After having been the recent “victim” of 4 emails touting the evils of fluoride and how it can kill you, I gotta wonder on the truth behind it.
Right now, I’m putting the people who are buying into it in the same category as the “fruits and nuts” section in your grocer’s aisle.
Sure…in great concentrations, it can kill. But so can the repeated application of lead in the .45 caliber. Sarcasm.
Opinions on this?
Sounds like the John Birch Society is at it again.
When fluoridation was introduced in the United States in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945, it was the John Birch Society which fearlessly took the helm in the anti-fluoridation crusade. Their position was immortalized by Sterling Hayden as General “Jack” Ripper in 1963’s Dr. Strangelove, or, etc.:
“Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six Mandrake. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? Its incredibly obvious isn’t it. A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Commie works.”
Okay, so Kubrick was off by a year. So sue him.
The Birch Society really did claim that fluoridation is a bad thing, and vocally opposed it. They were backed up by another authority on such matters, the Ku Klux Klan. Neither group seems to have much to say about it now, except that the John Birch Society now claims that the Society’s leadership opposed fluoridation on the grounds that it is a violation of individual rights, not that it was a communist plot. Apparently, it was just their followers who were claiming the commies were behind it. Silly me for thinking otherwise.
Since the commies seem to have gone on a no-doubt temporary hiatus in the minds of the psycho-Americans, the standard has since been taken up by others, who claim that fluoridation is nothing less than a conspiracy by the American government to pay fertilizer companies to dump their toxic waste into the water supply. Or something. I hope that cached link works. If not, plug in “fluoridation john birch” into Google and select the cached info for “The Fluoridation Fiasco.”
Some time ago, I pointed out that fluoride, and fluoridation, might make an ideal component in a secondary or tertiary chemical weapon. It has an excellent vector. Whether or not it can actually be used as such in the trace amounts that Americans ingest is a question I cannot answer. Don’t worry about me, I’m not going to claim that Earth Day is a covert celebration of Lenin’s birthday, either.
The Surgeon General seems to have no qualms about fluoridation, but then again, the Feds are in on the conspiracy, so it’s no use asking them, right?
Other interesting links:
National Center for Fluoridation Policy & Research
“A Systematic Review” by our friends across the pond.
Too much fluoride can cause discoloration and mottling of the teeth. Since toothpastes contain fluoride now, I don’t see the advantage of putting it in our drinking water anymore. I suppose if you don’t use a fluoride-containing toothpaste, fluoride may be good if you’re a child, to prevent caries.
Darn, Sofa King, I was hoping to be the first to post the Dr. Strangelove reference.
Here’s another site about the anit-fluoridation campaign at [url=“http://www.quackwatch.com/03HealthPromotion/fluoride.html”]. Here’s a quote from their article about the discoloration:
Here’s the fixed linked to the Quackwatch site. And that should be “anti-fluoridation.”
There is an interesting (and hysteria-free) article in the most recent issue of Mothering magazine that questions the use of fluoride supplements. According to this article, the benefits of fluoride are only topical, not systemic, as was earlier believed. (Fluoride supplements were never tested for safety or efficacy. They were “grandfathered” in because they were already being sold before drug testing was required.) And too much fluoride does indeed cause dental fluorosis-spotted, stained, or pitted teeth. The Canadian Dental Association and the Western Australia Health Department’s Dental Service have both stopped recommending regular fluoride supplementation. The CDA suggests fluoride supplements only after the permanent teeth appear and only for children at high risk. I think the issue is certainly worthy of consideration.
I think the point of flouridation is to ensure that children maintain a low level of the stuff from birth till the arrival of permanent teeth. It doesn’t require any thought or extra effort to maintain this concentration, no special rinses or anything like that.
My dad grew up before flouridation was common, and his teeth are pretty much trashed. He’s had all sorts of bridge work, gold fillings, etc etc. I’ve never had a single cavity, which is not entirely attributable to Crest ™ I’m sure. The stuff works.
The conspiricy theory goes that it is a waste product, byproduct of the aluminum industry and was foisted on us to either get rid of the poison (it is, in large doses, but what isn’t) and/or to make us docile drones receptive to the NWO and make the world safe for Communism. Difficult to believe anyone would believe that, but there it is. Personally, I don’t think it’s working, given our level of crime.
I switched to bottled water which has no fluoride, and I got 2 cavities that year, the first time in 20 years. My dentist put me on a high-fluoride prescription toothpaste because I wasn’t getting enough protection from regular fluoride toothpaste.
So don’t think you’re getting full protection from regular toothpaste, you still need fluoridated water.
Actually, 3 of the emails I traced back to a considerably conservative Christian source (yes, that’s right…ignore the “To” line and send it to everyone on your contact list, no matter if they’ve already gotten it…show that you’re zombie brain pudding).
Apparently it’s the new attack from the nasty ol’ atheists in an attempt to short-circuit the God-module or somesuch.
I don’t mindlessly follow the government’s every word, but nor do I believe that the very same government that can’t even keep covered up the method of le Petit Mort they experience with the underage, illegal immigrant that went missing and is suspected dead could keep something like this covered up. It just doesn’t figure.
Some researchers (no cite, sorry) hypothesize that excessive levels of fluoride can cause the leaching of calcium from one’s system. Don’t have a clue if that’s true or not, but moderation in all things seems prudent.
You should see my mother’s teeth. They’re a mess. She lived in India until she was four and I’m sure she had very little or no access to the stuff. Does anybody know when flouride was first added to toothpaste? (Her father was teaching math, apparently to escape being drafted into Korea.)
I might not even mind a few spots on my teeth if I didn’t have to get them drilled. shiver
I’ve heard (but don’t have cites) that some communities have naturally high levels of flouride in their ground water, much more than is put in municipal supplies, and people have lived there and drunk the water for generations with no side effects other than some tooth discoloration. Because of this, the government felt it was safe to put some flouride in public water to prevent tooth decay.
Nowadays, it’s quite common to run into young people with few or no cavities, but among those in my parents generation lousy teeth (or no teeth) seem to be the rule.
But, if you’re really paranoid, either drink bottled water or move out to where you can have your own well water without flouridation.
Curious:
What exactly is the concentration used in artificially fluoridated water? I looked at some of the links and couldn’t find this information (I may just be a lousy skim reader).
Thanks.
According to the Quackwatch article I posted above, it’s one part in a million.
The advantage is that more people drink water on a regular basis than brush their teeth. But they can’t put enough in water to equal the strength of it in toothpaste, or else people would get overfluoridated.
“The Canadian Dental Association and the Western Australia Health Department’s Dental Service have both stopped recommending regular fluoride supplementation.”
According to the Candadian Dental Association website at http://www.cda-adc.ca/public/frames/eng_index.html
“Adding fluoride to the water is the most efficient way to provide fluoride protection to a large number of people at a low cost. That’s why many towns and cities put fluoride in the water. Fluoride is also in toothpastes that most people use every day. Fluoride treatments are another source of fluoride. They are useful for people who have a higher risk of cavities.”
I couldn’t find a site for the Western Australia Health Department’s Dental Service but, according to the Australian Dental Association at
http://www.ada.org.au/brochures2/fluoride.htm
"Most major Australian cities have had fluoridated water for 20 to 30 years.
"One of the most beneficial discoveries in recent years is that fluoride encourages the enamel of the tooth to repair itself, providing the decay process has not gone too far.
"In the first 10 years after its introduction in Australia, fluoridated water has resulted in decay rates dropping up to 60 per cent.
"Approximately two out of every three Australians now drink fluoridated water.
"30 years ago:
"the average teenager had 18 teeth either needing fillings, already filled, or extracted due to decay;
two-out-of-three older adults had lost all their teeth and wore dentures;
"many 16 year-olds had to have all their teeth out due to decay;
"Today, tooth extraction due to decay is a rarity and most teenagers have only four or five teeth filled or affected by decay (many with no decay at all) and the damage is often slight.
“Due to fluoride, today’s young people may never need a filling.”
I wonder if the recommendation of the Western Australia Health Department’s Dental Service didn’t pertain either to people living in parts of Western Australia with high levels of dietary flouride or to the use of a 40% silver fluoride topical preparation which was apparently the standard topical fluoride supplement used by the Western Australia Health Department’s Dental Service until someone realized last year that 40% is way to strong.
“I think the issue is certainly worthy of consideration.” I couldn’t agree more, the issue is worthy of consideration. And that is why it has been not just considered but studied, ad nauseam. From the American Dental Association website: "For the past 50 years, detailed reports have been published on all aspects of fluoridation.54, 96 The accumulated dental, medical and public health evidence concerning fluoridation has been reviewed and evaluated numerous times by academicians, committees of experts, special councils of government and most of the world’s major national and international health organizations. The verdict of the scientific community is that water fluoridation, at the recommended levels, provides major oral health benefits. The question of possible secondary health effects caused by fluorides consumed in optimal concentrations throughout life has been the object of thorough medical investigations which have failed to show any impairment of general health.82, 92-95
http://www.ada.org/public/topics/fluoride/facts-saf13-22.html#14
BTW, this GQ thread
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?
threadid=73127
covers fluoridation reasonably well, and includes the famous exchange between Group Captain Mandrake and General Ripper.
We overseas when my two children were very young. My daughter, who was about 2.5 yo at the time, soon developed nasty cavities on the edges of some of her front teeth. On the recommendation of her American dentist, we supplemented her toothbrushing with fluoride supplements. We also started our son on fluoride supplements about the same time, pretty much as soon as his teeth came in. He has yet to have a cavity. They have both lived in the same countries, drank the same water, etc. However my daughter also is not terribly fond of most dairy products, save ice cream, so she may also be a bit deficient in calcium. Neither one was particularly fond of having their teeth brushed at an early age. We were more forceful about this with my son, having learned through tough experience the first time.
A word of advice for parents of young children: before your child’s teeth come in, e.g., after they are born, take a clean, soft cloth and gently rub their gums once or twice a day. This will make their gums less sensitive to a toothbrush when they do get teeth. It will also get them used to having something in their mouth.
I must second what ShobbOleth said. My son had two teeth extracted at the age of two because of advanced caries we did not catch in time. I would not wish that parental guilt on my worst enemy.
Anyway, my doctor told me that some researchers believe it is also bad to have fluctuating levels of flouride exposure when an infant. That is, if you change from flouridated water to unflouridated or vice versa (maybe more than once? He wasn’t specific) it can harm tooth enamel.
One more question on the topic:
Do those water filters (Brita, Pur etc.) filter out the fluoride? (If so, I guess my son’s going to have to drink it straight from the tap!)
If anyone wants to see in living color what no flouride in the water does, visit Hawaii and Guam in the US and Japan (and many other countries) outside the US. Two year-old local kids have no front teeth because they have already rotted out. Adults have most of their net worth in their mouths (not true, but interesting idea with gold caps and all).
Where in the US does a dentist go to make a good living…Hawaii, of course - lots of work.
Healthy teeth provide for healthier diets, less bacteria from gums to blood, etc., etc.
Flouride in the public water supply is probably the cheapest and most effective social health program ever happened upon. Discovered because some Texans had mottled teeth with no cavities.
Add flossing to the equation and you have a much healthier populace with lower overall health costs.
Systemic flouride works.