The debate over the positive and negative effects of fluoride has gone on for a long time, and there doesn’t appear to be a conclusive end in sight if the recent dispute in Calgary, Canada, is any indication. A recently published study is being used to sway public and political opinion to reverse a previous decision the city took when they stopped the fluoridation program of their water five years ago.
However, according to a press release from the Fluoride Action Network, the new study contains a variety of questionable to downright shady concerns, including a blatant conflict of interest. Of course, it also should be noted that the Fluoride Action Network is an organization dedicated to “broadening awareness about the toxicity of fluoride compounds,” as quoted from their own website.
While it might not be an issue directly pertinent to the Rochester community, it does highlight an important discussion as we find ourselves at the tail end of National Children’s Dental Health Month. It’s also something that isn’t readily thought about. Over 65% of parents using bottled water did not know what levels of fluoride it contained, according to one 2012 study in the Journal of Pediatric Dentistry.
One of the first points FAN brings up in their statement is the fact that while the study in question shows that tooth decay rates have gone up in Calgary, it conspicuously leaves out the part showing that a lot of the increase of tooth decay rates actually occurred when fluoride was still in the water.
“[The study is] not a valid assessment of the effect of fluoridation cessation,” said Dr. Trevor Sheldon, Dean of Hull York Medical School and a scientist who specializes in studying the effectiveness of health care interventions, including fluoridation. He went on to say that the omitted data, “shows a higher average annual rate of increase in [tooth decay] in the period before cessation (7%) than in the period which includes years after cessation in Calgary (5%).”
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the study though lies in the motive. The study’s lead author, Lindsay McLaren, is far from an unbiased researcher simply looking for answers. She’s currently a member of the Alberta Health Services’ Community Water Fluoridation committee, has written/spoken out about the benefits of fluoride many times and was even behind lobbying campaigns for fluoride in the past.
“The aggressive, orchestrated way this study has been rolled out to pressure city councilors to resume fluoridation raises the specter of a politically motivated study,” said Michael Connett, an attorney and FAN Executive Director.
Obviously, Connett and his side have an interest in this debate as well. Perhaps the most important thing to remember is that the stuff we put into our bodies can have a big impact on our lives. At the end of the day it’s up to individuals to do their own extensive research from both angles and make their own choice.
No Comment