You have to read the whole fact sheet from the CDA. Yes, they support the fluoridation of water because it is a cheap and easy way to get fluoride to people who need it. However, they also state:
Today’s young children are getting fluoride from a variety of sources, including drinking water and toothpaste, as well as foods and beverages that are made with fluoridated water. Children who show signs of dental fluorosis are generally being exposed to more fluoride than is required simply to protect their teeth.
and
Your dentist is aware of the fluoride levels in the water in your area. He or she will try to estimate your child’s total fluoride intake and risk of cavities before prescribing fluoride supplementation. Supplementation, in liquid or chewable format, has proven useful in protecting patients at high risk of cavities or living in areas with high rates of cavities.
The CDA is not recommending supplements for everyone because not everyone needs them. They are urging dentists to take into consideration how much exposure each individual is already getting.
Putting fluoride in the water supply is the easiest and cheapest way to get it to people, but it is not a terribly efficient method of doing so. Remember that the effects of fluoride are topical, not systemic. Fluoride in the water affects the teeth because it passes over them. It does nothing for the teeth once it is ingested, other than cause fluorosis. If every person had regular dental visits and got their fluoride swabbed onto their teeth, where it actually does some good, we wouldn’t need to put it in the water. Unfortunately, I don’t expect this to happen any time in the near future.
Fluoride, when used efficently, does work wonders at strengthening the enamel. I’m a big fan of dentist office fluoride treatments. My kids get them every six months. But they don’t need to ingest it every time they have a glass of water.
I don’t necessarily have a problem with a flouridated water supply, but I am going to play devil’s advocate for a moment. I am not a conspiracy theorist, but some of the hysteria is a result of “foot in the door” syndrome What if local governments had some evidence that introducing trace amounts of Prozac into the water supply would lead to a reduction in crime? Or that adding Red Dye #15 would have the amazing side effect of ensuring that people pay their taxes on time? Should they do it? Of course not. It’s unethical. What if a few years down the road it’s discovered that the health benefits weren’t exactly what the doctors anticipated? How many times have you heard good health advice from experts turned on it’s head but yet more credentialed experts?
I know flouride is an important factor in maintaining healthy teeth, so why do I need the government to add it to the water supply? I’ll get it in my toothpaste, thank you very much. If I or my doctor decide that Red Dye #15 is in order, I’ll take that too. It’s not the governement’s responsibility or business to make decisions about your health. That’s the HMO’s job.
I was given fluoride supplements as a young child, and my parents always bought fluoridated water. Despite terrible dental hygiene when I was younger and three years of braces, I’ve only had one tiny cavity, almost too small to notice, and it showed up only after I’d gotten into the habit of drinking tap water instead of fluoridated bottled water.
Unfortunately, whether tap water gets fluoridated or not, it won’t do me any good now because my tap water smells like sulphur … maybe the plumbing passes through Hell on the way up?
What if local governments had some evidence that introducing trace amounts of Prozac into the water supply would lead to a reduction in crime? Or that adding Red Dye 