Fake Banner
    Bottled Water is NOT linked to More Tooth Decay, Study Shows
    By Sally Stride | August 7th 2012 04:59 PM | 6 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    “While bottled water users had significantly lower fluoride intakes, this study found no conclusive evidence of an association with increased caries,” according to “An investigation of bottled water use and caries in the mixed dentition,” published in the Journal of Public Health Dentistry.

    American Dental Association spokesperson Dr.Jonathan Shenkin said, "There has been no research to show using bottled water causes tooth decay," in a Healthday.com article.

    Dr. Burton Edelstein agrees. He is president of the DC-based Children's Dental Health Project and Columbia University dentistry professor who describes the increasing prevalence of tooth decay among young children as "alarming."

    Tooth decay rates are soaring despite 67 years of fluoridation, 57 years of fluoridated toothpaste, a glut of fluoridated dental products, and a fluoride-saturated food supply. The Pew Foundation said that “preventable dental conditions were the primary reason for 830,590 ER visits by Americans in 2009—a 16 percent increase from 2006.”

    No US child is fluoride-deficient. But up to 60% show signs of fluoride-overdose (discolored teeth), according to the Centers for Disease Control. The U.S. Surgeon General reports that excessive fluoride increases susceptibility to cavities.

    To avoid crippling skeletal fluorosis, the Environmental Protection Agency sets 4 parts per million (ppm) or 4 milligrams per quart of water as a “safe” water level.. Many Americans exceed that amount from all sources. The Iowa Fluoride Study's principal investigator, Steven Levy, found that some babies ingest 6 milligrams of fluoride daily. Furthermore, Levy found 90% of 3-month-olds consumed over their recommended fluoride levels. 

    "There is no specific nutritional requirement for fluoride...,” Levy et al. admit.


    Levy also found:

    -- 77% of soft drinks had fluoride levels greater than 0.60 ppm
    -- two ounces of baby chicken food provides baby's maximum dose
    -- foods high in fluoride -- teas, dry infant cereals, dried chicken, and seafood
    -- grape juice, especially white, contains very high fluoride levels
    -- 42% of juice and juice drinks tested revealed unlabeled fluoride levels greater than 0.60 ppm
    -- cereals processed in fluoridated areas contain from 3.8 to 6.3 ppm fluoride

    The USDA provides a database of fluoride contents of food http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/Fluoride.html

    Reports that bottled-water drinkers risk more cavities are unsubstantiated. The Wall Street Journal reported, "Little research has been done on the use of bottled water and risk of tooth decay," dental experts concede. 

    "For children's dental health measures,it was found that fluoridation rates were not significantly related to the measures of either caries or overall condition of the teeth for urban or rural areas." (West Virginia University Rural Health Research Center, 2012)

    "It may...be that fluoridation ofdrinking water does not have a strong protective effect against early childhood caries (cavities)," reports dentist Howard Pollick, University of California, and colleagues, in the Winter 2003 Journal of Public Health Dentistry.

    Even when fluoridated water is the most consumed item, cavities are extensive when diets are poor, according to Caries Research.

    Burt and colleagues studied low-income African-American adults, 14-years-old and over, living in fluoridated
    Detroit, Michigan. Yet, 83% of this population has severe tooth decay and diets high in sugars and fats, and low in fruits and vegetables.

    "The most frequently reported food on a daily basis was [fluoridated] tap water," write Burt's research team. Second were [probably fluoridated] soft drinks and third were potato chips (which can contain fluoride-containing pesticide residues).

    Tooth decay in fluoridated
    Detroit's toddlers' teeth is also shocking. Almost all of Detroit's five-year-olds have cavities and most of them go unfilled.

    The CDC and the scientific literature now tells us that ingesting fluoride does not reduce tooth decay.  So it’s no surprise that drinking fluoride-free bottled water is not linked to higher rates of tooth decay and that people who drink fluoridated tap water are not experiencing less tooth decay.

    Comments

    This article is filled with errors, and they are far too numerous to cover in a single comment. But here is one example: "Sally" writes that CDC believes that "ingesting fluoride does not reduce" tooth decay. That statement is patently false. All you need to do to confirm that her statement is false is to Google the terms "fluoridation" and "Centers for Disease Control and Prevention."

    You cannot trust anyone who would make such a patently false statement like this. Either she did a sloppy job at researching the article or she deliberately lied. Neither reason reflects well on her.

    Sallly is absolutely CORRECT. YOU need to stop giving false information. The CDC acknowledged that swallowing fluoride does not reduce decay, following Featherstone's research published in 1999. It also states that fluoridated water has too little fluoride to have any cariostatic effect. The only straw it now hangs onto is to claim, contrary to Featherstone's (a mainstream dental researcher) finding, that the small amount of fluoride washing over teeth helps remineralisation. But 5 international studies show this is untrue.

    This is a great article with important facts about the ineffectiveness and dangers of fluoridation. In fact, about 10 years ago the CDC told the truth and stated that fluoride may have a good effect applied topically, but it should never be swallowed. Under extreme pressure from all those who profit from selling this toxic waste fluoride to communities they changed their story. It did not change the truth.

    Fluoride is neither a nutrient nor essential for healthy teeth. No adult has ever walked out of their doctor's office with a prescription for the fluoride drug because it is deadly poison and the body has no known use for it. It is never included in any multi-vitamin form ulation. Drinking it to prevent tooth decay is as foolish as drinking sunscreen to prevent sunburn. Every fluoride toothpaste tube carries the warning "if swallowed, call a poison control center immediately."
    _
    Read the best scientific information on fluoridation in Dr. Paul Connett's book "The Case Against Fluoride," published last year. It contains over 1200 peer reviewed studies and sound scientific reasoning showing the ineffectiveness and dangers to health including cancer, thyroid & pineal gland damage, broken hips from brittle bones, lowered IQ, kidney disease, and other serious health problems.

    I salute the information that you have in this article. I will try to find the article where CDC and ADA have actually announced that fluoride is not essentially needed by our teeth and body. I have read from different links supporting info on what you have just stated:
    http://curetoothdecay.com/blog/fluoride-myth-busting-part-one-elena-chri...
    http://curetoothdecay.com/blog/fluoride-myth-busting-part-2-elena-christ...
    http://www.curetoothdecay.com/Dentistry/Fluoride.htm
    http://www.curetoothdecay.com/Dentistry/fluoride_water.htm
    http://curetoothdecay.com/blog/start-a-fluoride-class-action-lawsuit-in-...

    I know that tooth decay is not something to be prevented by just fluoride. Good nutrition will heal tooth infection. You may read on Cure Tooth Decay of Ramiel Nagel and you will understand what I am talking about.

    Anonymous is correct; this article is incredibly misleading from a scientific standpoint.

    By the way, "Sally Stride" is an alias used by Carol Kopf, who is a staff member of the anti-fluoride group FAN (which stands for the Fluoride Action Network). I'm sure that Science 2.0 prefers to have contributing writers who are legitimately independent in their writing. But Carol and FAN espouse a lot of junk science. Read what the Institute for Science had to say about FAN and other anti-fluoride groups: http://www.scienceinmedicine.org/policy/papers/AntiFluoridationist.pdf

    Hank
    They don't need to be "indepdendent" - no one is independent, everyone works for someone - but they do need to be real names so using an alias is a no-no.