be accurate and easy to use. Materials provide information for parents of newborns about oral hygiene and nutrition and are designed to integrate into existing programs. Involving multiple agencies means parents hear a consistent message about oral care from a variety of agencies.

Arkansas City, Kansas is fluoridated: NYSCOF

Australia - Fluoride booklet arrives with Christmas mail

FLUORIDATED water for Geelong is safe, healthy and inevitable a recent letter from the state's health department says.The Department of Human Services said it was beneficial for Geelong water users to join more than 75 per cent of Victoria with fluoridated water.Victoria's chief health officer Dr John Carnie sent letters and a handbook to residents during Christmas as part of the State Government's long-term water plans.Dr Carnie said local and statewide health organisations backed fluoride's introduction, including a study last month from the National Health and Research Council.
``This review confirmed that fluoridation of drinking water remains the most effective and socially equal way of providing all community members with the benefits of fluoride,'' he said.``In Victoria, children living in fluoridated areas experience considerably less tooth decay than those in non-fluoridated areas.''
The booklet, sent by Barwon Water on behalf of the department, moved to assure residents that fluoride would not change Geelong water's taste or smell.
Dr Carnie said Geelong's lack of fluoridation came up during the mooted connection of the region's water supplies with Melbourne's fluoridated pipelines.
But the Barwon Association for Freedom from Fluoridation group has slammed the letter as spin, pledging ``rolling protests'' early next year.
Yesterday, anti-fluoride campaigner Peter Linaker branded Dr Carnie's letter as misleading, labelling the additive ``poison''. ``You are told it is `safe'; it is not and you have no rights,'' he said.
Local organisations backing the fluoride plan include Barwon Health, Bellarine Community Health, Committee for Geelong, General Practitioners' Association of Geelong and Deakin University's health and medicine faculties.
For fluoride information visit www.health.vic.gov.au/environment/water/fluoridation.htm or phone 1800 651 723.

Tea 'healthier' drink than water

Tea 'healthier' drink than water
Drinking three or more cups of tea a day is as good for you as drinking plenty of water and may even have extra health benefits, say researchers.The work in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition dispels the common belief that tea dehydrates.Tea not only rehydrates as well as water does, but it can also protect against heart disease and some cancers, UK nutritionists found.
Experts believe flavonoids are the key ingredient in tea that promote health.
Healthy cuppa
These polyphenol antioxidants are found in many foods and plants, including tea leaves, and have been shown to help prevent cell damage.
Public health nutritionist Dr Carrie Ruxton, and colleagues at Kings College London, looked at published studies on the health effects of tea consumption.They found clear evidence that drinking three to four cups of tea a day can cut the chances of having a heart attack. Some studies suggested tea consumption protected against cancer, although this effect was less clear-cut. Other health benefits seen included protection against tooth plaque and potentially tooth decay, plus bone strengthening.
Dr Ruxton said: "Drinking tea is actually better for you than drinking water. Water is essentially replacing fluid. Tea replaces fluids and contains antioxidants so it's got two things going for it."
Rehydrating
She said it was an urban myth that tea is dehydrating.
"Studies on caffeine have found very high doses dehydrate and everyone assumes that caffeine-containing beverages dehydrate. But even if you had a really, really strong cup of tea or coffee, which is quite hard to make, you would still have a net gain of fluid."Also, a cup of tea contains fluoride, which is good for the teeth," she added.There was no evidence that tea consumption was harmful to health. However, research suggests that tea can impair the body's ability to absorb iron from food, meaning people at risk of anaemia should avoid drinking tea around mealtimes. Dr Ruxton's team found average tea consumption was just under three cups per day.
She said the increasing popularity of soft drinks meant many people were not drinking as much tea as before."Tea drinking is most common in older people, the 40 plus age range. In older people, tea sometimes made up about 70% of fluid intake so it is a really important contributor," she said.Claire Williamson of the British Nutrition Foundation said: "Studies in the laboratory have shown potential health benefits."The evidence in humans is not as strong and more studies need to be done. But there are definite potential health benefits from the polyphenols in terms of reducing the risk of diseases such as heart disease and cancers.
"In terms of fluid intake, we recommend 1.5-2 litres per day and that can include tea. Tea is not dehydrating. It is a healthy drink." The Tea Council provided funding for the work. Dr Ruxton stressed that the work was independent.Source;BBC News.

More studies more funding!
My family drank a lot of tea but that didn't stop them from getting cancer.

OPEN YOUR MIND JOHN LENNON IMAGINE

Australia

Added: December 23, 2007
Prof Connett explains one of the ways in which Ballarat people are being duped.

USA - Charleston kids’ tooth-pulling expenses are higher than cleaning costs

Kids’ tooth-pulling expenses are higher than cleaning costs
In battle against oral disease, prevention measures are on the declineBy Eric EyreStaff writer
With each breath of the gas, she was floating higher, fingers tingling, belly tickling, her worries so washed away that she scarcely noticed the syringe needle slowly descending toward her open mouth. Six-year-old Madison Salisbury would have a present to put under her pillow for the tooth fairy tonight.
“Are you flying on the magic carpet?” asked Dr. Bridget Boggs Stevens, Madison’s dentist. Stevens grabbed an elevating tool to pry up Madison’s infected tooth, then reached for a pair of forceps. “We’re going to wiggle, wiggle, wiggle,” Stevens said. “Won’t that tooth dance with me?” Madison kept sniffing the bubble gum-scented nitrous oxide through the plastic “piggy nose.” She never flinched. In seconds, the decayed tooth popped out, and Madison left with a fistful of “High School Musical” stickers and a cheekful of blood-soaked gauze. Madison, a Putnam County first-grader, is one of thousands of West Virginia children who have their teeth extracted every year at the state’s expense. And while health officials and lawmakers say prevention is the solution to reversing West Virginia’s widespread oral health problems, the state Medicaid office is pouring tens of millions of dollars into filling teeth and taking them out.
In each of the past four years, West Virginia dentists have billed the state more to pull children’s teeth than to clean them, Medicaid claims data show. From 2003 through last year, the state was billed more than $15 million for children’s tooth extractions, and $13 million for cleanings.
Kids’ tooth-pulling expenses are higher than cleaning costs
In battle against oral disease, prevention measures are on the declineBy Eric EyreStaff writer
With each breath of the gas, she was floating higher, fingers tingling, belly tickling, her worries so washed away that she scarcely noticed the syringe needle slowly descending toward her open mouth.
Six-year-old Madison Salisbury would have a present to put under her pillow for the tooth fairy tonight.
“Are you flying on the magic carpet?” asked Dr. Bridget Boggs Stevens, Madison’s dentist. More than 31,800 teeth were pulled last year alone. “That’s heartbreaking,” said Gina Sharps, a dental hygienist and assistant director of WVU’s Childhood Oral Health Project. “We’re obviously not doing enough wellness and prevention. Children’s oral health is so important to their overall health.”
The Gazette analyzed more than 3.3 million Medicaid claims submitted by dentists since 2003. Among the findings: The state is spending more pulling and filling teeth than on prevention measures, such as cleanings, fluoride treatments and cavity-fighting sealant applications. Last year, the Medicaid office spent $11 million on children’s extractions and fillings, but only $6 million on prevention treatments. The number of cleanings, fluoride treatments and sealants all decreased from 2003 to 2006. At the same time, extractions also declined — a positive sign.
Routine teeth cleanings dropped from 95,566 in 2003 to about 87,971 last year. And they’re on pace to decline even further, to about 86,000 at the end of this year.
A Medicaid spokeswoman said she wasn’t surprised that the state was paying more for “acute dental care” than prevention — a common practice for Medicaid recipients with other illnesses and diseases. The state spends about $32 million a year for children’s dental services.
“A lot of our members access the medical system for crisis, not for prevention,” said Shannon Landrum, executive assistant to the state Medicaid commissioner. “It’s our goal to change that. The governor has directed us to provide the right care, at the right place and the right time.”
Dr. Stevens sees the extent of the state’s oral health problems every day.
The Dunbar dentist treats children with rampant decay who live up to 70 miles away — from Beckley, Parkersburg and Huntington — whose parents say they can’t find a dentist who accepts Medicaid close to home.
Children as young as 2 will show up needing more than half of their primary teeth extracted — and the rest drilled and filled with composite.
They bring her gifts — coffee mugs filled with peppermint candies, paintings of “good teeth” and “bad teeth” — and drop into the dentist’s chair, waiting for the piggy nose and laughing gas that gives them the giggles.
“Children are in terrible pain,” Stevens said. “They can’t eat. It’s absolutely hideous. Just horrific. There’s such a crisis.”

Does Charleston Water System water contain fluoride? Yes. Charleston Water System adds one milligram per liter (mg/1) or one part per million (ppm) of fluoride to treated water. This is the amount recommended by the American Dental Association to provide maximum protection from tooth decay.
See our Water Quality Reports

USA - City sees future in a bottle

City sees future in a bottle
December 24, 2007
By Brent Curtis
Herald Staff City officials are looking at exporting one of Rutland's purest commodities.Following the lead of other municipalities around the Northeast, Public Works Commissioner Paul Clifford has been pouring his efforts into finding a bottler who wants to sell water from the city's reservoir.After attending a Northeast Bottled Water Association seminar in September, Clifford has sent out two rounds of letters to 21 bottling companies in the region."It's something to try and if the market is right, I think it could work," Clifford said this week. "If the market is right and Rutland's name is on it, it could be a huge opportunity and a lot of money in it."For those who find the idea hard to swallow, look no farther than Worcester, Mass., an old industrial city and second-largest city in the Commonwealth. Worcester is home to Polar Beverages, which uses municipal water in that community for some of its beverages.An example closer to home can be found in Bennington, where water from an underground aquifer is sold to Vermont Pure Springs."There's a lot of competition out there," said Clifford, who noted many of the communities that have landed bottling contracts also have better transportation networks than Rutland.But he said the quality of Rutland's water supply is as good as its rivals."I think for the purity of it, it's a great product," he said. "If you sell it right from the filter and treat it to remove the taste of the chlorination, it's very good water."Rutland's water supply is collected from mountain streams running down Killington, Pico and the hills to the east. The tributaries pour into the bubbling Mendon Brook, following a tree-shaded course from its springhead high in the mountains to the Rutland Reservoir miles below.From there, the water passes through the city's sand-filtration system — an organic process that relies on microbes in the sand to accomplish the lion's share of purification. Sand filtering allows the city to reduce the amount of chlorine added to the water. The city also adds fluoride and zinc orthophosphate — a corrosion inhibitor designed to keep deposits within the city's old pipes bonded to the pipes and out of the water supply.If a bottling company were interested in the city's water supply, Clifford said he would look at either trucking the water to a distribution point or better yet, inviting the company to set up a bottling operation in the city limits. The public works commissioner said the city has plenty of excess capacity to sell."I know it's a long shot, but if we can find someone to bite on this, it would have a lot of potential," he said.Contact Brent Curtis at brent.curtis@rutlandherald.com.

No thanks.

USA - Central Illinois to get more than $8 million

PEORIA - More than $8 million in federal funds will pour into central Illinois next year, including about $287,000 to help build a dental clinic in the East Bluff for those who otherwise couldn't afford services."

Peoria and all of Illinois is fluoridated: NYSCOF

Fluorosis cripples villagers in Sonbhadra village in UP

Fluorosis cripples villagers in Sonbhadra village in UP
Posted December 22nd, 2007 by Mohit Joshi
Sonbhadra (Uttar Pradesh), Dec 22: A large number of villagers of Sonbhadra village in Uttar Pradesh are suffering from fluorosis due to the excessive fluoride content in the ground water that these villages draw to drink. They are facing the risk of becoming handicapped due to excessive fluorosis Chopan, Dudhi and Myorpur and Babhni Blocks. The excessive fluoride in water has given rise to several orthopaedic problems. “Water is the main problem in our village. Earlier, we didn't have any hand pump or well in our village. People used to drink water from open streams and have consequently become victims of deformities and diseases, ” said Shambhu Prasad Patel, a villager. Majority of the affected persons have to work hard to earn their daily bread. With weak bones, none of them is able to toil.
Since the villages are isolated, these hapless rural folk have no easy access to public health services. With some of them forced to travel over 50 kilometres for a public health centre and a hospital. Authorities of the State Health Department however claim that health camps are being set up for the villagers. "This problem is prevalent in nine villages of three blocks of the district because of excessive fluoride content in water. We have provided every facility for the treatment of the people who are handicapped or are suffering from any disease due to water, " said Dr. Ganesh Prasad, Chief Medical Officer of Sonbhadra District.
Another grouse of the villagers is that the government is not showing any concern as not even ten percent of the affected and handicapped persons have been issued certificates that they are handicapped. Villagers hope that the concerned officials in the administration will take effective steps to stem the rot.
Fluorosis is a condition caused by the excessive intake of fluorine and is commonly of two types - Skeletal Fluorosis and Dental Fluorosis. As the names suggest, it first affects the bones due to excessive accumulation of fluoride in bones and the latter affects the teeth. (ANI)

And they would convince us that one of these is just cosmetic.

USA - For some, fluoridated water still hard to swallow

For some, fluoridated water still hard to swallow
By Mike Anton, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer December 22, 2007
A chemist called it "criminally intolerant chemical warfare to enslave the American people." A self-described inventor and "secret investigator" said the government was trying to "kill you slowly." Another man put it bluntly: "Communism is one of the factors behind it."In the summer of 1966, a year after the Watts riots, Los Angeles City Council members took up what The Times called "one of the most controversial proposals ever."

The hearings drew hundreds of agitated citizens.The supercharged issue? Adding fluoride to tap water to prevent tooth decay. The proposal was defeated, as were subsequent attempts to fluoridate Los Angeles' drinking water in 1968 and 1975. The issue, in Southern California at least, seemed to be dead.Then last month, the Metropolitan Water District started fluoridating the water it serves 18 million customers across Southern California, giving life to another round of accusations and conspiracy theories. This time, though, a battle once waged by far-right red baiters is being led by independents and activists on the left."We are not lab rats and reject any attempt to be treated as such," actor and liberal political activist Martin Sheen and his wife wrote in a letter to The Malibu Times last month after reading about MWD's fluoridation effort in their latest water bill.The move, four years in the planning, is the largest fluoridation project in U.S. history and thus a watershed in the peculiar story of one of the nation's longest-running controversies.For more than 60 years, a debate has simmered over whether artificially fluoridated water is one of public health's greatest achievements or an ill-advised attempt by the government to medicate the population by force with a dangerous chemical.Fluoride is the Kennedy assassination of chemicals, a fountain of myths and misinformation, with people on each side of the issue accusing those on the other of using half-truths and twisted facts to push their agenda.Virtually all of the science and medical establishment -- including the American Dental Assn., the American Medical Assn., the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention -- have endorsed fluoride in water. Supporters say numerous studies over the decades show that the chemical, in low concentrations -- about one part per million or the equivalent of three drops in 42 gallons of water -- reduces tooth decay by 20% to 60% with minimal risk. "The science is crystal clear," said Jon Roth, executive director of the California Dental Assn. Foundation. "The unfortunate thing is there are still folks out there who do a good job of cherry-picking the scientific information. . . . I don't know where the motivation comes from. I just don't get it."

Though far fewer in number, fluoride's opponents are strident and proud to be committed to an uphill fight. In the 1960s, foes said fluoride produced Down syndrome in children. Today, opponents emphasize fluoride's purported links to bone cancer, thyroid dysfunction and other diseases. They say toxins such as arsenic and lead contaminate the hydrofluosilicic acid used to fluoridate water. They say the benefits are vastly overblown and point to Europe, which has low rates of tooth decay even though most countries there don't add fluoride to their water.But today's fluoride opponents are not nearly so vocal as those of a generation ago; there was little opposition in 2003 when the MWD began preparing to fluoridate its water. The city of Los Angeles finally did it in the mid-1990s without public outcry. In 1945, Grand Rapids, Mich., became the first U.S. city to fluoridate as part of a long-term federal study. In the 1950s and 60s, groups such as the John Birch Society warned that having government tamper with public water was the first step toward totalitarianism."It's incredibly obvious, isn't it?" the crazed Gen. Jack D. Ripper asked in the movie "Dr. Strangelove," which lampooned Cold War fluoride opponents. "A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual, and certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core commie works."Ed Edelman, who pushed fluoridation as a young Los Angeles city councilman, recalls being shocked by the vitriol. "People thought we were trying to put poison in the water," said Edelman, 77. "They came out of the woodwork. They were strange folks. . . . I hate to use the word 'crazies.' Nevertheless, I guess I can use it now."Today, fluoride isn't among the topics on the John Birch Society's website.When William F. Jasper first went to work for the group in the mid-1970s, the fluoride fight had taken a back seat to more pressing issues."We did have quite large files on fluoridation," said Jasper, a senior editor for the group's magazine. "I'm sure we still do somewhere."Jasper notes that the John Birch Society still opposes fluoridation as an abuse of government power. But he wasn't aware that his hometown of Sacramento began adding fluoride to its water two years ago.

"That was off my radar screen," Jasper said. Fluoride opponents today argue that government and industry have conspired to shove fluorosilicic acid -- a byproduct of making phosphate fertilizers -- down the public's throat as a way to dispose of the stuff."It's the largest single insult to the citizens of this nation in its history," said David Kennedy, a retired San Diego dentist and among the most outspoken opponents who keep the fight alive through such groups as the Web-based Fluoride Action Network.Kennedy, 62, who also has a degree in biochemistry and physiology, is past president of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, which has promoted research on the dangers of mercury in fillings.Finding Kennedy is easy: His home is the only one in his neighborhood with a large sign out front that reads, "Warning. Fluoride is Not Safe for a Baby!"Kennedy, an articulate and intelligent defender of his views, is used to being dismissed as a wacko. He couldn't care less."If you dare say you are against fluorosilicic acid in our water, you get labeled as a kook. That's their strategy: You denigrate the source by saying, 'This is just junk science,' " he said.Kennedy has been at odds with his profession for years. He hasn't used toothpaste since 1984, insisting saliva contains the nutrients needed for healthy teeth. "There is no valid scientific evidence to support the benefits of fluoride. . . . The Centers for Disease Control? They're lying." Because fluoride easily bonds with other chemicals it has been widely used in industry, including in the manufacture of steel, glass and ceramics. More sinister, in the eyes of its critics, have been its uses in such things as rat poison and atomic bomb production.And fluoride opponents can point to one indisputable fact: The chemical is indeed dangerous, even in small amounts. It's extremely corrosive -- an accidental spill of fluorosilicic acid on a Florida interstate a few years ago sent more than 50 people to hospitals. Drinking an ounce would probably kill a person. The amount considered optimal for teeth is minuscule by comparison. The EPA allows dozens of dangerous chemicals to be added in minute amounts to public water for a variety of reasons. Chlorine and ozone purify. Hydrochloric acid makes water less alkaline; sodium hydroxide makes it less acidic. Aluminum sulfate makes it clearer. Sodium chloride softens hard water.What sets fluoride apart is that it is the only chemical specifically added to water as a health remedy. "The people who are against this -- they are so exercised over it," said Michael Easley, a Florida state health official who has been one of the nation's leading proponents of fluoridation for three decades. "Nobody drags anyone to a water faucet and makes them drink. Dig a well. Move out of the country." When a panel of scientists last year reported that high fluoride levels could damage the tooth enamel of children and weaken adult bones, opponents of fluoridation cited the finding as more proof of the chemical's danger. But the National Academies' National Research Council focused on the relatively small number of Americans who drink water with naturally occurring fluoride levels that are about four times the recommended concentration. The report didn't examine the risks or benefits of lower-level artificially fluoridated water. Nevertheless, the council's report prompted the American Dental Assn. to recommend that reconstituted baby formula be made with fluoride-free water to reduce the risk of enamel fluorosis, which could permanently stain developing teeth. The group continues to support fluoridation of drinking water.That kind of scientific nuance, filtered through city council debates and voter initiatives -- and now the Internet -- has kept fluoride out of some water systems. Still, about 170 million Americans, about two-thirds of the population, drink from public systems with the recommended amount of fluoride.From the start, "every city that wanted to add fluoride conducted public hearings that brought out all sorts of theories," Easley said. "If they held immunizations to the same standard -- bringing it before city councils or going to the ballot box with it -- I doubt the states would have programs requiring them."California has been slow to adopt fluoride. Prior to 1995, California ranked 48th out of the 50 states in the percentage of people who drank fluoridated water. That year, Easley helped write legislation passed by the Assembly which mandates that water providers fluoridate when money becomes available to retrofit their systems. With the MWD's move and San Diego poised to add fluoride, California will soon be on par with the rest of the U.S.In August, as the MWD prepared to begin adding fluoride, Kennedy spoke before the agency's board. He insisted they had an obligation to warn customers that their children were about to be poisoned.He spoke about three minutes. There were no questions for him. In the weeks that followed, there was little public outcry. Being a fluoride warrior can be a lonely business. "I've spent more of my own money and time on this than I need to," Kennedy said. "We have as a nation become idiots staring at boob tubes. . . . Did they forget how to read? Or are their brains damaged from exposure to fluoride?"mike.anton@latimes.com

Too Much Fluoride Can Cause Permanent Tooth Damage

Too Much Fluoride Can Cause Permanent Tooth DamageJen Markham - When Karen Godshall's 8-year-old daughter Kristen was learning to brush her teeth, she didn't use kid-flavored toothpaste. "We didn't actually use some of the kids' toothpaste at first, because of that," Karen said. "Because I didn't want them to get used to that flavor of something they would eat, like a candy thing," Godshall said.
One of the main active ingredients in toothpaste is fluoride, an element that strengthens tooth enamel. It’s usually found in municipal drinking water.
Though fluoride can help fight tooth decay, a new study by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) shows that too much fluoride can cause permanent teeth discoloration - a condition called fluorosis. When too much fluoride is swallowed, the teeth become permanently stained with small white spots. Dr. Glen Spinelli of Spinelli Dental said "It's a permanent spot, it's permanent damage to the enamel. We can do things cosmetically to fix that, but…you really don't need toothpaste at all for 2 to 3 year-olds. Just tap water is fine."
Once children are four to five years old, dentists recommend parents start out with a very small amount of toothpaste, teach them how to spit, and to watch them to make sure they don't swallow. Kids are only at risk of fluorosis before their permanent teeth grow in, and while too much concentrated fluoride can be damaging, not enough fluoride can weaken developing teeth.
If children are drinking too much bottled water or unfluoridated well water, parents should talk to their dentist about getting fluoride supplements.
Parents of children under age six are also encouraged to know the concentration of fluoride in their drinking water, so they know how much toothpaste to use.

USA - Health Professionals Call for End to Water Fluoridation

As detailed in this ABC News Story, over 600 (now over 1,200) professionals are urging Congress to stop water fluoridation until ... all » Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks.

Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide. (First aired: August 9, 2007).

Australia - Fluoridation of Water - the balanced perspective

Orange County residents saying ‘no thanks’ to fluoride

ORANGE COUNTY, CA — Some county residents here are taking measures to reduce their exposure to the fluoride that was recently added to the water supply, a recent Orange County Register story reported.
County resident Blythe Fair said in the story, “I feel bad that there isn't a choice – there isn’t a way around being poisoned.” Among other things, Fair said she has been practicing Jin Shin Jyutsu to strengthen her bones and has changed the way she showers to limit exposure.
Resident Chris Sullivan will install a $500 activated alumina system to remove fluoride. “The people I have talked to and met with are not ‘delusional’ nor ‘fringe element,’ but educated, conscientious and often prominent members of our community,” Sullivan said in the story.
Terry Jakel made a similar move and installed a $200 reverse osmosis (RO) system. “Government shouldn’t be involved in dictating what they think is good for our health. We should have a choice of what we want to consume,” Jakel said in the story.
Cliff Christie, sales coordinator at Culligan Water of Orange County, said that a week before the fluoride was added, his phone was going "crazy" with calls.
Chris MacKnight, president of Water By Design, said he has had 10 inquiries about fluoride-removal systems, and others have called to see if their RO systems can remove fluoride.
The California Department of Public Health said in October it advises dentists to stop using fluoride supplements for a year so that patients are not exposed to more fluoride than necessary.

Calcium Fortified Fruit Juices May Reduce Dental Erosion

Calcium Fortified Fruit Juices May Reduce Dental Erosion
December 19th, 2007 by The MediNEWS Team
Dental erosion is common among individuals consuming large quantities of acidic or aerated drinks, professional wine tasters, and among people suffering from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and bulimia. Based on an invitro study by American researchers, Rachael E. Davis and colleagues, the findings of which are published in the latest issue of Journal of American Dental Association, it has been observed that calcium fortified fruit juices can prevent or reduce tooth erosion.

UK - The full facts about whether or not a public inquiry took place about Camelford water poisoning.

I'm very grateful to Doug Cross for giving me the full facts about whether or not a public inquiry took place about Camelford water poisoning. Best, Ann
---
By Doug Cross.
As the most deeply involved person alive, I can tell your corrrespondents what the correct situation is.

Firstly, there has been NO public inquiry into the incident. The first investigation was an internal assessment by Dr John Lawrence, into the Water Authority's handling of the affair. Shortly after this was followed by a police inquiry into whether or not any criminal activities had been involved.

The Government was then forced to set up the Clayton Committee in 1989, which visited Camelford for one day, interviewed seven people, then produced a report stating, in effect, that it was all psychological and there was nothing to worry about. We forced them to reveiw their position in 1991, when they issued a much more aggressive report reiterating their original view. The Water Authority was prosecuted for 'causing a public nuisance' in 1991.

Michaeal Meacher set up the most recent study by the Committee on Toxicity (CoT) in 2001, of which I was a Member. We released our draft Report in January 2005, preceeded by two days by an unauthorised Press Release from the Department of Health without our knowledge or consent, that virtually repeated the already discredited Clayton Committee's conclusions of 1989 and 1991. The new CoT sub-group was allegedly totally independent from the DoH. The current furore over the CoT report is due to my colleague and fellow member Peter Smith and my refusal to accept the final report and to go public over the outrageous initial cover-up, the continuous attempts to down-play emerging evidence of delayed and long-term medical damage, and subsequent attempts to subvert the latest study. The Coroner's decision to order a police inquiry is at least partly founded on evidence that I have given him of this deliberate attempt to conceal the inpacts of the incident on the public, and of the consequential extreme effects on at least some local people.

At no time has there been any Public Inquiry into the incident. A Public Inquiry has the power to ORDER witnesses to appear and to provide evidence, under cross-examination, and with legal sanctions if they refuse. None of the past studies, including the current CoT study, has had such powers. The Clayton study was a grotesque parody, deliberately designed to silence local concerns. It was reinforced by the Establishment when Wessley's publication of 'The legend of Camelford' was released - this is the psychiatrist who claims that almost all of the results of chemical poisoning are down to 'psychogenic' factors - it's all in the mind! (The paper is on the web and easy to find).

There must now be a full police inquiry, with legal powers to delve deeply into the antics of politicians who were involved in the protection of the water industry before privatisation. They must also investigate the medical services that went along with the claim that aluminium can't be absorbed into the blood when they were entirely aware that this was not true (Edwardson had warned the Clayton Committee of the existance of what he called 'super-absorbers' of aluminium in February 1989, but this evidence was never released publicly, despite its crucial relevance). On this basis the defence in the Water Authority trial was able to convince even the Judge that there could not be any medical damage as the result of the incident.

This saga will continue to run and hit the front pages. I for one am determined that this is exactly what will happen until we finally get the full story out into the open, and the damage to the people of North Cornwall, and the ten thousand unknown visitors caught up in the trauma, is recognised for the disastrous poisoning that it really was.

Doug Cross

Australia - Anger at GPs' fluoride backing

FIGHTING FLUORIDE: Barwon Association for Freedom from Fluoride secretary Mary Sestak, left, treasurer Anna Michalik and Water Quality Australia secretary David McRae are planning protests. Photo: ALISON WYND

Anger at GPs' fluoride backing
Danny Lannen
19Dec07 ANTI-fluoridation campaigners believe general practitioners have disgraced themselves by backing State Government fluoridation plans for Geelong.
They believe the GP Association of Geelong has sold out to the Government by flagging its support and is ignoring latest scientific findings on the impact of fluoride on bones, kidneys and thyroid glands. Opponents also said the Government was mocking the people of Geelong with its lack of consultation and have promised residents will have their chances to protest.
The GP Association of Geelong has joined a dozen Geelong health and welfare organisations backing fluoridation. Others include Barwon Health, Bethany Community Support, Committee for Geelong, Glastonbury Child and Family Services and the Corio-Norlane Renewal group.
Victoria's chief health officer Dr John Carnie said the health sector support had preceded the distribution of fluoride information booklets. Water Quality Australia secretary David McRae, of Geelong, said no studies had measured the effects on Australians after 40 years of fluoridation but a 2006 USA National Research Council study had indicated there was no safety margin between the amount of fluoride supposed to protect teeth and the amount that might damage organs. ''That US study was a bombshell,'' Mr McRae said. ``Dr Carnie should have been jumping up and down saying we should study this more but instead he's pumping out spin.''
The Government was breaking its election promise that it would introduce fluoridation only if the community demonstrated support, he said. ''Where is that support?'' Mr McRae said. ``And now Dr Carnie is saying there will be no referendum.'' Barwon Association for Freedom from Fluoridation acting treasurer Anna Michalik said community protests would start early in 2008.
''There will be rolling protests and we will take it to government in Melbourne,'' Mrs Michalik said. Association acting secretary Mary Sestak, of Norlane, was incensed Geelong GPs and Corio-Norlane Neighbourhood Renewal spokesman Dr Mark Kennedy had said fluoridation would benefit lower socio-economic areas. ''How dare they assume that in Norlane and Corio we're not up to par,'' Mrs Sestak said.

Fluoridated Water Jeopardizes Your Health

Top Ten Unfounded Health Scares of 2007
Fluoridated Water Jeopardizes Your Health
Posted: Tuesday, December 18, 2007
The (Unfounded) Scare: The addition of fluoride to tap water causes multiple health problems, including fluorosis, abnormal thyroid function, lower IQ and osteosarcoma. Origin of the Scare: The Environmental Working Group (EWG) published an article in their August 2007 Bulletin entitled “Fluoride in Your Water: Friend or Foe?”(6) The article claimed that “[e]ven the American Dental Association has changed its tune and tells parents to avoid fluoridated water.” The EWG also featured a study done by researchers at Harvard, which was also published in the Harvard journal Cancer Causes and Control.(7) The study linked fluoridated water to a rare bone cancer in boys. Media Coverage: This story scared many cities about their public water supply and was picked up by hundreds of local newspapers. ABC in Fayetteville, North Carolina ran a story about fluoridated water entitled “Fluoridation fears.” It quoted Dr. Michael Fleming, a member of the FDA dental advisory committee, saying, frighteningly, “Fluoride in the water is essentially a drug, it’s an uncontrolled use of a drug.”(8)
The Bottom Line: The EWG is a strident anti-chemical group that took two claims about fluoride and ran with them, in a bad direction. The authors of the Harvard paper noted that their work is just a part of a much bigger project and that it is an “exploratory analysis” that will require scientific confirmation. In addition to this, the principal investigator of the larger study states that the full study will not suggest an overall association between fluoride and osteosarcoma.(9) Not only did EWG skew their reporting of the Harvard data, they also misrepresented the ADA’s recommendations about fluoride and infant formula.(10) The ADA states that infant formula prepared with fluoridated water presents no health risk but may create a small increased risk of fluorosis, which only affects the way teeth look, not overall health as the EWG would like everyone to believe. They should be ashamed for telling a flat-out lie about the ADA.

The way they dismiss fluorosis would make anybody doubt their word on any of it.

Australia - 'Vocal minority' against water fluoridation

'Vocal minority' against water fluoridation
Posted Wed Dec 19, 2007 8:00am AEDT
Dentists say people against the fluoridation of water supplies in Victoria do not speak for their communities. The Victorian Government is planning to fluoridate the domestic water supplies for several country towns, including Castlemaine. The Australian Dental Association's Dr Mark Bowman says a recent study confirms children who drink fluoridated water have better dental health. He says most people want fluoride in their water.
"We would see that the people who are anti-fluoride from experience we've had, are a vocal minority," he said. "We've got no evidence to the contrary."

Australia - Qld Govt denies fluoride causes health issues

Qld Govt denies fluoride causes health issues
Posted 8 hours 43 minutes ago Updated 8 hours 44 minutes ago
Health Minister Stephen Robertson has hit back at claims that fluoridation of the state's water supplies could cause health problems in infants.
He says an Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report, which has found that Queensland children have worse teeth than children in Uganda, justifies the Government's recent decision to fluoridate water across the state.
Mr Robertson says recent Australian studies show no significant link between the use of infant formulas made with fluoridated water and dental fluorosis.
"Fluoridated water can be safely used to reconstitute infant formula and the risk of what they call dental fluorosis, which is just a staining or mottling of teeth, is still low," he said.
"There's a lot of unsubstantiated, very poor science that goes into the anti-fluoride debate."

Australia - Fluoride gives kids healthy teeth

Fluoride gives kids healthy teeth
Monday, 17 December 2007

Children in Australia have better oral health than children in most other countries, due largely to fluoridated water, according to new research conducted at the University of Adelaide.A new report into water fluoridation and children's dental health has been released today by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The report contains the findings of research conducted by the AIHW Dental Statistics and Research Unit at the University of Adelaide."At any given age, in both baby teeth and permanent teeth, children who live in areas with optimal fluoridated water have less tooth decay than those from areas with low fluoride levels," says the report's author, Mr Jason Armfield."These differences in disease experience between fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas were as high as 66 per cent for seven-year-olds," Mr Armfield says.Optimal water fluoridation was associated with better dental health for both five to six-year-old and 11 to 12-year-old children regardless of the socioeconomic status of the area in which the children lived.The report, Water fluoridation and children's dental health: The Child Dental Health Survey, Australia 2002, found that compared to children in other countries, Australian 12-year-olds have the seventh lowest average number of decayed, missing and filled permanent teeth."Although Australians are doing well in the world stakes, locally, oral health problems in children are still evident," Mr Armfield says.In 2002, more than 47 per cent of Australian six-year-olds had cavities in their baby teeth. On average, for every six-year-old child in Australia there were approximately two decayed, missing or filled baby teeth.At the same time, more than 42 per cent of 12-year-olds had cavities in their permanent teeth. For every 12-year-old in Australia, there was approximately one decayed, missing or filled permanent tooth.Levels of dental decay in children varied around Australia, with the average number of decayed, missing or filled deciduous teeth (among five to six-year-olds) highest in Queensland and the Northern Territory, and lowest in Western Australia and South Australia.The number of decayed, missing or filled permanent teeth in 12-year-olds was highest for the Australian Capital Territory, Queensland (which does not currently have state-wide fluoridation) and Tasmania, and lowest for South Australia and the Northern Territory."Variations by state and territory reflect underlying population levels of disease as well as differences in the targeting of services," Mr Armfield says.

Tasmania has one of the most intensive fluoridation schemes, with 48 fluoridation plants for ½ a million people in comparison to Melbourne’s 6 plants for 4

Australia - Tooth decay rampant among children: survey

Transcript
This is a transcript from The World Today. The program is broadcast around Australia at 12:10pm on ABC Local Radio.

Tooth decay rampant among children: survey
The World Today - Monday, 17 December , 2007 12:50:00
Reporter: Jennifer Macey
BRIGID GLANVILLE: A new survey shows that half of all six-year-olds in Australia have tooth decay. The survey was conducted by the University of Adelaide for the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

It found there's been a five per cent increase in tooth decay in young children, partly due to lack of access to public dental health care. But it's also found that adding fluoride to the water supply does help in fighting against tooth decay.
.

JENNIFER MACEY: Every second six-year-old child in Australia has a decayed, missing or filled baby tooth. And on average every 12-year-old has cavities in their adult teeth.

These are the latest findings in a report by the Australian Health and Welfare Institute. The report's author, Jason Armfield, says there's been a steady increase in dental disease among children.

JASON ARMFIELD: Since the mid 1990s amongst younger children we've seen a steady increase, year by year by year, and we're also starting to see increases now amongst older children too which is a little bit of a concern. So child oral health in Australia is actually getting worse.

JENNIFER MACEY: Mr Armfield says there's a strong link between child tooth decay and the socio-economic status of families.

JASON ARMFIELD: Children from lower socio-economic groups generally have poorer exposure to fluorides, they have a higher exposure to sugary foods, poor foods, and they're also likely to be seeing a dentist less often.

JENNIFER MACEY: The new Federal Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, says the previous government failed to adequately fund public dental health care.

She says the Government has committed $29- million extra into the public dental health care scheme.

NICOLA ROXON: But we've also established and are in the process of making sure this can roll out in the new year, a teen dental program which will provide $150 to parents to ensure that their teenagers do go and have a regular, preventative check up, make sure that their teeth are being cared for properly, and to get that information about the way food and drink can affect your teeth, and to make sure they're being cared for in a way which will prevent these sorts of declining results.

JENNIFER MACEY: But the Australian Dental Association says this won't be enough to fix the problem.

The Association's President is Dr. John Matthews.

JOHN MATTHEWS: The dental spend is $5-billion so we're talking about actually $100-million a year, that $290 is over three years. They've also, in the teen dental plan there's over $500-million again over about four years. So they're putting about $250-million a year out of $5-billion. It's not huge but it's a significant step and if they doubled it I think they could make a huge difference.

JENNIFER MACEY: He says the Government should reintroduce the free dental clinics that used to make the rounds of all primary schools.

JOHN MATTHEWS: School dental service was a fantastic service to the community and we'd love to see it strengthened again. We've got a Federal Government who's talking about helping out in these areas. They've got a teen dental plan. So we'd love to see that sort of all go on the table and see that restored to its former glory.

JENNIFER MACEY: The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) also supports the return of the free school dental service.

The council's President, Lin Hatfield Dodds, says poor oral health in early years often flows through to dental problems in adult life.

LIN HATFIELD DODDS: But we'd also like to see the Government roll out a free preventative course of treatments for adults every two years. We've costed that at $800-million from the Commonwealth and matched funding from the States. And when you think about 650,000 people on waiting lists, that's not a huge investment to address that really serious issue of poor oral health for children and for adults.

BRIGID GLANVILLE: Lin Hadfield Dodds, ACOSS President, ending that report by Jennifer Macey.

USA - Not in my water supply

Not in my water supply
Some local residents resist extra dose of fluoride.
By JEFF OVERLEY
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
Corona del Mar resident Blythe Fair has consulted Jehovah's Witnesses, practiced a Japanese form of holistic healing and armed herself with a salad spinner, all in a desperate attempt to evade her arch-nemesis – fluoride.
Concerned that the icon of dental hygiene is actually a menace to public health, Fair is among a small but resolute band of local residents going to great lengths to avoid the extra dose of fluoride added last month to about half of Orange County's water supply.
"I feel bad that there isn't a choice – there isn't a way around being poisoned," Fair said. Among many steps, Fair is practicing Jin Shin Jyutsu to support her bone health, has asked for advice from Jehovah's Witnesses, who sometimes eschew certain medical procedures, and has a salad spinner to rid lettuce of fluoridated H2O.
Water fluoridation has conjured colorful protests since its early stages in the 1950s, when opponents famously decried it as a communist conspiracy. Anti-fluoride activists, however, bristle at suggestions they're paranoid.
"The people I have talked to and met with are not 'delusional' nor 'fringe element,' but educated, conscientious and often prominent members of our community," said Newport Beach resident Chris Sullivan, who plans to install a $500 system that uses activated alumina to remove fluoride.
But suspicions do remain, even after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention dubbed water fluoridation one of the "10 great public health achievements of the 20th century."
"Does the (Metropolitan Water District of Southern California) expect people to believe that dentists would actually recommend a substance for healthier teeth that will pretty much decrease their business?" asked Santa Ana resident Karim Nasser.
Water district spokesman Bob Muir says that's exactly the case – medical and dental professionals requested the addition of fluoride to water in Orange County and surrounding areas.
Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley already have fluoridated water; since the newly fluoridated water will often be blended with other supplies, other county residents will encounter varying amounts of fluoride.
Even with the prospect that the increase in fluoride will be negligible, many locals aren't taking chances. Orange resident Terry Jakel installed a $200 reverse osmosis filter to purify his water. "Government shouldn't be involved in dictating what they think is good for our health," Jakel said. "We should have a choice of what we want to consume."
Fluoridation foes have a two-pronged argument. They say the practice is pointless since fluoride absorbs best through tooth enamel, instead of being swallowed. Second, they fear health risks.
Figures from the World Health Organization, they note, show that rates of tooth decay have plummeted in past decades not only in the United States, where two-thirds of the country's population drinks fluoridated water, but also in Western Europe, where only about 2 percent of households use fluoridated water.
Public health officials have argued, according to published reports, that Western Europe has more effective preventive care.
Also, a 2002 Orange County study indicated that children in Huntington and Fountain Valley, on average, had one less missing, decayed or filled tooth than residents of cities with un-fluoridated water.
Whatever the case, opponents say fluoridation amounts to mass medication. "When are they going to start antibiotics in the water to prevent the flu?" asked Laguna Woods resident Beverly Portlock.
Research linking fluoride to bone cancer and thyroid problems, dismissed as flawed by leading medical agencies, is spotlighted by fluoride opponents as damning evidence of fluoride's dangers.
Fluoride fears are a boon for some water-purifying companies. "A week before (fluoride was added) was when the phone was just going crazy," said Cliff Christie, sales coordinator at Culligan Water of Orange County.
Chris MacKnight, president of Water By Design in Fullerton, said 10 people inquired about fluoride removal, and others with reverse-osmosis purifiers called to see if their systems removed fluoride.
Supporters and critics of fluoride agree that excessive fluoride can cause blotchy white stains on teeth. The California Department of Public Health in October advised dentists to suspend fluoride supplements for a year to "ensure that consumers do not receive more fluoride than is necessary."
For activists such as Fair, however, such steps are too meager. A onetime resident of the U.S. Virgin Islands, she's now enjoying what she calls "tropical showers" – a quick rinse, turn off the water, soap up and rinse off – to minimize fluoride contact.
"I know it sounds comical," she said, "but you have to limit exposure."
Contact the writer: 714-445-6683 or joverley@ocregister.com
OAS_RICH('Middle1');
document.write('');

From the editor: Many of you have expressed concerns about some of the harsh anonymous comments from readers. To remedy that, we are introducing new features. You can create your own blog, publish your news and share your photos with the community. Once you fill out a simple form and leave a verifiable e-mail address, you can set up your profile page. It will display all of your contributions and allow you to track issues and easily connect with others.
We want our site to be a place where people discuss and debate ideas that foster stronger communities. We built this for you. Please take care of it. Tolerate broad thinking, but take action against obscene or hateful material. Make it a credible and safe place worth preserving and sharing.



dannyhaszard wrote:
Jehovah's Witnesses have no more expertise on the use of flouride as they do at predicting the end of the world.
12/16/2007 10:46 PM PST on OCRegister.com

PatrickSal wrote:
Letter: When ingested, fluoride adversely affects more than just teeth Saturday, October 6, 2007The proponents of water fluoridation tell us, “fluoride occurs naturally in most water systems. We adjust it to a therapeutic level.”This is a lie from the so-called experts and a lack of knowledge from the rest. What is found in nature is sodium or calcium fluoride (NaF or CaF2). Just because the word fluoride shows up doesn’t mean it is the same. Many people think sodium is salt. It is called sodium on every food label. Sodium (Na) is a soft, silvery gray metal that can be cut with a knife and is highly reactive with water. Chlorine (Cl) is a poison, and a good dose will kill you. But put them together and you get sodium chloride (NaCl), better known as table salt.If I gave you a cheese grater and a block of sodium, would you sprinkle it over your dish of pasta? It’s the same thing, or is it?Fluoride or fluorine (F) is No. 9 in the periodic table of elements. It has nine protons, nine neutrons, but only seven electrons. It is called an ion because it is missing two electrons in its outer shell. This makes the atom electrically unbalanced and, like a magnet, it attaches itself to the calcium in the ground.Don’t be misled. The chemical used most in water fluoridation is hydrofluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6). Nature has nothing to do with its existence. It is a hazardous waste product from the fertilizer industry and 25 times more toxic than CaF2. When ingested, it attaches to the calcium in your bones. According to the Center of Disease Control, one third of the children in this country have dental fluorosis (spotting of the teeth). It is an outward sign of both excessive fluoride intake and systemic harm.Once ingested, fluoride adversely affects more than just teeth.Pat Arena Jensen Beach
12/16/2007 5:49 PM PST on OCRegister.com

fauxpas wrote:
What the people who have commented before me and those who were interviewed for the article need is a "tropical shower" for the brain! You people are, without a doubt, the most idiotic people on the face of the planet! Have you been taking Dean Koontz far too seriously? What will you do next; wrap aluminum foil around your head to keep the government from sending signals into your brain? Do you attend the annual conventions in Roswell, New Mexico? As Forrest Gump said - STUPID IS AND STUPID DOES! Be realistic - fluoride is a tooth cavity tool and nothing more! Be thankful that just by drink water, millions of people who, unlike the elite idiots that protest, will have good teeth. Unlike the "Idiot Protester", they cannot afford the dental care every 6 months!
12/16/2007 4:14 PM PST on OCRegister.com

nghthawk47 wrote:
I checked with Rayne water systems in Irvine and they told me they have systems that will deal the fluoride issues. We are going to buy a system next week! I can not believe the water districts were able to get this one by!
12/16/2007 3:54 PM PST on OCRegister.com

CleanSAFEH20 wrote:
To: ALL with ‘Common Sense’ about keeping our drinking Waters CLEAN & SAFE.URGENT! Know that the actual 'illicit chemical cocktail' that is ‘corruptly sold’ by phosphate chemical corporations to ‘peer pressured’ government regulated municipal water treatment plants all over North America is an USA-EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] 'Regulated Potential Pollutant' of Air, Water, and Land. Silicofluoride is derived from primarily the Phosphate ore mining & processing industries ‘HAPS’ units [e.g. Hazardous Air Pollution Scrubbers], and subsequently is regulatorily classified by EPA as a 'Class 1 ..'HAZARDOUS WASTE'. Politically appointed USA-EPA highest management is primarily in ‘political complicity’ to allow Silicofluorides to be sold and metered into our precious USA drinking waters. However, recently around 7,000+ EPA professional CAREER ‘non-politically hired’ Scientists, Toxicologists, Chemists, and professional field health workers signed a Petition to EPA top Management requesting ‘fluoridation’ be stopped. Read the PR Announcement at:http://www.world-wire.com/news/0830050001.htmlOn March, 2006 a 'balanced' distinguished dozen group of Scientists on a National Research Council/National Academy of Science Panel, after 3-1/2 years of their intensely studying recent 'peer reviewed' published 'Fluoride' SCIENCE as related to possible health endangerment issued a 507 page REPORT in bound book format concerning ALL they learned and concluded with 'Recommendations'. One essential Conclusion was that the current USA governmental set maximum established levels for fluoride in drinking water are NOT Protective especially of children from 'fluorosis', and lifetime 'Bone damage' and other bodily damage! You can read the entire Report 'FREE' on Internet, or purchase a copy by going to:http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571____The daily swallowed DOSAGE of ‘fluoridated drinking water’ swallowed by especially Pregnant Mothers, and very SMALL CHILDREN is UNCONTROLLABLE! Read article about Amer. Dental Assoc. and CDC [Center for Disease Control] WARNINGS to prevent Babies/Infants from getting ‘fluoride’:http://www.mothering.com/sections/news_bulletins/november2006.html#fluorideMany Cities in the USA have ceased, or voted NOT to ‘fluoridate’, especially in the past 10 years. See LIST of those Cities at:http://www.fluoridealert.org/communities.htmFinally, know that the AWWA [American Water Works Association] has reported in one of their ‘Water Conservation pamphlets’ that “Less than 1% of utilities treated water is ever consumed [e.g. swallowed] by human beings.” ‘Fluoridation’ is the Worlds Most economically Wasteful, illogical ‘medicant’ delivery system on the face of this Earth!NEVER SWALLOW ANY FLUORIDE ![ Read the Warning Label on back of any fluoride laden toothpaste.]Demand…‘No! Toxics’ in Drinking Water!
12/16/2007 1:19 PM PST on OCRegister.com
progrowth wrote:
Wow. The crazies from the 1950s thought fluoridation was a Commie plot. Now that the Commies are gone, they appear to be just a bit crazier. But then these are the same people who pay a buck to drink what's nothing more than bottled tapwater.
12/16/2007 1:01 PM PST on OCRegister.com


nyscof wrote:
New York - December 16, 2007 -- In a statement first released August 9, 2007, over 1,200 professionals, double the original number, urge Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks. (http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html)Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.Signer Dr. Arvid Carlsson, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, says, “Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It's really obsolete.”An Online Action Petition to Congress in support of the Professionals' Statement is available on FAN's web site, www.fluorideaction.org. “The NRC report dramatically changed scientific understanding of fluoride's health risks," says Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network. "Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath as to why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” he added. An Assistant NY State Attorney General calls the report “the most up-to-date expert authority on the health effects of fluoride exposure.” The Professionals’ Statement also references: -- The new American Dental Association policy recommending infant formula NOT be prepared with fluoridated water. -- The CDC’s concession that the predominant benefit of fluoride is topical not systemic.-- CDC data showing that dental fluorosis, caused by fluoride over-exposure, now impacts one third of American children.-- Major research indicating little difference in decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.-- A Harvard study indicating a possible link between fluoridation and bone cancer. -- The silicofluoride chemicals used for fluoridation are contaminated industrial waste and have never been FDA- approved for human ingestion. The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a DC watchdog, revealed that a Harvard professor concealed the fluoridation/bone cancer connection for three years. EWG President Ken Cook states, “It is time for the US to recognize that fluoridation has serious risks that far outweigh any minor benefits, and unlike many other environmental issues, it's as easy to end as turning off a valve at the water plant.”Further, researchers reporting in the Oct 6 2007 British Medical Journal indicate that fluoridation, touted as a safe cavity preventive, never was proven safe or effective and may be unethical. (1)Partially, as a result of the professionals' statement, at least one city, Cobleskill NY, stopped 54 years of water fluoridation. See: http://www.fluoridealert.org/news/2998.htmlOn October 2, Juneau Alaska voters rejected fluoridation despite the American Dental Association's $150,000 political campaign to return fluoride into the water supply after the legislative body voted it out.Many communities rejected or stopped fluoridation over the years. See: http://www.fluoridealert.org/communities.htmSOURCE: Fluoride Action Network http://www.FluorideAction.NetReferences:(1) “Adding fluoride to water supplies,” British Medical Journal, KK Cheng, Iain Chalmers, Trevor A. Sheldon, October 6, 2007

Australia - Geelong doctors back fluoride in water

Geelong doctors back fluoride in water
Danny Lannen
17Dec07 GEELONG general practitioners have backed fluoridation of the city's water supply and expect benefits to reach far beyond improved oral health. The GP Association of Geelong is one of a dozen health and welfare organisations to have endorsed fluoridation for the city as the State Government prepares to distribute education booklets to residents. GPs believe fluoridation will help improve general health and will particularly benefit lower socio-economic areas. Barwon Health, Bethany Community Support, Committee for Geelong, Glastonbury Child and Family Services and Corio-Norlane Neighbourhood Renewal group have also flagged support for fluoride. Victoria's chief health officer Dr John Carnie said the booklets would provide balanced, factual information. ``The decision to begin this process in Geelong follows support from the local health sector,'' Dr Carnie said. State Government plans to link Geelong to Melbourne water supply would introduce fluoridated water to the city. Dr Carnie said the fluoride content needed to be one part per million to be beneficial. GP Association spokesman Dr Mark Kennedy said benefits were more than cosmetic. Problems like chronic mouth infections could cause difficulties in managing illnesses like diabetes and might lead to problems with heart valve infection. ``And we often see that patients who are unable to access regular dental services rely on their GPs for treating dental infections rather than having their teeth filled or removed,'' Dr Kennedy said. ``That's certainly a problem in poorer areas rather than areas where people will access dental services.'' Dr Kennedy is also health and wellbeing spokesman for Corio-Norlane Neighbourhood Renewal group. He said poorer socio-economic areas of the city stood to gain most from fluoridation. ``I've been working in the area for the past 20 years and certainly the state of oral health in areas where people can't afford and have much less access to oral health treatment is more noticeable than in areas where people are able to access services,'' Dr Kennedy said. Dr Carnie said a National Health and Medical Research Council review had confirmed that fluoridation of drinking water remained the most effective and socially equal way of providing all community members with benefits.
``The benefits of fluoridation are illustrated by the fact that six-year-old children living in fluoridated areas of Victoria have up to 36 per cent less tooth decay than those in non-fluoridated areas,'' Dr Carnie said.

Tooth Whitening Procedures May Reduce Dentin Fracture Toughness

Tooth Whitening Procedures May Reduce Dentin Fracture Toughness
December 17th, 2007 by The MediNEWS Team
Dental bleaching techniques, commonly known as tooth whitening, are simple and conservative procedures for aesthetic restoration of discolored teeth. However, dental bleaching agents may cause enamel sensitivity as well as mild irritation to the soft tissues around the bleached tooth. Now, in a new research article published in the latest issue of the Journal of Dental Research, it has been reported that bleaching techniques reduce the fracture toughness of the dentin.
The invitro study, conducted by Canadian researchers, Tam LE and Noroozi A, at the University of Toronto, evaluated the response of the dentinal structures to peroxide tooth bleaching. On the compact test specimens consisting of human dentin, either bleach (16% or 10% carbamide peroxide or 3% hydrogen peroxide) or control material containing 0.1% sodium fluoride was applied. The bleach was applied directly to the dentin or indirectly via the enamel (6 hours/ day) for a period of 2 weeks and 8 weeks. Based on an Analysis Of Variance (ANOVA) and Fisher’s Least Significant Difference (LSD) test, the fracture toughness results were evaluated. A significant decrease in the mean fracture toughness was observed, with a more prominent decrease after direct bleaching techniques (19-34% after 2 weeks and 61-68% after 8 weeks) compared to the indirect technique (up to 17% after 2 weeks and 37% after 8 weeks). The decrease was also directly proportional to the application time and bleach concentration.
Earlier this year, the same team of researchers had conducted a similar study (Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, 2007) to evaluate the effects of prolonged bleaching techniques. The study was done for 8 weeks on the dentin of recently extracted molars, which was directly or indirectly treated at-home (10% carbamide peroxide or 3% hydrogen peroxide, 6 hours/day, 5 days/week) or in-office (30% hydrogen peroxide, 1 hour/week). The control materials for this study were placebo gel and distilled water. The team observed that upon prolonged use, directly bleached specimens showed a prominent decrease in the dentin fracture toughness (P < 0.05).
Bleaching agents not only decrease the dentin fracture toughness but also have a dehydrating effect on the dentin (Operative Dentistry, 2006). Application of dental varnishes prior to bleaching can reduce or prevent the dehydration of dentin due to the peroxides.
Dental bleaching does not change the color of the crown, caps or fillings, and the whitening effect of the procedure is temporary. Also, care should be taken when using bleach for prolonged duration in cases with dentinal exposure in the form of occlusal attrition or in the case of gingival recession.
Over the past five years, the demand for tooth bleaching has increased by more than 300 percent. Recent studies show that about 80 percent of adults aged between 18 to 49 years would prefer to have whiter and brighter teeth. There are many bleaching techniques available such as nightguard (home) bleach, as well as in-office bleaches. For all these procedures, peroxide is used in varying concentrations and duration. With new evidence establishing that the dentin fracture toughness is dependent on the concentration and duration of the peroxides used during whitening, utmost care should be employed while perform these procedures.

Australia - Tooth decay rampant among children: survey

Tooth decay rampant among children: survey
The World Today - Monday, 17 December , 2007 12:50:00
Reporter: Jennifer Macey
BRIGID GLANVILLE: A new survey shows that half of all six-year-olds in Australia have tooth decay. The survey was conducted by the University of Adelaide for the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. It found there's been a five per cent increase in tooth decay in young children, partly due to lack of access to public dental health care. But it's also found that adding fluoride to the water supply does help in fighting against tooth decay. Jennifer Macey reports.JENNIFER MACEY: Every second six-year-old child in Australia has a decayed, missing or filled baby tooth. And on average every 12-year-old has cavities in their adult teeth. These are the latest findings in a report by the Australian Health and Welfare Institute. The report's author, Jason Armfield, says there's been a steady increase in dental disease among children. JASON ARMFIELD: Since the mid 1990s amongst younger children we've seen a steady increase, year by year by year, and we're also starting to see increases now amongst older children too which is a little bit of a concern. So child oral health in Australia is actually getting worse.JENNIFER MACEY: Mr Armfield says there's a strong link between child tooth decay and the socio-economic status of families. JASON ARMFIELD: Children from lower socio-economic groups generally have poorer exposure to fluorides, they have a higher exposure to sugary foods, poor foods, and they're also likely to be seeing a dentist less often.JENNIFER MACEY: The new Federal Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, says the previous government failed to adequately fund public dental health care.She says the Government has committed $29- million extra into the public dental health care scheme.NICOLA ROXON: But we've also established and are in the process of making sure this can roll out in the new year, a teen dental program which will provide $150 to parents to ensure that their teenagers do go and have a regular, preventative check up, make sure that their teeth are being cared for properly, and to get that information about the way food and drink can affect your teeth, and to make sure they're being cared for in a way which will prevent these sorts of declining results.JENNIFER MACEY: But the Australian Dental Association says this won't be enough to fix the problem.The Association's President is Dr. John Matthews.JOHN MATTHEWS: The dental spend is $5-billion so we're talking about actually $100-million a year, that $290 is over three years. They've also, in the teen dental plan there's over $500-million again over about four years. So they're putting about $250-million a year out of $5-billion. It's not huge but it's a significant step and if they doubled it I think they could make a huge difference.JENNIFER MACEY: He says the Government should reintroduce the free dental clinics that used to make the rounds of all primary schools.JOHN MATTHEWS: School dental service was a fantastic service to the community and we'd love to see it strengthened again. We've got a Federal Government who's talking about helping out in these areas. They've got a teen dental plan. So we'd love to see that sort of all go on the table and see that restored to its former glory.JENNIFER MACEY: The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) also supports the return of the free school dental service.The council's President, Lin Hatfield Dodds, says poor oral health in early years often flows through to dental problems in adult life. LIN HATFIELD DODDS: But we'd also like to see the Government roll out a free preventative course of treatments for adults every two years. We've costed that at $800-million from the Commonwealth and matched funding from the States. And when you think about 650,000 people on waiting lists, that's not a huge investment to address that really serious issue of poor oral health for children and for adults.BRIGID GLANVILLE: Lin Hadfield Dodds, ACOSS President, ending that report by Jennifer Macey.

Australia - Report justifies fluoride decision: Robertson

Report justifies fluoride decision: Robertson
December 17, 2007 - 1:31PM
A report ranking Queenslanders' teeth as the worst in the country justified a decision to fluoridate the state's water supplies, Health Minister Stephen Robertson says.
Premier Anna Bligh earlier this month announced plans to fluoridate water supplies across Queensland, provoking anger in some communities that the chemical could cause long-term health problems.
However, Mr Robertson said The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report released today showing Queensland children have the highest levels of decay in the country proved action needed to be taken.
Queensland is the only state in Australia which does not fluoridate its water, which the report identified as one reason for the state's poor dental health.
"Children from areas where drinking water contained negligible fluoride had poorer dental health than did children from areas with either naturally or artificially fluoridated water," the report stated.
"The poorer dental health in children from areas with negligible levels of fluoride in the water persisted across differing areas of residential location and levels of socioeconomic disadvantage."
Mr Robertson said Townsville, in the state's north, was the only major centre to fluoridate its water and residents there had the best dental health in Australia.
"The US centres for Disease Control and Prevention has called it one of the most effective public health measures of the last century and surveys have consistently found the overwhelming majority of Queenslanders in support of fluoride," he said.
More than 90 per cent of Queensland residents are expected to be drinking fluoridated water by 2012 under the government's $35 million program.