Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Officials Lie About Fluoridation Safety
The American Public Health Association’s (APHA) new Fluoridation Position Statement is based on many documents that neither support nor evaluate fluoridation’s safety and/or effectiveness as it claims (1).
APHA asserts, “All of these reviews have found CWF [Community Water Fluoridation] to be safe and effective.” Here’s the truth about APHA’s “supportive” references:
National Research Council (2006)
This isn’t a fluoridation risk/benefit analysis. It found EPA’s current fluoride maximum-contaminant-level-goal for drinking water is not protective of health and must be lowered. (2)
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (2003)
This report says "… subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and its compounds…the elderly, people with osteoporosis, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium, vitamin C, and/or protein." (3)
University of York, UK (2000)
About this report, the Centre for Review and Dissemination writes “We were unable to discover any reliable good-quality evidence in the fluoridation literature world-wide.” (4)
Lewis and Banting, Canada (1994)
“The effectiveness of water fluoridation alone cannot now be determined,” they write. (5)
New York State Department of Health (1990)
The authors concluded: “… some individuals may experience hypersensitivity to fluoride-containing agents.” And, “…it is currently impossible to draw firm conclusions regarding the independent effect of fluoride in drinking water on caries prevalence using an ecologic study design.” (6)
World Health Organization (2006)
This report, not about fluoridation, documents high levels of natural fluoride causing human bone and teeth malformation in many countries. (7)
Medical Research Council, UK (2002)
This report, not a fluoridation risk/benefit analysis, identifies fluoridation health uncertainties such as total exposure and bone effects. (8)
Institute of Medicine (1999)
Since fluoride is not a nutrient, this report set the adequate intake from all sources to avoid children’s moderate dental fluorosis (discolored teeth) and, also, the upper limit to avoid crippling bone damage -- which the IOM admits “is too high for persons with certain illnesses…” (9)
While APHA says that fluoridation reduced the incidence and severity of tooth decay, ”No clear reasons for the caries decline have been identified,” according to dental textbook, Dentistry, Dental Practice, and the Community (Burt and Eklund).
“Why is the APHA misrepresenting these documents and not publicizing fluoridation’s health risks and uncertainties, therefore, protecting fluoridation instead of the American public?” asks attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
Over 2,200 professionals urge Congress to stop fluoridation. Join them at http://congress.FluorideAction.Net
References:
1) American Public Health Association Oral Health Section Newsletter, Winter 2009
http://www.apha.org/membergroups/newsletters/sectionnewsletters/oral/winter09/
2) “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of
EPA's Standards,”
Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, National
Research Council, Executive Summary, 2006
http://www.nap.edu/nap-cgi/report.cgi?record_id=11571&type=pdfxsum
3) US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluordie, and Fluorine, (2003) http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp11.pdf
4) “What the 'York Review' on the fluoridation of drinking water really found,” October 28 2003,A statement from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/fluoridnew.htm
5) Lewis DW, Banting DW. Water fluoridation: current effectiveness and dental fluorosis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1994;22:153–158 http://tinyurl.com/bhtlkq
6). Kaminsky LS, Mahoney MC, Leach J, Melius J, Miller MJ. Fluoride: benefits and risks of exposure. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1990;1:261–281 http://crobm.iadrjournals.org/cgi/reprint/1/4/261
7) World Health Organization, “New WHO report tackles fluoride in drinking-water,” November 2006 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/new/2006/nw04/en/index.html
8). Medical Research Council. Medical Research Council Working Group Report: Water Fluoridation and Health. September 2002. www.mrc.ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index.htm?d=MRC002482
9) Institute of Medicine, Food and Nutrition Board. Fluoride: Background Information. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D and Fluoride. Report of the Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes. Washington, DC:http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309063507
The American Public Health Association’s (APHA) new Fluoridation Position Statement is based on many documents that neither support nor evaluate fluoridation’s safety and/or effectiveness as it claims (1).
APHA asserts, “All of these reviews have found CWF [Community Water Fluoridation] to be safe and effective.” Here’s the truth about APHA’s “supportive” references:
National Research Council (2006)
This isn’t a fluoridation risk/benefit analysis. It found EPA’s current fluoride maximum-contaminant-level-goal for drinking water is not protective of health and must be lowered. (2)
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (2003)
This report says "… subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and its compounds…the elderly, people with osteoporosis, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium, vitamin C, and/or protein." (3)
University of York, UK (2000)
About this report, the Centre for Review and Dissemination writes “We were unable to discover any reliable good-quality evidence in the fluoridation literature world-wide.” (4)
Lewis and Banting, Canada (1994)
“The effectiveness of water fluoridation alone cannot now be determined,” they write. (5)
New York State Department of Health (1990)
The authors concluded: “… some individuals may experience hypersensitivity to fluoride-containing agents.” And, “…it is currently impossible to draw firm conclusions regarding the independent effect of fluoride in drinking water on caries prevalence using an ecologic study design.” (6)
World Health Organization (2006)
This report, not about fluoridation, documents high levels of natural fluoride causing human bone and teeth malformation in many countries. (7)
Medical Research Council, UK (2002)
This report, not a fluoridation risk/benefit analysis, identifies fluoridation health uncertainties such as total exposure and bone effects. (8)
Institute of Medicine (1999)
Since fluoride is not a nutrient, this report set the adequate intake from all sources to avoid children’s moderate dental fluorosis (discolored teeth) and, also, the upper limit to avoid crippling bone damage -- which the IOM admits “is too high for persons with certain illnesses…” (9)
While APHA says that fluoridation reduced the incidence and severity of tooth decay, ”No clear reasons for the caries decline have been identified,” according to dental textbook, Dentistry, Dental Practice, and the Community (Burt and Eklund).
“Why is the APHA misrepresenting these documents and not publicizing fluoridation’s health risks and uncertainties, therefore, protecting fluoridation instead of the American public?” asks attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
Over 2,200 professionals urge Congress to stop fluoridation. Join them at http://congress.FluorideAction.Net
References:
1) American Public Health Association Oral Health Section Newsletter, Winter 2009
http://www.apha.org/membergroups/newsletters/sectionnewsletters/oral/winter09/
2) “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of
EPA's Standards,”
Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, National
Research Council, Executive Summary, 2006
http://www.nap.edu/nap-cgi/report.cgi?record_id=11571&type=pdfxsum
3) US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluordie, and Fluorine, (2003) http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp11.pdf
4) “What the 'York Review' on the fluoridation of drinking water really found,” October 28 2003,A statement from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/fluoridnew.htm
5) Lewis DW, Banting DW. Water fluoridation: current effectiveness and dental fluorosis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1994;22:153–158 http://tinyurl.com/bhtlkq
6). Kaminsky LS, Mahoney MC, Leach J, Melius J, Miller MJ. Fluoride: benefits and risks of exposure. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 1990;1:261–281 http://crobm.iadrjournals.org/cgi/reprint/1/4/261
7) World Health Organization, “New WHO report tackles fluoride in drinking-water,” November 2006 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/new/2006/nw04/en/index.html
8). Medical Research Council. Medical Research Council Working Group Report: Water Fluoridation and Health. September 2002. www.mrc.ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index.htm?d=MRC002482
9) Institute of Medicine, Food and Nutrition Board. Fluoride: Background Information. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D and Fluoride. Report of the Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes. Washington, DC:http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309063507
