Amesbury Nixes Fluoride

Last week, Amesbury residents voted in a relatively narrow margin against the re-introduction of adding fluoride to the public water supply. Fluoride has been added to many public drinking water supplies all over the country for decades in an attempt to combat dental decay. The theory is that ingested systemic fluoride strengthens the developing teeth and makes them less susceptible to decay.
I would bet you would think that I am a proponent of public water fluoridation given my profession. I am not. In fact, I think it is unethical, unnecessary, ineffective, unsafe, inefficient, and unscientifically promoted. Although there is not enough space in this column to go into this in depth, let me give you an example of each.
Public water fluoridation is unethical because it violates an individual’s right to informed consent to mass medication. It is okay to put substances in the public water to make it safe, but not to medicate, and especially not a heavy metal that accumulates in the body. Public water fluoridation is also unnecessary because people, including children, can have healthy teeth without being exposed to systemic fluoride. This is different than topical fluoride which I will touch on later in this column.
Public water fluoridation is ineffective as research has shown that fluoride’s benefits are primarily topical and not systemic. Countries that have halted water fluoridation generally do not see increases in decay. It is unsafe as systemic fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and in bones, making them more brittle. Also, where the fluoride comes from is an interesting topic of discussion. Many municipalities get their fluoride from China.
Public water fluoridation is inefficient for many reasons, one being that more and more people drink bottled water (which is loosely regulated) and most of the public water ends up washing dishes, in the shower or watering the lawn. If ingestion of fluoride did make sense there are better ways to make it available to people who want it. But, is it really necessary?
Lastly, public water fluoridation is unscientifically promoted. As stated by the US Centers for Disease Control, “Laboratory and epidemiologic research suggests that fluoride prevents dental caries predominately after eruption of the tooth into the mouth, and its actions primarily are topical for both adults and children”. I am a proponent of topical fluoride such as the fluoride found in toothpaste. And, as we age, the decay rate often increases due to exposure of more root surfaces of the teeth which are more susceptible to decay.
Research continues on the effect that fluoride has on teeth, both systemically and topically. The research also continues on the effects that ingested fluoride has on the rest of the body. There is also mounding research on products other than fluoride that show promise in combating dental decay.
I have a fair number of patients on prescription level topical fluoride that I feel are more susceptible to decay. My protocol may be changing soon due to pending research. However, one thing is certain, those with a good diet, impeccable homecare, and who visit a dentist at least twice per year, are much less susceptible to decay no matter what they brush their teeth with.