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

UK Against Fluoridation

Thursday, October 31, 2019

From Ann Wills

Daily Mail 29.10.19  “MALE INFERTILITY TIMEBOMB” by John Naish.
British experts are blaming the male fertility crisis on chemical pollutants in our environment.  Phthalates are considered a key culprit.  These are added to plastics to increase their durability.  Shanna Swan, professor of reproductive epidemiology at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, found mothers with high blood phthalates in early pregnancy are much more likely to have sons with a low sperm count.  In another study last year, obstetricians at University of Western Australia found men whose mothers had high levels of phthalates between 18th & 24th week of pregnancy had low sperm counts.  Published in “Frontiers in Endocrinology.”   Another key pollutant appears to be perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS)  used as a stain-repellent in furnishing fabrics & carpets etc.  It’s called a “forever chemical” because it persists for decades in the environment often in drinking water.  (My comment PFOS contains fluoride.)

Ann

Fluoride's Brain Research is Alarming and Growing

NEW YORK, Oct. 30, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Water fluoridation is linked to Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Environment International December 2019), adding to the growing pile of scientific literature linking fluoride to neurological disorders e.g. lower IQ, Autism, poor memory, dementia, Alzheimer's Disease. Governments failed to determine fluoride's toxic brain effects before declaring fluoridation safe in the early 1900's, reports the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF).

Fluoridation, the purposeful addition of non-essential fluoride chemicals into public water supplies, attempts to reduce tooth decay in tap water drinkers.

"Fluoride is presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans," concludes the US HHS's National Toxicology Program's monograph, Systematic Review of Fluoride Exposure and Neurodevelopmental and Cognitive Health Effects (Draft 9/6/2019).

NTP writes: "This conclusion is based on a consistent pattern of findings in human studies across several different populations showing that higher fluoride exposure is associated with decreased IQ or other cognitive impairments in children."

Six Mother-Child studies link fluoride to offspring's lower IQ. Over 400 more fluoride/neurotoxic studies (including 50+ human) support its biological plausibility.

EPA admits that fluoride is a chemical with "Substantial Evidence of Developmental Neurotoxicity."

At EPA's request, the National Research Council (NRC) reviewed fluoride toxicology research to conclude in 2006, "fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain." Since NRC's review, hundreds of fluoride/brain studies were published; yet EPA has taken no action.


Based on this evidence and more, consumer groups are suing the EPA to recognize fluoride's brain effects when setting safe water fluoride levels now based solely on fluoride's adverse bone and teeth effects.

A July 2019 University of Calgary public health fluoride report admits "there is some new emerging evidence that fluoride exposure during pregnancy may be harmful to the brain development of children."

Attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President says, "Government agencies and organized dentistry were irresponsible to instigate fluoridation without brain-safety evidence. Instead, they continue to protect fluoridation and their own carelessness by demanding more research. Shouldn't that have been done 75 years ago?"

"The precautionary principle dictates that, at least, pregnant women should be advised to avoid ingesting fluoride. The fetus derives no benefit from fluoride, anyway. Brains don't need fluoride. At best, put fluoride on your teeth not in your brain or the water," says Beeber.

Contact: Paul Beeber, JD, 516-433-8882 nyscof@aol.com
http://twitter.com/nyscof

Wednesday, October 30, 2019

Why is Hong Kong still putting fluoride in its water supply?

Kylie KnottKylie Knott  Why is it some people in Hong Kong leap onto their high horse when they discover monosodium glutamate (MSG) has been added to their lunch noodles but don't cause a ripple when they learn their domestic water supply is treated with a toxic chemical?
Since 1961, domestic water in Hong Kong has been fluoridated to prevent tooth decay. But studies have since linked fluoride in water to all sorts of things, from lower IQ in children to infertility.
Illustration: Bay Leung
Illustration: Bay Leung
Most developed nations don't fluoridate their water (in Western Europe only 3 per cent of the population consumes fluoride with their H2O) and the World Health Organisation says there is no discernible difference in the levels of tooth decay between developed countries that do and those that do not. The decline in tooth decay the United States has experienced over the past 60 years, which is often attributed to fluoridated water, has been matched in all developed countries.
So how can the Hong Kong government continue to add fluoride if there is doubt over its safety?
Local health adviser Anita Cheung Shuk-kwan thinks water fluoridation is an archaic practice: "There is compelling evidence that exposure to fluoride during the early stage of life can damage children's brains. One needs to ask: why force infants who have no teeth to take fluoride? … If someone wants fluoride they can get it from their dentist, or from fluoridated oral-care products. There is no need to put a drug in the public drinking water without public consent … Low-income families can't afford equipment to remove fluoride [most home water-treatment systems can't completely remove it anyway]."
So to those officials in control of the city's taps, instead of mass medicating Hong Kong people via the water supply, why not improve dental care by encouraging proper brushing and flossing or, even better, by removing sugary drinks and snacks from school canteens?
This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: Kick in the teeth

'So much is at stake': Academics call for release of data behind controversial Canadian fluoride study

A study linking fluoride exposure in pregnancy to lower IQ scores in boys is unnecessarily frightening people into avoiding fluoridated water, researchers say

When the editor-in-chief of a highly reputable American medical journal decided to publish a potential bombshell study from Canada hinting that pregnant women who drink fluoridated water risk subtly damaging their child’s brain, he braced for the blowback.

He imagined anti-fluoridationists would sink their teeth into it and wave it as more proof of the harms of “mass medication,” while proponents of fluoride would “trash it, because they just don’t want to believe the findings,” Dr. Dimitri Christakis, editor of JAMA Pediatrics said in an interview with the Post.

Well, he certainly called it.

Anti-fluoride activists are demanding a moratorium on fluoridation and an end to a “human experiment on millions of children,” while an international group of academics has now taken the rare step of urging the study’s American funder to formally request that the authors of the controversial paper release their data for independent review.

“So much is at stake,” reads the group’s appeal sent this week to the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The former chief dental officer for England, the chair of the Royal Society for Public Health in the U.K. and Timothy Caulfield, Canada Research Chair in Health Law and Policy at the University of Alberta, are among the 30 signatories

“Hundreds of millions of people around the globe — from Brazil to Australia — live in homes that receive fluoridated drinking water,” the letter states. “Hundreds of millions of people use toothpaste or other products with fluoride. Many millions of children receive topical fluoride treatments.”

'It's just one study': Why experts say it's not time to give up on fluoridation
Why the anti-fluoride haters are attacking a Calgary academic, calling her a 'fraud'
Calgary councillors vote to study effects of removing fluoride from city's water eight years ago
The authors argue, among other concerns, that the York University-led paper that suggested children born to women exposed to higher levels of fluoride during pregnancy have lower IQs is riddled with inconsistencies and “incongruities,”  that it focused a significant portion of its narrative on one “subgroup” (boys), that it didn’t take the mother’s IQ scores into account and that invalid measures were used to determine how much fluoride the mothers were exposed to.

They’re also displeased with the way it was presented to the public, saying it has caused confusion and scary headlines that could influence public policy. (The study’s senior author, York psychology professor Christine Till, told Time magazine that instructing pregnant women to reduce their fluoride intake is a “no brainer.”)

The fallout from the article is particularly harmful in Calgary, the academics said, where it’s being cited as reason not to resume water fluoridation eight years after the city ceased adding fluoride to tap water. (Calgary city council is holding a public hearing on fluoridation Tuesday).

Till told the Post that under no circumstances could she share the raw data, because it doesn’t belong to her. Rather, it belongs to a Canadian biobank containing more than 200,000 biological samples taken from thousands of mothers who gave birth between 2008 and 2012. Generally, the biobank is available to researchers in Canada, or outside Canada, so long as the data remain in Canada, Till said.

Till said she hired a PhD student to run “every single diagnostic test she could” and even offered her a bonus if she could find an error. Till has also been publicly posting answers to questions about the study on a free and open platform for research collaboration.

I care about effects that we cannot treat. At least with cavities you can treat them


The psychology professor has been accused of being anti-fluoride. Till said she is nothing of the sort. “We’re scientists. We let the data tell us the story and still people don’t believe it.” Till’s group has published a new study linking fluoride exposure to an increased risk of ADHD in Canadian youth. She has another paper close to being accepted, this one looking at babies fed formula made with fluoridated versus un-fluoridated tap water.

“As a neuropsychologist, I care about brain development, I care about effects that we cannot treat. At least with cavities you can treat them.”

True, however Calgary dentists say they are seeing bigger, deeper and more aggressive cavities since added fluoride was phased out of the city’s tap water in 2011. “The amount of decay that we’re seeing is just startling,” said Calgary pediatric dentist Dr. Kari Badwi, who recently treated a six-year-old with nearly half her teeth “just rotted down to the gums.” Untreated, teeth can become abscessed and infected. Bacteria can “get into the brain, it can get into different organs and it can cause death,” said Calgary dentist Robert Barsky.

One case reported in 2012 in the Journal of the Canadian Dental Association involved an 11-year-old boy from Timmins, Ont., who suffered a brain abscess from bacteria that likely originated from an infected molar. He was rushed to hospital after his mother found him lying on the floor screaming and holding his head. He was airlifted by helicopter to Toronto, where he underwent two brain surgeries and months of rehabilitation.

What are you hiding?


Timmins doesn’t have fluoridated water, and it would be a serious stretch to suggest cause and effect, said Dr. Scott Tomar. Tooth decay is caused by numerous factors and water fluoridation alone “isn’t a panacea,” said Tomar, a professor at the University of Florida School of Dentistry who is among those urging the York team to release their data.

“But (the Till study) said that this is a neurotoxin and that it will lower children’s IQ and that, unfortunately, is undermining public health policy that has been widely advocated by the U.S. federal government, the United Nations, the World Health Organization and many others for decades.”

While no parent would want it, a four-point drop in his or her child’s IQ wouldn’t represent a significant impediment, Christakis said. However, the total cognitive loss at a population level “would be a different story.”

During his training, Christakis was taught people opposed to fluoride “were a bunch of whack jobs and that there’s absolutely no science at all to suggest that fluoride is dangerous.” The York study, he said “was sort of an eye-opener for me.”

“I was like, ‘hold on a minute, is this Wakefield,’” he said, referring to the British physician who, in 1998, published a paper claiming a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. It was bunk, the paper was retracted and Wakefield lost his licence.

Christakis said the fluoride paper was subjected to extraordinary scrutiny. “This was not Wakefield making up data on eight patients, by any stretch,” he said. “This is a very respected group of researchers.” Anyone who tries to liken this to a Wakefield-esqe study shows just how much vitriol and misrepresentation there is, on both sides, he said.

McGill University chemistry professor Joe Schwarcz doesn’t believe fluoride is toxic to young, developing brains at levels found in tap water in Canada. Asking for the data, he added, “doesn’t seem to me like an unreasonable request.

“What are you hiding? Whoever owns the data should be willing to release it.”

Marathon fluoride debate takes over city hall

CALGARY (660 NEWS) – Dozens of people for and against fluoride in our water descended on City Hall Tuesday.
Members of a city committee heard results from a survey on whether fluoride should be added back into the city’s water supply.
The decision to remove it came in 2011 but it came under fire from several dentists. The University of Calgary also noted there has been an increase in tooth cavities since the change.
Opponents of fluoride argue there needs to be more research into its negative effects.
In Feb. 2019, city council approved a study from the University of Calgary O’Brien Institute of Health to examine the pros and cons of fluoridation.
The study showed fluoride in the water would help reduce cavities, especially with children.
Calgarians have voted in favour of fluoride in two previous plebiscites before council struck down the idea in 2011.

Should the City of Calgary be putting fluoride in its water supply?
 
 
 
 

Tuesday, October 29, 2019

UK - Big Brush 2019

Friday 1 November to Saturday 30 November

We are encouraging all parents in Oldham to back a borough-wide dental campaign that will help local children brush up on their tooth care.
Our annual month of toothbrushing is back and from Friday 1 November to Saturday 30 November we want to get as many under-fives to improve their oral hygiene as part of our Big Brush campaign.

Throughout the month children’s centres and many nurseries will be involved in the Big Brush campaign and some children will receive oral health packs containing toothpaste, toothbrushes, timers and written information.

Here’s some top tips for sparkling teeth:

Brush teeth twice a day especially at bedtime and at one other time in the day
Use family toothpaste containing the right amount of fluoride
Use a smear of family fluoride toothpaste for children under three and from three use a small pea size amount
Spit out after brushing and do not rinse with water
Help children to brush their teeth until they are at least seven years old

For a full list of tips on how to better look after children’s teeth, visit: www.oldham.gov.uk/babyteeth
Events taking place in Oldham during Big Brush 2019
Dental Playbox sessions

To celebrate Big Brush libraries are hosting a fun and interactive session which teaches children the importance of looking after their teeth and healthy eating.
Using puppets, giant toothbrushes and fun timers followed by a play session using role play outfits including masks, gloves, mirrors and toothbrushes, teddies with teeth, books and games to alleviate any fears that children may have about visiting the dentist.

Free event. Booking is essential as places are limited.
Thursday 7 November 1.30pm — 2.30pm at Royton Library
Thursday 14 November 1.30pm — 2.30pm at Chadderton Library
Wednesday 20 November 10am —11am at Oldham Library
Visit www.oldham-council.co.uk/libevent/ to book your place on this event.

Download the DJ Brush App
The NHS have developed a new app which uses music to make brushing teeth fun. The app plays 2 minutes of music taken from your smartphone or tablet to encourage brushing for an effective length of time.
Download the free app here: www.brushdj.com/
Smiles Matter – supervised brushing

Is your setting involved?
As part of the Big Brush campaign, we’re also encouraging schools, nurseries and other early years settings to take up the Greater Manchester Supervised Brushing programme for children aged 2 – 5.
Children get a free toothbrush, toothpaste and information pack to take home and are supervised to brush daily in school or nursery with toothpaste containing the correct amount of fluoride.
Can you help us encourage your child’s school or nursery to get involved with supervised brushing? Ask your child's school / nursery if they are taking part in this programme.
Find out more: www.oldham.gov.uk/smilesmatter

Oral Health Products

You can purchase toothbrushes and family fluoride toothpaste, along with Healthy Start vitamins at your local children’s centre. Just ask at the reception desk.

Remember to tweet us throughout the week with top tips that you find useful using when doing your brushing routines – just use the hashtag #OldhamBigBrush

Monday, October 28, 2019

Sunday, October 27, 2019

Fluoride scheme to tackle tooth decay will not reach Teesdale

A MAJOR project to slash levels of tooth decay in County Durham will not be rolled out in Barnard Castle and other parts of Teesdale.
Durham County Council has approved the next stage of £250,000-a-year plans to add fluoride to the county’s water supplies.
But the scheme is not expected to reach southern parts of the county connected to the Teesside system, which is the responsibility of Teesside local authorities.
According to a report for Durham councillors: “The whole of County Durham can receive fluoridated water with the exception of those properties who are on a private water supply and the Barnard Castle population and surrounding area. This is due to their water being received from the Teesside water supply system.
“Should Teesside Local Authorities decide to progress with a community water fluoridation scheme in the future this population would subsequently be consulted with and, pending the public consultation outcome, would receive fluoridated water.”
About 2,200 people in County Durham rely on a private water supply, with a further 21,000 in Barnard Castle and the surrounding area connected to Teesside.
Last Wednesday, Durham County Council's cabinet agreed to push ahead with the fluoridation scheme.
Public Health England is expected to fund the £4.125 million upfront cost of the project, with the county council picking up the £250,000 annual running costs – equivalent to about 60p per head.
Sunderland and South Tyneside, as well as parts of Darlington, Gateshead, Stockton, Hartlepool and Cumbria are also expected to benefit. Parts of Derwentside have already seen the benefits of fluoridation, with lower levels of tooth decay than other comparable areas without.
The report added: “The population who would not receive fluoridated water already have good oral health and so would not be disadvantaged. The Barnard Castle population would continue to receive the other parts of the oral health strategy such as tooth brushing schemes and businesses supported through better Health at Work.”

Saturday, October 26, 2019

The Fluoride Action Network has published the press release below.  Please email the PR Newswire version of our release to you local decision makers and the news editors of the media outlets in your community, large and small (newspaper, radio, TV, online).

NTP Study:"Fluoride is presumed to be a
cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans"
On Oct 22, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) published a draft review of fluoride's neurotoxicity concluding: 
"…fluoride is presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans. This conclusion is based on a consistent pattern of findings in human studies across several different populations showing that higher fluoride exposure is associated with decreased IQ or other cognitive impairments in children."
For years the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has been drawing attention to fluoride's neurotoxicity. There are 61 human IQ studies linking lowered IQ with fluoride exposure, many of which FAN had translated from the original Chinese.
FAN disagrees with NTP's conclusion that studies "with [fluoride] exposures in ranges typically found in the water distribution systems in the United States (i.e., approximately 0.03 to 1.5 ppm) …are inconsistent and therefore unclear (our emphasis)."
FAN's director Paul Connett, PhD, says, "the studies funded by US government agencies (Bashash et al. 20172018Green et al., 2019were at exposure levels commonly experienced with fluoride water concentrations below 1.5 ppm, and are consistent, very clear and stronger than the earlier Chinese studies at levels above 1.5 ppm (Choi et al, 2012) because they were based on individual exposures, with many confounding variables carefully controlled. In reality, it is the studies with lower fluoride levels of exposure that have provided the strongest evidence."
Connett continued, "We hope that, when the National Academy of Sciences completes its peer review, NTP will raise the classification of fluoride to a 'known' from 'presumed' neurodevelopmental hazard to humans. Whether they do or not, the weight of scientific evidence in the NTP review should be sufficient to force an end to fluoridation."
Dr. William Hirzy, former Environmental Protection Agency risk assessment specialist, says, "Damage at a concentration of 1.5 ppm in water offers no meaningful margin of safety to protect the brains of a whole population of infants drinking fluoridated water at 0.7 ppm. Without going into detailed calculations of total dose, a safety factor of ten (to account for the expected range of sensitivity in a large populations), would reduce the allowed level in water to less than 0.1 ppm in water."
Connett asks, "How can anyone now claim that community water fluoridation is safe? And why allow it to continue when safer and more effective programs (e.g., Childsmile) exist?"
CLICK HERE TO ACCESS ADDITIONAL NTP RELATED GRAPHICS 

NZ - Nelson council to remind DHB that it should consult on fluoride

Anti-fluoridation protesters outside the Nelson premiere of That Sugar Movie. The Nelson City Council has narrowly voted to raise the issue of fluoridation with the district health board despite one councillor calling the move "bizarre".
Councillors were deliberating on the draft annual plan and have no responsibility for deciding on fluoridation, which the Government has said it intends to hand to DHBs. But it had received 45 annual plan submissions opposing any plans to fluoridate the water supply and last week it heard from a string of anti-fluoride citizens.
On Wednesday they were  supplied with new information from the staff saying if the council were responsible for fluoridating Nelson's water, they estimated a one-off $250,000 capital cost and operational costs of $80,000 a year. 
The council has already sent the written submissions to the DHB and councillors were told in writing that staff would also send the minutes of hearings and encourage the board to engage with the community on this issue.
This was not enough for councillor Ruth Copeland. She wanted the council to express the concerns of the submitters to the board at its May 24 meeting, specifically the potential cost to ratepayers of water treatment and infrastructure changes, the discharge of fluoride to the environment and its unknown long-term effects on the water catchment, and the lack of opportunity for a public "interface" with the board's process.
Her motion was seconded by councillor Gaile Noonan and led to a spirited debate and a series of amendments.
Copeland said fluoridation wasn't on the DHB's May 24 agenda but she was going to make sure that it was put there. 
"There's an opportunity there for the council to present."
She told Mayor Rachel Reese that she hadn't yet arranged the presentation but was aware of the meeting and the opportunity for the council to speak at the public forum.
"I think it's our obligation as leaders of the city to convey the concerns of the submitters, given that they don't have that same option to interface with the DHB."
Councillor Luke Acland said he was sure that all the people who'd submitted to the council would "wander up" to the DHB on May 24 and present the same viewpoint.
"It does strike me as bizarre that we're even getting involved in this ... I want to make it expressly clear that this is not a viewpoint of council ... and we wouldn't be providing any such feedback without any consultation with our community on this issue."
It later emerged that Copeland's intentions weren't clear and at one point Reese asked: "What's going on here, councillor Copeland?"
"What makes it possible for council to speak to the DHB? You'll have to explain what's going on."
Copeland said several of the submitters had made it plain that they were not able to be heard by the DHB. 
The mayor said she'd relied on Copeland's earlier statement that there was a public forum opportunity. 
"Now I want that clarified." 
It wasn't, at least not publicly, but after the lunch break Copeland withdrew her motion. She said she wanted to personally submit to the DHB and was told that meant she shouldn't vote on a new council motion. 
After a moment's reflection she decided she wouldn't make a personal submission after all and rejoined the debate.  
Noonan then moved that the council ask to be heard at the DHB meeting, to express the concerns of the anti-fluoride submitters, noting that it was not feedback on the council's position, "the point of concern being the lack of opportunities for public interface with the DHB". 
Reese was her seconder. She said the council was just giving feedback on what it had heard in the chamber, "and I'd like them to be aware of that". 
Deputy mayor Paul Matheson spoke in favour, saying he hoped the issue of cost would also arise. 
Acland said he was "hugely opposed".
"Having not consulted in our draft annual plan on this issue, we're now taking up the cause of submitters on something completely irrelevant to the business of this council."
The motion was passed on a division.  For: Reese, Copeland, Noonan, Matheson, Mike Ward, Kate Fulton.  Against: Acland, Ian Barker, Matt Lawrey, Brian McGurk, Pete Rainey.  Councillor Tim Skinner was absent for the vote - at the dentist -  and councillor Eric Davy had put in an apology.   


FAN Comments on NTP Study: "Fluoride is presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans"

NEW YORKOct. 25, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- On Oct 22, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) published a draft review of fluoride's neurotoxicity concluding:
"…fluoride is presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans. This conclusion is based on a consistent pattern of findings in human studies across several different populations showing that higher fluoride exposure is associated with decreased IQ or other cognitive impairments in children."
For years the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has been drawing attention to fluoride's neurotoxicity. There are 61 human IQ studies linking lowered IQ with fluoride exposure, many of which FAN had translated from the original Chinese.
FAN disagrees with NTP's conclusion that studies "with [fluoride] exposures in ranges typically found in the water distribution systems in the United States (i.e., approximately 0.03 to 1.5 ppm) …are inconsistent and therefore unclear (our emphasis)."
FAN's director Paul Connett, PhD, says, "the studies funded by US government agencies (Bashash et al. 20172018 Green et al., 2019were at exposure levels commonly experienced with fluoride water concentrations below 1.5 ppm, and are consistent, very clear and stronger than the earlier Chinese studies at levels above 1.5 ppm (Choi et al, 2012) because they were based on individual exposures, with many confounding variables carefully controlled. In reality, it is the studies with lower fluoride levels of exposure that have provided the strongest evidence."
Connett continued, "We hope that, when the National Academy of Sciences completes its peer review, NTP will raise the classification of fluoride to a 'known' from 'presumed' neurodevelopmental hazard to humans. Whether they do or not, the weight of scientific evidence in the NTP review should be sufficient to force an end to fluoridation."
Dr. William Hirzy, former Environmental Protection Agency risk assessment specialist, says, "Damage at a concentration of 1.5 ppm in water offers no meaningful margin of safety to protect the brains of a whole population of infants drinking fluoridated water at 0.7 ppm. Without going into detailed calculations of total dose, a safety factor of ten (to account for the expected range of sensitivity in a large populations), would reduce the allowed level in water to less than 0.1 ppm in water."
Connett asks, "How can anyone now claim that community water fluoridation is safe? And why allow it to continue when safer and more effective programs (e.g., Childsmile) exist?"

Friday, October 25, 2019

PLAQUE ATTACK Chewy tablets reveal just how rubbish your kids’ tooth brushing really is – and mums are raving about them

A MUM has praised some chewable dental tablets from Boots which help her son see if he has brushed his teeth properly.
 A mum has shared a photo of her son trying out some chewable tablets that show your plaquePaige Bradley raved about the Boots Kids Plaque Reveal Tablets, which cost just £2 on Facebook.
A mum has shared a photo of her son trying out some chewable tablets that show your plaque
The mum said: “Sooo we tried these from boots today to see if my son is brushing his teeth properly and clearly he isn't but I think these are amazing for kids to know how to brush and understand you cant see all plaque.

“Now he understands why brushing is important £2 for 10 in boots ...little chewable tablets.”
She shared an adorable cheeky photo of son Hudson beaming as he tries out the tablets.
In the shot her son’s teeth have been stained purpley-blue hue by the tablets, which indicate he has a build-up of older plaque.