Currently, the majority of the United States is fluoridating with industrial waste without sound scientific evidence of the potential environmental and health impacts. The American Dental Association and other governmental agencies rely on bad science that was done over seventy years ago to justify water fluoridation. The governmental agencies continue to claim it safeguards against cavities. However, recent studies have proven there is no correlation between fluoride and cavity prevention. Communities without fluoridation are shown to have the same decline in cavities as non-fluoridated communities. These results can be attributed to improved diets and dental healthcare. Furthermore, the studies that are being conducted on health prove that fluoridation irreversibly harms the body. Extensive studies on the effects of fluoridation in the environment also need to occur.
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
Fluoride in drinking water has been a hot topic in the past decade. Some communities are all for it and some are completely against it. With such a range of opinions on the matter some organizations have took it upon themselves to present the pros and cons of the fluoride to the public so they can make informed decisions. Often times these surveys are bias to one side or the other, so I shall be giving information on both sides of the issue, the future outlook, and my personal opinion in order to help inform you to decide on your own.
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.
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.
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
Fluoridation of drinking water addresses the health issue of tooth decay and the related dental problems associated with it.1 Fluoride is associated with this health issue since fluoride has been recognized as an important nutrient for healthy teeth.1
In those case the person have to control the levels of fluorides because in most cases the levels are greater than FDA/CDC recommend but most people don't treat their water to lower the amount of fluoridation. In the case cities water systems fluoridation is monitored and adjusted to meet certain standards, low enough not to cause harm yet high enough to aid in preventing tooth decay. Tooth decay is a big health problem if not controlled. Which one the the water supply systems did you read about that was causing the health
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
Research has been showed that such an improvement is due to many factors that combined together. One of these factors is systemic water fluoridation, which has been announced to have a substantial impact on children dental health, alongside with topical fluoride that can be found in mouthwash, toothpaste, and fluoride supplements. In addition to better nutrition, rising standards of living, and better access to dental care 76.
Fluoride compounds have been added to water supplies since as early as the 1950s because claims were made to support fluoride's use as a cavity preventer. However, studies conducted even decades before have shown that fluoride is an extremely hazardous substance that should be completely avoided. These views or claims about fluoride are just too contradictory, both cannot be true. Fluoride has hidden dangers that not enough people know about and should be removed from the water supplies despite false reports that it is actually beneficial, and the practice of water fluoridation should be completely eliminated.
For over 60 years, Americans have been inundated with propaganda proclaiming the benefits of artificially fluoridating the public’s drinking water to prevent tooth decay. I do not use the term “propaganda” lightly. In fact the “father” of modern propaganda, nephew of Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays was brought in to sell spiking America’s public water supply with fluoride (Pilger). This was critical to protect the American Aluminum Company (ALCOA), the world’s largest aluminum producer, from litigation from their workers who were exposed to toxic levels of sodium fluoride. Fluoride in the public water supply is a detriment to the health of Americans and provides no positive benefits while presenting great risk. Fluoridated water is poison, it is proven to decrease IQ, and it is medicating the public with an FDA classified tranquilizer without the informed consent of the citizens.
population that are on public water systems have access to fluoridated water. In order to truly make a change and improve the overall oral health of American citizens, each state needs to raise this number to 100%. The CDC estimates that the return investment for community water fluoridation, including productivity losses, ranged from $4 in small communities of 5,000 people or less, to $27 in large communities of 200,000 people or more. Nearly everyone would enjoy the benefits of the community water fluoridation which include having to deal with fewer cavities that are less severe, less need for fillings, and a greater chance for teeth not reaching such an unhealthy state that they need to be removed. It’s no wonder why community water fluoridation is recommended by the American Dental Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, US Public Health Service, and World Health
Fluoridation of drinking water serving communities of more than 5000 people is now the law. The anti-fluoridation advocates, continue to as they have done in the past, fight fluoridation tooth and nail. This is an ongoing conflict.
This report investigates about water fluoridation, and its effects and why it is added to water. Water fluoridation is a process where fluoride is added to public drinking water. The main purpose of this is to reduce tooth decay. The dosage that is added to the water is paramount to stopping tooth decay. This process can only be achieved by physically adding the fluoride to the drinking water. When the fluoridated water is drunk it acts on the surface of the teeth building up the enamel. It also leaves low levels of fluoride in the saliva. This also reduces the decaying rate of the teeth. This practice is common among developed countries. This is where the rate of tooth decay is high.
if the it exceeds this level, fluorosis will occur (Pizzo, Piscopo, Pizzo, 2007). Further studies confirmed that if the level of fluoride in the drinking water is between 0.9 and 1.2, teeth will have a mild dental fluorosis (Dean, 1942).(Fawell, Bailey, 2006). Later, 0.7-1.2 PPM was a recommended concentration depending on the climatic temperature, dietary practices and water consumption in the area (fawell, 2003; Palmer, Wolfe, 2005). In January 1945, many studies about the advantages of fluoridated water to level 1 PPM was began in the USA and Canada. The medical use of fluoride started in Grand Rapid, United state for dental caries prevention. It became the first city in the world which has fluoridated water adjusted to level 1 PPM in the public drinking water (Dean, Francis et al,.1950; Pizzo, Piscopo, Giuliana, 2007). By the mid-1980s. however, the water fluoridation efficiency has declined. It is argued that the fluoride is not safe unless it is used carefully within the recommended ranges. The main aim of this article to review the adverse and the beneficial effect of water fluoridation on human teeth to prevent