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

UK Against Fluoridation

Thursday, May 11, 2017

Estimates of fluorosis prevalence in the Australian National Health & Medical Research Council review (2016)

The 2016 NHMRC Evidence Evaluation (1) included a critical assessment of the 2000 York review, the 2007 Australian NHMRC review and the 2015 Cochrane review. 
Their main finding on dental fluorosis was that these earlier reviews were of limited relevance to the Australian setting because: 
  • Many of the studies had fluoride levels much higher (up to 5ppm) than used in Australia (around 1ppm)
  • They did not consider other sources of fluoride (e.g. toothpaste), and
  • There is evidence that some of the dental fluorosis included in “fluorosis of aesthetic concern” reviews may not actually be of any concern to Australians. 

The Evidence Evaluation therefore concentrated on recent Australian studies which show:
  • Dental fluorosis is found in 1 in 4 children, slightly higher in fluoridated (25%) compared to non-fluoridated (17%) areas
  • The vast majority is mild or very mild
  • Moderate fluorosis is uncommon and may, or may not, be of concern to people who have it
  • Severe fluorosis is rare.

The above is from the British Fluoridation Society.
The fact that fluorosis is found in areas without fluoridation it must indicate we are getting too much now. It seems that every report that suggests harm is quickly dismissed as being poor even the 2000 York review, What's the bet if the York Review looked at the 2016 NHMRC Evidence Evaluation  they too would dismiss it as being poor science. 
Dont treat the symptoms remove the cause sugar. 


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home