Dental Fluoridation

If left untreated, pulp infection can lead to abscess, destruction of bone, and systemic infection (Cawson et al. 1982; USDHHS 2000). Various sources have concluded that water fluoridation has been an effective method for preventing dental decay (Newbrun 1989; Ripa 1993; Horowitz 1996; CDC 2001; Truman et al. 2002). Water fluoridation is supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as one of the 10 great public health achievements in the United States, because of its role in reducing tooth decay in children and tooth loss in adults (CDC 1999). Each U.S. Surgeon General has endorsed water fluoridation over the decades it has been practiced, emphasizing that “[a] significant advantage of water fluoridation is that all residents of a community can enjoy its protective benefit…. A person’s income level or ability to receive dental care is not a barrier to receiving fluoridation’s health benefits” (Carmona 2004). As noted earlier, this report does not evaluate nor make judgments about the benefits, safety, or efficacy of artificial water fluoridation. That practice is reviewed only in terms of being a source of exposure to

The NRC reported in 2007 that fluoride was considered an element essential to life. Fluoride plays an important role in the body’s ability to perform metabolic and biochemical reactions that help prevent tooth decay and help bone formation. Essentially the government says that the fluoridation of water is more helpful than harmful for people as it is a good use of tax dollars as it treats upper class and lower class citizens equally in dental prevention.

The prevention of caries is accomplished through the execution of a variety of measures, such as the fluoridation of the drinking water supply as well as the utilization of sealants and topical fluorides (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2625). Despite the ease of preventability of tooth decay, it is one of the most common childhood chronic diseases, with more than half of the nation’s children having detectable caries (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2625). Unfortunately, only 62% of water supplies are fluoridated, and underserved communities with low-income and minority families are usually the ones who are disproportionately affected (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2626). Low-income individuals are generally less likely to seek preventative care, increasing their costs of neglected oral diseases and morbidity factors (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2626). In addition, only one in five children who are covered by Medicaid are authorized for preventative oral healthcare, while restorative care is generally not even a consideration (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2625).

Fluoridation of group drinking water is a main consideration in charge of the decrease in dental caries (tooth rot) . The historical backdrop of water fluoridation is a great case of clinical perception prompting epidemiologic examination and group based general wellbeing intercession. Albeit other fluoride-containing items are accessible, water fluoridation remains the most fair and practical strategy for conveying fluoride to all individuals from most groups, paying little respect to age, instructive achievement, or wage level.

Studies show that dental caries does not increase following the cessation of fluoridated water (21,22)

In United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Healthy People 2020 (2011), the report talks about how many improvements have occurred in oral health but there is still a lot more improvement needed. The report further explains how water fluoridation has been one of the most efficient ways to reduce decay across the nation. Mostly everyone has access to water and if the water is fluoridated, then those with little or no access to dental care are getting preventative dental care in the form of a fluoride regimen in their daily water intake. (HHS, Healthy People 2020, 2011) Given this, it would only make sense that the government would employ a dental professional to assess the water fluoridation in every state.

Higgs explains in her essay that the use of fluoride has been used in water for some time now and that it is used to help prevent tooth decay as stated in her citations. She further explains that when brushing ones teeth and swallows an “x” amount of toothpaste that that one should called poison control, so why would one be able to drink it? About sixty percent of homes contain fluoride-added water and an average person is suppose to drink eight 8-ounce glasses of water each day, while the amount of fluoride in each glass contains more than twice the amount (to be consumed) of fluoride allowed in toothpaste (Higgs par.2), and if one had too much

This is because according to the department of health, Rnzcgp this process is not able to be regulated and the dosage is dependent on the person’s circumstances i.e age which can result in health problems. When too large a dose is absorbed into the system according to the The United Nation news it can cause health issues relating to skeletal and dental fluorosis. The compound is also shown to affect the brain and kidney negatively. Fluoridation is a system by which the town or country is taking responsibility for its people. The proposed action is not to fluoridate teeth by adding fluoride to the entire water supply which will affect every person’s entire body with fluoride, but to instead educate about the benefits of using toothpaste which people already commonly use. People can suffer adverse effects because the government would further their own goal. There is no controversy about the people and side effect because I propose not fluoridating. So the evidence is that there will be 100% no risk to getting the side effects, and yet there is no limitation of restricting tooth hygiene and maintaining tooth health through personal care. The evidence of science is that not using a material eliminates the potential for side effects. Personally I find that instead of treating drinking water we should be treating personal care products such as tooth paste which is more effective action. Therefore there is no risk of affecting the entire population in the hands of just a

Few object to the therapeutic use of fluoride to stop tooth decay, but fluoridation, the addition of fluoride to the public water supply, can spark avid controversy. Most dentists, medical groups, and government officials argue that fluoridation is a cheap and risk-free venture that doubles cavity prevention. In contrast, a small minority of dentists and conservative political groups argue that fluoride is a hazardous, poisonous substance that should not be consumed. Some antifluoridationists even claim that fluoridation is an untrustworthy form of socialized medicine. But rather than just attacking fluoridation as socialized medicine, opponents originally claimed that it was a conspiracy to poison or brainwash Americans through

According to World Health Organization data obtained from a study on 12 year old’s levels of tooth decay, fluoride has had very little effect, if any at all, on tooth decay. Countries such as Japan, Italy, and Iceland, who are non-fluoridated countries, actually have about the same level of tooth decay decrease as countries that have fluoridated water. Fluoride is considered a drug, according to the FDA, which means that it is a medical treatment. Medical treatments are not to be given unless the patient agrees to the treatment, therefore, placing fluoride into the public water supply violates informed consent seeing as how citizens are not given the opportunity to vote on the matter. Even if people could vote on the situation, not all people are going to agree with and since it is considered a drug, it

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recommendation for the optimal fluoride level in drinking water to prevent tooth decay have changed from 0.7 -1.2 milligrams per liter stablished in 1962 to 0.7 milligrams of fluoride per liter of water. This change was the result of a systematic reviews of the scientific evidence related community water fluoridation since it was incorporated in 1945. As a result of community water fluoridation there was an increase in the percentage of children who were caries-free and a significant decreases in the number of teeth or tooth surfaces with caries in both children and adult. The main reason to lower the recommendation was because Americans nowadays have more sources of fluoride than the ones

The current data suggests that water fluoridation disproportionately harms low-income and minority communities. In 2005, the Centers for Disease Control released the results of a national survey of dental fluorosis, which was conducted between 1999 and 2002. According to the results, in the U.S., African American children have significantly higher rates of dental fluorosis.2 Same observation has been made in other studies as well. Another study conduced in Indianapolis, Indiana, shows that “the prevalence of dental fluorosis in African American children (80.1%) was significantly higher than in Whites (62.5%). 3

To fluoride water in a community, the average cost annually per person would range somewhere between 40 cents to $2.70. For someone in a lower socioeconomic community, this is more affordable than most other oral health options. In England, 5 year old children from socially deprived parts of Birmingham, where water is fluoridated, had fewer decayed, missing and filled teeth (1.35 on average) compared to 5 years olds from the well-off parts of Herefordshire where water is not fluoridated who had on average 1.78 teeth decayed, missing and

Fluorine is added in water in certain countries and used in toothpaste so that it can strengthen people’s teeth.

Shortly thereafter, he noticed that a high amount of children had splotchy brown stains on their teeth. After many years of research, he discovered that an excess amount of natural fluoride coming from their drinking water was the cause of the disease we now know today as fluorosis, but Dr. Mckay, along with another with other top dental hygienists concluded that putting a tiny amount of fluoride in the water would help prevent overall tooth decay, and they eventually got their wish.