I understand that fluoride is coming back onto Byron Shire Council’s agenda. I welcome this and hope for a positive result. I note that the northern rivers region and into southeast Queensland have a vociferous, if ill-informed, anti-fluoride lobby that harbours some conspiracy theories. But I suspect all their arguments emanate from the misunderstanding and confusion of the different chemistries of sodium fluoride and hydrofluoric acid. Plus some ‘alternative medicine’ that benefits no-one.
All knee-jerk naysayers would benefit from a little more chemical knowledge, easily provided through high schools, chemistry texts and public health agencies. And don’t forget the dentists who have to deal with infant and childhood dental decay and the hospitals tasked with anaesthetising infants to remove their baby teeth because the babies can’t even talk through brown rotting stumps. They know full well and can explain the chemical process that makes fluoride such a beneficial additive.
Dental decay is the tenth most common disease in the world. The statistical difference in the incidence of dental decay in non-fluoridated reticulated community water supplies and those with added sodium fluoride is startling. Those communities that have naturally occurring fluoride in the water used – like Cue and Meekatharra in WA – show the lowest incidence of dental decay per population numbers.
I know of no dentist who preaches against the addition of fluoride as an aid to community oral health. There is no dental association or public health authority that stands against fluoridation.
It is just not good enough to rail against public and political ‘authorities’ as a philosophical stance of individualism. I know the northern rivers communities tend to take stances on issues unnecessarily. There must be substantial and substantiated evidence for such a stance. There is none for the anti-fluoride lobby to use as an argument against the addition of fluoride.
There is no evidence pointing to a diminished IQ or any of the other manufactured detriments. Compulsory medication is another argument but doesn’t really stand up. The additives already in water supplies to control bacteria, cleanliness and providing catalysts are of benefit to the communities turning on the taps. To say otherwise is bunkum.
The naysayers border on religious fanaticism as seen in the AVN anti-vaxxers now put paid to by the state government.
Veronica Guy, Glenrothes, Scotland
Yes Yes, I remember now Veronica, It was a Scotish Villiage that inadvertantly administered an overdose of Fluoride into the town’s drinking water, the most obvious effect was that the water became ‘heavy’ ‘sticky’. Has any long term studies been done to determine the ill effect? or is that useless because they’re all dead or in nursing homes with altzheimers………………….
Bulldaog – you have your facts a bit messed up. Here is an excerpt from the Fluoride debate:
Because of a government decision in 1979, fluoridation in the northern Scotland town of Wick was discontinued after eight years. The water was returned to its sub-optimal, naturally occurring fluoride level of 0.02 ppm. Data collected to monitor the oral health of Wick children clearly demonstrated a negative health effect from the discontinuation of water fluoridation. Five years after the cessation of water fluoridation, decay in permanent (adult) teeth had increased 27% and decay in primary (baby) teeth increased 40%. This increase in decay occurred during a period when there had been a reported overall reduction in decay nationally and when fluoride toothpaste had been widely adopted. These data suggest that decay levels in children can be expected to rise where water fluoridation is interrupted or terminated, even when topical fluoride products are widely used.
In a similar evaluation, the prevalence of decay in 10-year-old children in Stranraer, Scotland, increased after the discontinuation of water fluoridation, resulting in a 115% increase in the mean cost of restorative dental treatment for decay and a 21% increase in the mean cost of all dental treatment. These data support the important role water fluoridation plays in the reduction of dental decay.
Maybe you were thinking of the Scottish village of Strontian which gave its name in 1790 to Strontium. Some forms of Strontium are used to treat bone cancer and other forms added to toothpaste to help prevent dental caries.
Can you cite some evidence as to the village you may have been thinking about?
Veronica please give references if possible, when quoting these statistics, we need to see the data, and the maths that supports these results. After all we are talking science not ‘quasi Science’ nor hearsay.
With regard to diminished IQ , science shows that fluoride has a higher atomic weight than iodine , when fluoride is ingested iodine absorption is is stopped as fluoride takes over all the receptor sites for iodine .
Iodine is needed by every cell in the body not just the thyroid and it is particularly necessary for brain function , promoting fluoride is also promoting iodine deficiency and in its chronic form is cretinism.
Anton – in Australia there is the benefit of iodised salt and that has been available all my life. I have used iodised salt all my life. Potassium iodide is used to iodise salt. Potassium iodate is used to add iodine. My whole family has used iodised salt and my whole family has used fluoridated town water. The water is chlorinated as well to rid it of pathogens. Admittedly this is anecdotal evidence only. However my family counts inter alia in its number public health professionals and academic scientists.
The only references I can find to diminished IQ seem to emanate from questionable sites written by people with questionable qualifications and some other agendas. There are many genetic and many other environmental causes of diminished IQ.
The compound sodium fluoride is used in Australia although America uses hexafluorsilisic acid and sodium hexafluorosilicate to fluoridate water.
I am no chemist, but the amount of information available on the internet plus discussions with chemists, dentists that I have had over the decades all point to the salutary effect of fluoride on tooth enamel and therefore the drastic diminution of dental decay – especially in infants and children. Dental fluorosis is rarely observed and is mild. It is only seen in children during tooth development.
Iodine is more a problem nutritionally as the fast food industry impacts on diet. Diets are changing from whole to processed foods and vegetables and seafood containing iodine compounds are being consumed less.
The lethal dose for a 70 kg (154 lb) human is estimated at 5–10 g. Fluoridation of water supplies is at between 0.6 and 1.2ppm, depending on ambient temperature and adjusted by monitoring on a 24 hour basis.
Veronica, it does not matter if you believe you have iodine in your diet , if you include fluoride , you exclude iodine , look at the periodic scale and see for your self , fluoride has a higher atomic weight and as such displaces iodine , it is that simple . The WHO lists iodine deficiency as the leading preventable cause of mental retardation.
Veronica, you are seriously confused. The evidence for diminished IQ from fluoride exposure includes a 2012 Harvard University systematic review and meta-analysis of 27 studies. It also includes studies which measure fluoride concentration in urine, whereas the studies which are used to justify forced-fluoridation are ecologic. Hexafluorosilicic acid is the most common fluoridation chemical used in Australia, not sodium fluoride. If you haven’t read and understood original research on the subject, your opinions are meaningless. Dental fluorosis is not always mild in artificially fluoridated areas, is not rare (41% of American 12 to 15-year-olds had dental fluorosis according to the latest official figures), and is not only seen in children during tooth development. It is only acquired during tooth development, but it is a toxic and permanent effect. If you think the lethal dose of fluoride is the only relevant statistic, you obviously don’t understand the concepts of chronic toxicity, margin of safety, or chemical sensitivity. Fluoride is a cumulative toxin, with a half life in the body of around 20 years.
Unbelievable crap Veronica! You take two issues, fluoridation and vaccination, and you can come up with little or no evidence to support either argument. Both issues are highly controversial with experts on both side of the debates. The jury is out Veronica, and you have jumped on a side too soon.
Hello Richard. Still at your best at not understanding the nature of comments? The juxtaposing of the anti-vaxxers and anti-fluoridationists has to do with willful misinformation. The issue is actually fluoridation.
I have to say the jury is in on the issue of herd immunisation, despite Wakeman, Dorey et al and their misinformation and duping of some parents to the detriment of their children and communities at large.
The jury is also in on the issue of fluoridation of communal water supplies as the most cheapest, most efficient and socially equitable way of delivering fluoride to communities.
There isn’t any debate Richard. It is only the issue of self determination (with little regard for the societies) that propels such argumentation. Conspiracy theorists abound as well you know. Ill-informed knee jerk reactions to authority abound as well you know. Alternative medicine and unsound herbal remedies abound as you well know.
I stand by my words. I think that uninformed arguments, emotional diatribes and decisions made by lay people with no actual knowledge of what they are deciding is dangerous. I would prefer that the State Governments have the responsibility to deliver public health directives. The professionals within the state Public Health authorities are much better placed to make decisions of this nature.
But to say there is still a sound debate is just nonsense. There is more debate within the issues of climate change and global warming than there is in community health directives delivered responsibly by public health authorities to the communities under their care and concern.
Fluoride and its beneficial effect on tooth enamel both systemically and topically is amply demonstrated in the literature and by the diminished amount of dental caries in populations drinking fluoridated water.
My association with the Northern Rivers stems from 40 years residence and my familiarity with fluoride started in 1966 in Perth WA.
I hope you can tell me why (with reputable evidence) what I have said is ‘unbelievable crap’. Otherwise you are just being gratuitously rude.
Well well Veronica such passion for public health… or so it seems.
With Australia leading the world on childhood obesity…with the scary increase in preventable diseases nationally… with alcohol related diseases steadily on the rise … medical injuries up there in the top causes of death. I could go on and on about the embarrassing state of health or should I say the state of diseased Australians.
My point is the glaringly obvious elephant in the room regarding our appallingly unhealthy population is our diet and lifestyle. Even the magic pill prescription writers/minions of the pharmaceutical industry/ allopathic practitioners agree (after many decades in denial) that poor diet is the primary cause of many diseases.
So given what we all know to be true… no fresh fruit and vegetables makes jack a very sick boy and fat boy….. with a very unhealthy mouth regardless of how much fluoride you stick in the water.
Are you getting me yet Veronica …. all your passion about fluoride like it is the panacea for all ills is closing the gate after the horse has bolted. No matter how many cavities or in fact teeth Jack has he is still obese on a roller coaster to diabetes… heart disease…etc
You represent with your last century views the conservative mainstream …in denial of the disease ridden population… in total ignorance of the fact that their state of health/ill health is primarily their own creation….in victim mode dependent on the ‘state’ to fix their health…
Your views help to strengthen the myth that allopathic medicine has the answers in a bottle of pills or syringe. They disempower people … which of course keeps the dollars rolling in for the (so called) health industry.
The money council will/may spend on fluoride could be spent towards teaching nutrition /cooking/vegetable growing/yoga/sport or perhaps introducing a cooked nutritionally sound sourced locally organic lunch time meal for all schools in the local municipality.
Meals for kids that they help prepare and learn about will give them the necessary skills to eat correctly something their parents don’t know, obviously or they wouldn’t be obese.
Something to think about Veronica or is it all too hard easier to not think just exercise your rather large ego.
Thanks Anton & Richard, The incident that I referred to was in the papers or notable magazine quite some time ago, like more than 10 yrs , however the fact is that the personel were insufficently trained to administer the correct dosage of fluoride (particularly difficult when the product is waste) not pharmaceutical grade fluoride. Have you ever known one medico to get up & contradict another? Answer: When hell freezes over.My message to Veronica: Stay in Scotland, I think they need you more there than we do here……….
I’m willing to bet that I did better in chemistry in high school than you did, Veronica. Are you aware that many people with PhDs in chemistry have opposed the forced-fluoridation experiment, including some Nobel Prize winners? Are you aware that fluoride forms hydrofluoric acid in stomach acid? Read the chapter on pharmacokinetics in the 2006 US National Research Council report Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards if you don’t believe me. It is an outright lie to say that there is no evidence pointing to a diminished IQ. There are dozens of human studies which do so, some of which measure individual fluoride exposure, which is virtually unheard of in the studies which are used to justify forced-fluoridation, and dozens more animal studies. The Fluoride Action Network is a good place to start for anyone who wants more information.
Heh Veronica lets see some hard science to back up what you say.
A precedent has to be set here…. regarding the medication of our water. The allopathic medical fraternity have form for over medication. Buoyed on by their masters the pharmaceutical industry we could end up with allopathic medication in all our food as well.
The greed of these industries and their minions knows no bounds.
When you see the profitable map over top Capital Businesses and their interests, you too will see there are no conspiracy – just a truth to ugly to manage to digest – and an increasing unwillingness to see the disturbing facts by certain people that is still hanging on to illutions.
The companies that sell Pectesides, Herbecides etc. to make our food toxic, sell Flurioide etc. sell vaccinations etc are the very same companies (under different names) that owns the Medical companies that provide you with and sell you the “Medicine” for your diffuse strange symptoms, cancers, tumors, obesity, heart failure etc. + all other exploding disease.
They can decide their profits for themselves by adding whatever toxins they figure out and humanity, with already a huge decline in IQ – eat and drink their toxins willingly, without even questioning all the diseases, cancers and allergies.
Please go ahead and be their experiment and income source… please provide this Sickness Industry (the biggest Industry in our world today) with their profits and increasing powers, Im not stopping anyone from drinking Fluroide or eating Toxins,
– just keep it far away from my food and my drinking waters thank you!
As a one size fits all reply to those commenters who have yet to produce any verifiable evidence for their emotional stance against fluoridation, please don’t expect me to get into slinging matches with the witless. Nor am I about to argue the toss with alternative food faddists, yoga exponents and others who simply blindside themselves to real data and cherry pick what they want.
Does any sane person seriously think that government agencies are in some conspiracy to damage the population at large (The new Federal Libs not withstanding) in a dire, irremediable way? Or is my original comment that the Northern Rivers has more than its fair share of conspiracy theorists and nutters actually more correct than I hitherto thought?
I presume that no one wants to remove the other chemicals in reticulated water supplies that:
control algae
remove turbidity and colour
remove microorganisms
remove algal metabolites and synthetic pollutants
reduce organic matter
reduce the concentration of iron, manganese and other elements
reduce pesticides and herbicides
control taste and odour
soften
buffer or modify the pH
disinfect
control corrosion in distribution systems
cf. http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/adwg_11_06_chapter_8.pdf
Suffice to say that the Nobel prizewinner Carlsson’s area of expertise is neurotransmitters, dopamine and Parkinson’s. He states in an interview (produced by the anti-f brigade of Connett et al) that there is no systemic value of fluoride to teeth and bones, only as a topical treatment. This is just not true. See this: http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1227169969666
pg 3 onwards and follow the references. An expert needs to provide verifiable data regardless when he makes claims outside his area of expertise. Carlsson does not do this.
My point is that water fluoridation is the easiest, most cost effective and efficient way to ensure a diminution of dental caries in the whole population especially infants and children. No one is saying that topical applications to teeth via gels, varnishes and toothpastes aren’t efficacious. And I am certainly not saying that diet and exercise isn’t important. But try getting sodium and other compound salts and fructose out of processed foods. Try banning sugar and sugared drinks, lollies and salted crisps, preservatives of all kinds. Same as alcohol and tobacco. You have Buckley’s chance.
By far the best bet is to do what you can to ameliorate the effects of a modern, western lifestyle, processed and soft foodstuffs and increasingly sedentary lives. Typically the disadvantaged in our communities are the ones who are not considered while the lifestyle and self-determination of the vociferous others take precedence. Did any of you bother to check out naturally occurring levels of fluoride in the waters of Cue, Meekatharra or other places throughout the globe? Or how dumb everyone there appears to be?
All I can do is to reiterate that the benefits of water fluoridation far outweigh any perceived negatives. There is no reputable data to the contrary. It is as simple as that. Beefed up emotional arguments, the use of quasi-chemistry and simplistic deductions do not trounce science. Nor can they deny hard data as to the efficacy of fluoride on bones and teeth.
Considering how clueless you are on this issue, you really shouldn’t be calling other people witless. This idea you have that opponents of forced-fluoridation must think there is a “conspiracy to damage the population at large” is irrational. Has it occurred to you that we might think artificial water fluoridation is a really stupid idea, similar to other stupid 20th century ideas such as adding lead to petrol, and using asbestos and Agent Orange? Do you think that the people who opposed those things were crazy conspiracy theorists?
Why are you asking us to provide “verifiable evidence”? The burden of proof is on you; Robert Kehoe’s “show me the data” mentality is not good enough. It is not just a coincidence that Kehoe, a US industry-funded pseudoscientist, was a key promoter of both the forced-fluoridation experiment and the leaded petrol experiment. I have challenged many toxic waste pushers like you to cite a single good quality original research study which indicates that forced-fluoridation is anything but dangerous and useless, and they can never come up with anything.
Perhaps some of the other chemicals which are added to public water supplies should be looked at more closely, but fluoridation chemicals have the distinction of being the only chemicals which are added for the purpose of treating people, rather than treating the water. It therefore makes more sense to compare them to other drugs than to water treatment chemicals.
The brief and not particularly credible overview of sodium fluoride toxicity you linked to doesn’t say anything about a supposed “systemic value of fluoride to teeth and bones”. The US National Academy of Sciences finally admitted in 1989 that fluoride is not an essential nutrient. People can have perfectly healthy teeth and bones without any fluoride. It can’t be disputed that fluoride can harm teeth and bones, and there is no convincing evidence of any benefit.
Artificial water fluoridation doesn’t ensure anything except adverse health effects, because the research which is supposed to prove its efficacy is of poor quality. If diet is important, why don’t the fluoridationist studies account for it? You have completely failed to explain what is so special about toxic industrial fluoride waste, such that it needs to be dumped into public water supplies, unlike any other medication.
Your protestations regarding Cue and Meekatharra are unscientific, anti-intellectual twaddle, like everything else you’ve written. You could use the same form of argument to “prove” that leaded petrol and paint has no effect on people’s intelligence. You clearly have little understanding of science or rational thought. If you were smarter, you would cut your losses instead of digging a deeper hole for yourself.
Suggesting that infants should consume fluoridated water is ignorant and irresponsible.
No evidence of transfer of fluoride from plasma to breast milk
Ekstrand J, et al. (1981). British Medical Journal 283: 761-2.
“These findings show that plasma fluoride is poorly transferred to breast milk and infants thus receive almost no fluoride during breast feeding. This is in contrast to another halogen, bromide, which reportedly accumulates in breast milk.”
“The existence of a physiological plasma-milk barrier against fluoride suggests that the newborn is actively protected from this halogen. Hence the recommendation made in several countries to give breast-fed infants fluoride supplementation should be reconsidered.”
The following information is from the 2006 US National Research Council report Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards.
p 48/9 “Other groups of people [apart from habitual tea drinkers] who are expected to have exposures higher than those calculated here include infants given fluoride toothpaste before age 1, anyone who uses toothpaste more than twice per day or who swallows excessive amounts of toothpaste, children inappropriately given fluoride supplements in a fluoridated area, children in an area with high fluoride concentrations in soil, and children with pica who consume large amounts of soil.”
p 52 Table 2-12 Total estimated (average) chronic inorganic fluoride exposure (mg/kg/day) from all sources for non-nursing infants below the age of one year is 0.100 for a modeled water intake, and 0.115 for the EPA default water intake, with a fluoride concentration in drinking water of 1 mg/L (i.e. 1 ppm).
p 53 Table 2-13 The figures given for high water intake individuals drinking water at 1 mg/L are 0.084 for athletes and workers, 0.134 for diabetes mellitus patients aged 3-5 years, 0.084 for adult diabetes mellitus patients, 0.184 for nephrogenic diabetes insipidus patients aged 3-5 years, and 0.164 for adult nephrogenic diabetes insipidus patients – units are mg/kg/day.
p 69 Table 2-18 lists a value of 0.10 mg/kg/day as a “Tolerable upper intake” for ages 0-8.
Veronica said “””My point is that water fluoridation is the easiest, most cost effective and efficient way to ensure a diminution of dental caries in the whole population especially infants and children. No one is saying that topical applications to teeth via gels, varnishes and toothpastes aren’t efficacious. And I am certainly not saying that diet and exercise isn’t important.”””
Veronica … as I have said elsewhere the general population is in a health crisis as is clearly seen by any one ‘with eyes’ walking down a street in any city/town in Australia. The level of obesity/overweight is staggering.
You and sadly ,millions of others, are clearly in denial.
You are ‘fiddling while Rome burns’.
Is your ‘state of denial’ creating a turmoil in your conscience… a dilemma perhaps.
Are you asking yourself… Am I wrong about the ‘wonderful allopathic’ health system that has all the answers to health issues.
How can it be that the hospitals are full and have yearlong waiting lists where most die on them (the waiting list) How can it be that thousands of children are obese. How can it be that medical error deaths are in the top causes of death in this country. How can it be that tooth decay has massively increased where people have ‘fluoride’ in their water supply. How can it be that antibiotics are no longer able to fight off many ‘super bugs’.
Veronica says ….. “”And I am certainly not saying that diet and exercise isn’t important.”””
Diet and exercise isn’t just important Veronica… Lack of correct diet and exercise is the PROBLEM. Hello..
We have to start at first base, go back to basics. The battle with disease is lost the allopathic tool kit is flawed it is inadequate to deal with the ability of bacteria to evolve resistance.
We already have an immune system that has the potential to get us through many health problems if it is allowed to function to its full potential.
This is the basic level of personal health our own immune system. All common knowledge nothing new here.
So why isn’t anyone listening.
Some of us are aware of this and follow the simple first base rules…
look after your health through eating fresh fruit and vegetables every day.
get plenty of physical exercise
Avoid toxins
stay hydrated
get enough rest
laugh and love etc etc
We all know them and they make sense.
All things in moderation … avoid excess. Be kind… etc etc
When people are living healthy lives illness is minimal and more manageable and even allopathic medicine has a place as have many other medical systems.
Are you getting it yet Veronica???