The Case Against Water The Case Against Water Fluoridation Fluoridation

Paul Connett, PhDPaul Connett, PhD

Professor Emeritus of Environmental ChemistryProfessor Emeritus of Environmental Chemistry

St. Lawrence University, Canton, NYSt. Lawrence University, Canton, NY

Director, Fluoride Action NetworkDirector, Fluoride Action Network

www.Fluoridewww.FluorideALERTALERT.org.org

pconnett@gmail.com

Ministry of Health, NZ, March 22, 2011Ministry of Health, NZ, March 22, 2011

Outline of talkOutline of talk

1. Fluoridation is a poor medical practice1. Fluoridation is a poor medical practice

2. Fluoridation is unethical2. Fluoridation is unethical

3. The evidence of any benefit is very weak3. The evidence of any benefit is very weak

4. There is no adequate margin of safety to 4. There is no adequate margin of safety to protect the brain from harm and other protect the brain from harm and other KNOWN health effectsKNOWN health effects

5. Politics versus Science5. Politics versus Science

6. Other health concerns6. Other health concerns

Part 3.Part 3.The evidence of benefitThe evidence of benefit

is very weakis very weak

Comparing CountriesComparing Countries

Most countries don’t fluoridate their Most countries don’t fluoridate their water, water, but their kids’ teeth but their kids’ teeth are as good as those that doare as good as those that do

SOURCE: World Health Organization. (Data online)

Comparing US StatesComparing US States

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

% of Residents with Water Fluoridation

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

% of Residents with Water Fluoridation

Lo Income with Very Good/Excellent Teeth

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

% of Residents with Water Fluoridation

Lo Income with Very Good/Excellent Teeth

Hi Income Very Good/Excellent Teeth

50 USA States and DC

Perc

en

t

National Survey of Children's Health. http://mchb.hrsa.gov/oralhealth/portrait/1cct.htm U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Maternal and Child Health Bureau. The National Survey of Children's Health 2003. Rockville, Maryland: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2005

http://www.cdc.gov/oralhealth/waterfluoridation/fact_sheets/states_stats2002.htm

Comparing US CommunitiesComparing US Communities

NIDR conducted the largest survey of tooth NIDR conducted the largest survey of tooth decay ever conducted in the US (1986-7)decay ever conducted in the US (1986-7)

The teeth of over 39,000 children in 84 communities The teeth of over 39,000 children in 84 communities were examined.were examined.

The largest US survey of tooth decay

Average difference (for 5 - 17 year olds) in DMFS

3.4 DMFSNF

2.8DMFS

F

Brunelle and Carlos, 1990

Average difference (for 5 - 17 year olds) in DMFS = 0.6 tooth surfaces (5 surfaces to a tooth)

3.4 DMFSNF

2.8DMFS

F

Weaknesses in Brunelle and Weaknesses in Brunelle and Carlos studyCarlos study

1) Brunelle and Carlos did not report 1) Brunelle and Carlos did not report statistical significance of the 0.6 tooth statistical significance of the 0.6 tooth surface decay differencesurface decay difference

2) Nor did they adjust for possible 2) Nor did they adjust for possible delayed eruption of teeth in delayed eruption of teeth in fluoridated areas-fluoridated areas-

William Kiel of Alamo Heights, William Kiel of Alamo Heights, Texas, made this adjustment…Texas, made this adjustment…

Original Data – Age Based Shifted Data – Post-Eruption Based*

Recent Trends in Dental Caries in U.S. Children and the Effect of Water Fluoridation by J.A. Brunelle and J.P. CarlosJournal of Dental Research February 1990 (Volume 69, Special Issue, Pages 723-727)

*Fluoridated data was shifted back by one year; e.g. age 6 Fluoridated aligns with age 5 unfluoridated, etc.

Mea

n D

MFS

Mea

n D

MFS

Adjusted for one year Delayed eruption of teeth William Kiel, Alamo Heights.

Studies in Australia have found Studies in Australia have found even less saving than O.6 DMFS!even less saving than O.6 DMFS! SpeSpencer et al. (1996) found a saving in two states ncer et al. (1996) found a saving in two states

of ONLY 0.12 – 0.3 permanent tooth surfaces.of ONLY 0.12 – 0.3 permanent tooth surfaces. Armfield and Spencer (2004) found Armfield and Spencer (2004) found no no

statistically significant difference in tooth decay in statistically significant difference in tooth decay in the permanent teeth the permanent teeth between children in South between children in South Australia who had drunk fluoridated water all their Australia who had drunk fluoridated water all their lives and those who had drunk bottled or tank lives and those who had drunk bottled or tank water.water.

“The magnitude of [fluoridation’s] effect is not largein absolute terms, is often not statistically significant,

and may not be of clinical significance.”

SOURCE: David Locker for the Ontario Ministry of Health & Long Term Care, 1999

Studies in NZStudies in NZ

John Colquhoun (studies:1984- 1997)John Colquhoun (studies:1984- 1997) De Liefde, 1998 The difference in tooth De Liefde, 1998 The difference in tooth

decay in permanent teeth was “clinically decay in permanent teeth was “clinically meaninglesss”meaninglesss”

Recent studies reported in MOH (2010), “Our Recent studies reported in MOH (2010), “Our Oral Health”Oral Health”

Wellington versus Canterbury saving of 1 Wellington versus Canterbury saving of 1 DMFS (2.4 – 1.4) Lee and Dennison, 2004, DMFS (2.4 – 1.4) Lee and Dennison, 2004, MOH p.28.MOH p.28.

Studies in NZ (MOH)Studies in NZ (MOH) “… “… studies found that 9-10 year olds studies found that 9-10 year olds

continuously exposed to water fluoridation continuously exposed to water fluoridation had half the dental caries experience of had half the dental caries experience of those who had not in Auckland those who had not in Auckland (Kanagaratnam et al 2009) (Kanagaratnam et al 2009) and Southland and Southland (Mackay and Thomson 2005)(Mackay and Thomson 2005). Another . Another Auckland study of 9-year-olds similarly Auckland study of 9-year-olds similarly found lower levels of dental caries in found lower levels of dental caries in fluoridated areas than non-fluoridated areas fluoridated areas than non-fluoridated areas (Schluter et al 2008)(Schluter et al 2008)” p.28, MOH, 2010” p.28, MOH, 2010

Schluter et al 2008Schluter et al 2008 Prevalence of caries:Prevalence of caries: Deciduous teeth, Deciduous teeth, prevalence: F = 54.9%, NF prevalence: F = 54.9%, NF

= 62.0 % (p=0.05) Saving = 7.1%= 62.0 % (p=0.05) Saving = 7.1% Permanent teeth Permanent teeth prevalence F = 15.9%, NF = prevalence F = 15.9%, NF =

11.7% (p=0.14) Permanent teeth worse in F-11.7% (p=0.14) Permanent teeth worse in F-areas but not statistically significantareas but not statistically significant

Nothing here looks like a saving of half of the Nothing here looks like a saving of half of the dental caries in either the deciduous or dental caries in either the deciduous or permanent teeth (nor was a corrcction made permanent teeth (nor was a corrcction made for delayed eruption of teeth in F city).for delayed eruption of teeth in F city).

Mackay and Thomson, 2005Mackay and Thomson, 2005 Residence in F area up to age 9Residence in F area up to age 9 Deciduous teeth: Deciduous teeth: dmfsdmfs None 5.11 None 5.11 Intermittent 4.29 Intermittent 4.29 Continuous 3.42 Continuous 3.42 Saving = 5.11 – 3.42 = 1.69 dmfsSaving = 5.11 – 3.42 = 1.69 dmfs % saving = 1.69/5.11 x 100 = 33%% saving = 1.69/5.11 x 100 = 33%

Mackay and Thomson, 2005Mackay and Thomson, 2005 Residence in F area up to age 9Residence in F area up to age 9 Permanent teethPermanent teeth: DMFS: DMFS None 1.22None 1.22 Intermittent 1.18Intermittent 1.18 Continuous 0.70 Continuous 0.70 Saving = 1.22 – 0.70 = 0.52 DMFSSaving = 1.22 – 0.70 = 0.52 DMFS % saving = 0.70/1.22 x 100 =43%% saving = 0.70/1.22 x 100 =43%

NZ studiesNZ studies In neither of these two NZ studies was there In neither of these two NZ studies was there

any attempt to control for the possible delayed any attempt to control for the possible delayed eruption of teeth in F communitieseruption of teeth in F communities

Even so the best result indicates a saving of Even so the best result indicates a saving of ONLY 0.5 of a single permanent tooth surfaceONLY 0.5 of a single permanent tooth surface

There are either 4 or 5 surfaces to a tooth.There are either 4 or 5 surfaces to a tooth. There are 128 tooth surfaces when all the There are 128 tooth surfaces when all the

teeth (except the wisdom teeth) have erupted.teeth (except the wisdom teeth) have erupted.

Percentage savings Percentage savings versusversus absolute savings absolute savings

Proponents frequently report their findings as Proponents frequently report their findings as percentage savings. This can be very percentage savings. This can be very deceptive.deceptive.

We saw in this last study that a saving of one We saw in this last study that a saving of one half of a permanent tooth surface half of a permanent tooth surface (note there (note there are 4 or 5 surfaces to a tooth) equates to a are 4 or 5 surfaces to a tooth) equates to a percentage saving of percentage saving of 43%. 43%.

The latter sounds more impressive to the The latter sounds more impressive to the general public.general public.

Kanagaratnam et al., 2009 Kanagaratnam et al., 2009 ““no significant relationship was found no significant relationship was found

between residential fluoridation history and between residential fluoridation history and dental caries in the permanent dentition. dental caries in the permanent dentition. This may be partly because, at 9 years of This may be partly because, at 9 years of age, only some of the permanent teeth are age, only some of the permanent teeth are present, and differences in caries prevalence present, and differences in caries prevalence and severity with differing exposures to and severity with differing exposures to fluoride may become more obvious in older fluoride may become more obvious in older children who have more permanent teeth children who have more permanent teeth for a longer time (29)….for a longer time (29)….

Kanagaratnam et al., 2009 Kanagaratnam et al., 2009 ……a longer time (29).The significantly a longer time (29).The significantly

higher proportion of girls higher proportion of girls (whose teeth (whose teeth erupt at an earlier age) erupt at an earlier age) with permanent with permanent teeth caries compared with boys exemplifies teeth caries compared with boys exemplifies this limitation.” this limitation.”

Australian studiesAustralian studies The most impressive studies demonstrating The most impressive studies demonstrating

a small difference in tooth decay between a small difference in tooth decay between fluoridated and non-fluoridated fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities have come from Australia communities have come from Australia from Adelaide University (Spencer, from Adelaide University (Spencer, Armfield etc). They controlled for several Armfield etc). They controlled for several confounding factors to reach a small savingconfounding factors to reach a small saving

BUT they did not control for delayed BUT they did not control for delayed eruption of the teeth in F-areas.eruption of the teeth in F-areas.

Delayed eruption in F areasDelayed eruption in F areas

““The DA (dental age) of the AUS and UK The DA (dental age) of the AUS and UK populations was found to be different (Fig. populations was found to be different (Fig. 5). The AUS population had a 0.82 year 5). The AUS population had a 0.82 year delay in their DA compared to the UK delay in their DA compared to the UK population. This difference was compared population. This difference was compared and was found to be very statistically and was found to be very statistically significant (P < 0.001).” significant (P < 0.001).” Peirisi et al. Peirisi et al. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry 2009; 19: 367–3762009; 19: 367–376

Original Data – Age Based Shifted Data – Post-Eruption Based*

Recent Trends in Dental Caries in U.S. Children and the Effect of Water Fluoridation by J.A. Brunelle and J.P. CarlosJournal of Dental Research February 1990 (Volume 69, Special Issue, Pages 723-727)

*Fluoridated data was shifted back by one year; e.g. age 6 Fluoridated aligns with age 5 unfluoridated, etc.

Mea

n D

MFS

Mea

n D

MFS

Adjusted for one year Delayed eruption of teeth William Kiel, Alamo Heights.

Important recent studiesImportant recent studies

Komarek et al., 2005 Komarek et al., 2005 (controlled for delayed (controlled for delayed eruption of teeth in F-communities).eruption of teeth in F-communities).

Found no difference in tooth decay between Found no difference in tooth decay between F and non-F communities.F and non-F communities.

Warren et al., 2009 Warren et al., 2009 (measured tooth decay as (measured tooth decay as a function of individual exposure to fluoride). a function of individual exposure to fluoride).

Found no relation between tooth decay and Found no relation between tooth decay and amount of fluoride ingested.amount of fluoride ingested.

An explanation for weak evidenceAn explanation for weak evidenceof benefit in very large studiesof benefit in very large studies

The major benefits of fluoride are The major benefits of fluoride are TOPICALTOPICAL not not SYSTEMIC. SYSTEMIC. (CDC, 1999, (CDC, 1999, 2001). In other words fluoride works on 2001). In other words fluoride works on the the outside surface outside surface of the tooth not from of the tooth not from inside the bodyinside the body

Fluoridation should have ended in 1999!Fluoridation should have ended in 1999!

Fluoride’s main benefit is TOPICAL.It works on the outside of the tooth.

“Its actions primarily are topical for both adults and children." Centers for Disease Control, 1999

"Fluoride's predominant effect is posteruptive and topical." Centers for Disease Control, 2001

Schluter et al 2008Schluter et al 2008 ““The effect of fluoride on dental caries is due The effect of fluoride on dental caries is due

primarily to the topical effect of fluoride after the primarily to the topical effect of fluoride after the teeth have erupted into the oral cavity. The teeth have erupted into the oral cavity. The harmful effects of fluoride are due to it systemic harmful effects of fluoride are due to it systemic absorption during tooth development resulting in absorption during tooth development resulting in dental fluorosis …dental fluorosis …

The dose-response relationship is linear and for The dose-response relationship is linear and for every 0.01 mg/kg bodyweight increase in exposure, every 0.01 mg/kg bodyweight increase in exposure, there is a corresponding detectable increase in the there is a corresponding detectable increase in the population (Ellwood and Fejerskov, 2003).”population (Ellwood and Fejerskov, 2003).”

Part 4.Part 4.There is no adequate There is no adequate

margin of safety margin of safety to protect everyone from to protect everyone from

knownknown harmful effects of fluorideharmful effects of fluoride

A KEY QUESTIONA KEY QUESTION

When fluoride is damaging the When fluoride is damaging the baby’s growing tooth cells baby’s growing tooth cells (causing dental fluorosis)(causing dental fluorosis) what is it what is it doing to its other developing doing to its other developing tissues?tissues?

The baby’s developing brainThe baby’s developing brain

The baby should NOT be exposed to The baby should NOT be exposed to fluoride of up to 250 times the level of fluoride of up to 250 times the level of fluoride that occurs in mothers milkfluoride that occurs in mothers milk

“ “One wonders what One wonders what …an increase in the …an increase in the exposure to fluoride, exposure to fluoride,

such as occurs in such as occurs in bottle-fed infants …bottle-fed infants …

may mean for the may mean for the development of the development of the brainbrain and the other and the other

organs…” 1978organs…” 1978

Arvid Carlsson Nobel Prize for Arvid Carlsson Nobel Prize for Medicine, 2000Medicine, 2000

National Research Council (2006):Fluoride & the Brain

“it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain.”

Fluoride and the BrainFluoride and the Brain

Many more studies on the brain have been Many more studies on the brain have been published since the NRC reviewpublished since the NRC review

The panel reviewed FIVE IQ studiesThe panel reviewed FIVE IQ studies

Human studiesHuman studies

As of 2011, there areAs of 2011, there are 24 24 published studies published studies (from China, (from China, Iran, India and Mexico) Iran, India and Mexico) indicating that moderate to high indicating that moderate to high fluoride exposure is associated fluoride exposure is associated with lowered IQ in childrenwith lowered IQ in children

See FluorideAlert.org/brainSee FluorideAlert.org/brain

Xiang et al. (2003 a,b)Xiang et al. (2003 a,b)

Compared children in two villages ( <0.7 ppm Compared children in two villages ( <0.7 ppm versus 2.5 - 4.5 ppm F in water)versus 2.5 - 4.5 ppm F in water)

Controlled for lead exposure and iodine intake, Controlled for lead exposure and iodine intake, and other key variables (NOTE: both lead and other key variables (NOTE: both lead exposure and low iodine also lower IQ).exposure and low iodine also lower IQ).

Found a drop of 5-10 IQ points across the whole Found a drop of 5-10 IQ points across the whole age rangeage range

The whole IQ curve shifted for both males and The whole IQ curve shifted for both males and femalesfemales

Xiang et al. (2003 a,b)Xiang et al. (2003 a,b) MALES

Xiang et al. (2003 a,b)Xiang et al. (2003 a,b)FEMALES

Xiang et al. (2003 a,b)Xiang et al. (2003 a,b)

Estimated that IQ in Estimated that IQ in children lowered atchildren lowered at

1.91.9 ppm fluoride in water ppm fluoride in water (threshold)(threshold)

There is no adequate margin of safetyThere is no adequate margin of safety If fluoride is associated with lowering IQ of If fluoride is associated with lowering IQ of

children at 1.9 ppm children at 1.9 ppm in a small population studyin a small population study we need to apply a safety factor to protect the we need to apply a safety factor to protect the whole population of childrenwhole population of children

Normally we use a safety factor of 10 to do thisNormally we use a safety factor of 10 to do this If we assume that the Chinese children were If we assume that the Chinese children were

drinking one liter of fluoride per day the dose drinking one liter of fluoride per day the dose that lowered IQ was 1.9 mg/daythat lowered IQ was 1.9 mg/day

That would mean to protect the intelligence of That would mean to protect the intelligence of ALL the children in a large population a safe ALL the children in a large population a safe dose would be 0.19 mg/day (1.9 divided by 10)dose would be 0.19 mg/day (1.9 divided by 10)

Mini sensitivity analysisMini sensitivity analysis If the Chinese children were drinking 0.5 liter, If the Chinese children were drinking 0.5 liter,

LOAEL for lowered IQ = 0.95 mg/day. Safe LOAEL for lowered IQ = 0.95 mg/day. Safe dose to protect whole population = 0.095 dose to protect whole population = 0.095 mg/day.mg/day.

If the Chinese children were drinking 2 liters, If the Chinese children were drinking 2 liters, lowered IQ at 3.8 mg/day. Safe dose to protect lowered IQ at 3.8 mg/day. Safe dose to protect whole population = 0.38 mg/day (less than two whole population = 0.38 mg/day (less than two glasses of water)glasses of water)

If we reduced margin of safety to 5(instead of10)If we reduced margin of safety to 5(instead of10) Safe dose = 0.19- 0.76 mg/day (equivalent to 190 Safe dose = 0.19- 0.76 mg/day (equivalent to 190

-760 ml of water at 1 ppm a day)-760 ml of water at 1 ppm a day)

Xiang et al. (2010)Xiang et al. (2010) Xiang et al. elaborated on their 2003 study.Xiang et al. elaborated on their 2003 study. Added in more details of methods etc.Added in more details of methods etc. Added in data showing an association between plasma Added in data showing an association between plasma

levels of fluoride and lowered IQ.levels of fluoride and lowered IQ. Accepted for publication by Accepted for publication by Environmental Health Environmental Health

PerspectivesPerspectives the journal of the National Institute of the journal of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)

NIEHS is an agency of the US Department of Health and NIEHS is an agency of the US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).Human Services (DHHS).

Pre-publication copy of this article published onlinePre-publication copy of this article published online Article withdrawn because Xiang had published some of Article withdrawn because Xiang had published some of

the data before (conflicts with EHP policy)the data before (conflicts with EHP policy)

Xiang et al. (2010)Xiang et al. (2010) Please note:Please note: Xiang et al. (2010) paper was NOT Xiang et al. (2010) paper was NOT

withdrawn because the methodology withdrawn because the methodology was considered inadequatewas considered inadequate

The methodology was PEER The methodology was PEER REVIEWED and the study REVIEWED and the study considered acceptable for considered acceptable for publication in the leading US publication in the leading US environmental health journal.environmental health journal.

Ding et al. 2011 Ding et al. 2011 (J. Hazardous Materials)(J. Hazardous Materials)

“ “Mean value of fluoride in drinking water was Mean value of fluoride in drinking water was 1.31 ±1.05mg/L (range 1.31 ±1.05mg/L (range 0.24–2.840.24–2.84).” ).”

“ “ ConclusionsConclusions Overall, our study suggested that low levels of Overall, our study suggested that low levels of

fluoride exposure in drinking water had negative fluoride exposure in drinking water had negative effects on children’s intelligence... effects on children’s intelligence...

The results also confirmed the dose–response The results also confirmed the dose–response relationships between urine fluoride relationships between urine fluoride concentrations and IQ scores…concentrations and IQ scores…””

Ding et al. 2011Ding et al. 2011

Fig 2. The relationship between IQ differences and urine fluoride concentrations. Multiple linear regression model was carried out to confirm the association with urine fluoride exposure and IQ scores (F=9.85, p < 0.0001)

Ding et al. 2011Ding et al. 2011

“ “an increase in the urine fluoride concentration of an increase in the urine fluoride concentration of 1 mg/L associated with a decrease of 0.59 IQ 1 mg/L associated with a decrease of 0.59 IQ scores.”scores.”

Fluoride and the brainFluoride and the brain

There have now been over There have now been over 100 100 animal experimentsanimal experiments which show which show that fluoride can damage the that fluoride can damage the brainbrain

Varner et al. (1998)Varner et al. (1998)

Gave rats Gave rats 1 ppm1 ppm fluoride in their water for fluoride in their water for one year (one group got AlFone year (one group got AlF33 the other NaF) the other NaF)

Both groups had kidney damage, brain Both groups had kidney damage, brain damage, greater uptake of aluminum into damage, greater uptake of aluminum into the brain and beta amyloid deposits that the brain and beta amyloid deposits that some have associated with Alzheimer’s some have associated with Alzheimer’s disease.disease.

Weight of Evidence on Weight of Evidence on brain studiesbrain studies

Positive FindingsPositive Findings

There have now been over There have now been over 100 animal experiments100 animal experiments which which show that fluoride can damage the brainshow that fluoride can damage the brain

There have been There have been 24 studies 24 studies that show a that show a lowering of IQ lowering of IQ at at levels at - or close to - exposures in fluoridated levels at - or close to - exposures in fluoridated communitiescommunities

There have been There have been three studies three studies that show that show fetal brain damage fetal brain damage in fluorosis areas in Chinain fluorosis areas in China

There have been There have been two studies two studies from China that show from China that show behavioral differences behavioral differences associated with fluoride exposure– associated with fluoride exposure– one for children and one for industrial workersone for children and one for industrial workers

Rocha-Amador et al. (2009)Rocha-Amador et al. (2009)

Study from Mexico found an association Study from Mexico found an association between between visual-spatial learning visual-spatial learning and fluoride and fluoride exposure (Neurotoxicology 30 1149-1154)exposure (Neurotoxicology 30 1149-1154)

Negative FindingsNegative Findings

ONE small study in NZ did not find a ONE small study in NZ did not find a lowering of IQ associated with living in a lowering of IQ associated with living in a fluoridated community (Shannon et al., fluoridated community (Shannon et al., 1986)1986)

One small study did not find behavioral One small study did not find behavioral differences associated with severity of differences associated with severity of dental fluorosis (Morgan et al., 1998)dental fluorosis (Morgan et al., 1998)

Two preposterous notionsTwo preposterous notions

What parent in their right mind would put their What parent in their right mind would put their children’s teeth above their brains?children’s teeth above their brains?

What government would support a program aimed What government would support a program aimed at lowering tooth decay - by at most 0.6 of one at lowering tooth decay - by at most 0.6 of one tooth surface – if it lowered the IQ of the tooth surface – if it lowered the IQ of the population by even a small amount?population by even a small amount?

Other health concernsOther health concerns(see chapters 13-19 in (see chapters 13-19 in The Case The Case

Against Fluoride )Against Fluoride )

Key Health Studies have NOT been Key Health Studies have NOT been done in most fluoridating countries done in most fluoridating countries

NO INVESTIGATION of a possible relationship NO INVESTIGATION of a possible relationship between consumption of fluoridated water andbetween consumption of fluoridated water and

lowered IQ in children (except one small study in NZ), lowered IQ in children (except one small study in NZ), Behavioral changes in children (attention deficit etc)Behavioral changes in children (attention deficit etc) arthritic symptoms in adults,arthritic symptoms in adults, hypo-thyroidism (underactive thyroid),hypo-thyroidism (underactive thyroid), Increased bone fractures in children,Increased bone fractures in children, Melatonin levels in childrenMelatonin levels in children Earlier onset of puberty,Earlier onset of puberty, Alzheimer’s disease in adults, andAlzheimer’s disease in adults, and

Key Health Studies have NOT been Key Health Studies have NOT been done in most fluoridating countries done in most fluoridating countries

There has been NO FORMAL There has been NO FORMAL INVESTIGATION INVESTIGATION of the many of the many anecdotal reports and case studies (and anecdotal reports and case studies (and one clinical trial) that some individuals one clinical trial) that some individuals are highly sensitive to fluoride (e.g. are highly sensitive to fluoride (e.g. gastrointestinal, neurological and skin gastrointestinal, neurological and skin conditions)conditions)

See Fluoride Fatigue (Spittle, 2008) See Fluoride Fatigue (Spittle, 2008)

If you don’t look, you don’t find!If you don’t look, you don’t find!

The absence of studies, does not mean the The absence of studies, does not mean the absence of harmabsence of harm

Dr. Peter Cooney, the Chief Dental Officer Dr. Peter Cooney, the Chief Dental Officer of Canada, told an audience in Dryden, of Canada, told an audience in Dryden, Ontario (April 1, 2008),Ontario (April 1, 2008),

““I walked down your High Street today, and I walked down your High Street today, and I didn’t see anyone growing horns, and you I didn’t see anyone growing horns, and you have been fluoridated for 40 years!”have been fluoridated for 40 years!”

WHY?WHY? The only rational explanation for so much The only rational explanation for so much

irrational (or irresponsible) behavior on the irrational (or irresponsible) behavior on the part of health agencies that continue to part of health agencies that continue to promote water fluoridation is…promote water fluoridation is…

It has become more important to protect this It has become more important to protect this practice than it is to protect the health of the practice than it is to protect the health of the people they represent…people they represent…

Why should that be?Why should that be?