It’s kind of mind-blowing to consider, but it looks like we may finally be nearing the end of the fluoridation era. A US federal court has ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must address the risks of adding fluoride to our drinking water. Too much evidence now points to its potential for neurodevelopmental harm.
As UPI reported,
While District Court Judge Edward Chen was careful to note his decision “does not conclude with certainty that fluoridated water is injurious to public health,” he added that evidence of its potential risk was now enough that the EPA has to do something.
“In all, there is substantial and scientifically credible evidence establishing that fluoride poses a risk to human health; it is associated with a reduction in the IQ of children and is hazardous at dosages that are far too close to fluoride levels in the drinking water of the United States,” Chen wrote in his ruling….
It’s something biological dentists and hygienists have been saying for years. The impact on IQ is just the tip of the iceberg, though. Many more health risks have been scientifically documented over the years, affecting adults as well as kids. There are also better ways of preventing decay, tackling root causes instead of trying to mitigate the damage done by poor nutrition, poor hygiene, and an imbalanced oral microbiome.
Interestingly, Judge Chen’s ruling comes at a time when science is providing new evidence that fluoridation isn’t even all that effective.
One study, published this past August, analyzed 10 years of data from 17.8 million patients aged 12 and up who received dental care through the United Kingdom’s National Health Service. Patients were grouped according to whether they had “optimally” fluoridated water (at least 0.7 mg/L) or not. To make the comparison fair, the researchers matched people from both groups based on similar characteristics, then analyzed data from 6.4 million patients.
The results showed that those in the fluoride group needed just 3% fewer invasive dental treatments. Their DMFT scores – a measure of Decayed, Missing, or Filled Teeth – were a whopping 2% lower.
Wow.
There was no difference in the number of missing teeth between groups, nor was there any strong evidence that fluoride reduced oral health inequalities between different socioeconomic groups (one common justification for fluoridation), leading the authors to conclude that
Receipt of optimal water fluoridation 2010-2020 resulted in very small positive health effects which may not be meaningful for individuals.
This was followed by an updated Cochrane review on the impact of fluoridation on children’s dental health in particular. Analysis of relevant studies published after 1975 found that while adding fluoride to drinking water might slightly reduce tooth decay in baby teeth, there was precious little evidence of its having any impact at all on permanent teeth.
What’s more, the authors suggest that fluoridation now appears to be less effective than it was decades ago, before fluoride became practically standard in big brand toothpastes and other oral hygiene products.
Results from studies conducted after 1975 suggest that the initiation of water fluoridation schemes may lead to slightly less tooth decay in children’s baby teeth. Analysis of these studies, covering a total of 2,908 children in the UK and Australia, estimates that fluoridation may lead to an average of 0.24 fewer decayed baby teeth per child.
However, the estimate of effect comes with uncertainty, meaning it’s possible that the more recent schemes have no benefit. By comparison, an analysis of studies with 5,708 children conducted in 1975 or earlier estimated that fluoridation reduced the number of decayed baby teeth, on average by 2.1 per child.
The same contemporary studies (conducted after 1975) also looked at the number of children with no decay in their baby teeth. The analysis found that fluoridation may increase the number of children with no tooth decay by 3 percentage points, again with the possibility of no benefit.
Again, wow.
And what makes this study especially compelling is that Cochrane Reviews are considered the gold standard in medical research, authoritative and deeply trusted.
Perhaps more public health officials will start to listen.
