Water fluoridation controversy: Difference between revisions

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Statements against water fluoridation: undue weight to this; let's get some consensus on talk page before adding; appears end run around blacklisting
Reverted Yobol. These 2 additions have been put after long discussions in the talk page.
Line 52: Line 52:
Citing impacts on the environment, the economy and on health, the [[Green Party of Canada]] seeks a ban on artificial fluoridation products. The Canadian Green Party adopted in 2010 a platform position which considers water fluoridation to be unsustainable.<ref>{{cite web |author=Rodriguez-Larrain, Claudia |title=Ban on artificial water fluoridation, a new policy |publisher=Green Party of Canada |url=http://greenparty.ca/blogs/15909/2010-08-26/engage-elizabeth-may-new-policy-ban-fluoridation }}</ref>
Citing impacts on the environment, the economy and on health, the [[Green Party of Canada]] seeks a ban on artificial fluoridation products. The Canadian Green Party adopted in 2010 a platform position which considers water fluoridation to be unsustainable.<ref>{{cite web |author=Rodriguez-Larrain, Claudia |title=Ban on artificial water fluoridation, a new policy |publisher=Green Party of Canada |url=http://greenparty.ca/blogs/15909/2010-08-26/engage-elizabeth-may-new-policy-ban-fluoridation }}</ref>


[[Arvid Carlsson]], winner of the 2000 [[Nobel Prize for Medicine]] for his work on [[Parkinson's disease]], opposes water fluoridation.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/artikel_498843.svd |title=(title in Swedish) |trans_title=Fluoride in drinking water can cause cancer |newspaper=Svenska Dagbladet |language=Swedish}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author=Torell, P.; Forsman, B. |title=(title in Swedish) |trans_title=Arvid Carlsson's fluoride ponderings 1978 |language=Swedish |journal=Tandlakartidningen |volume=71 |issue=3 |pages=142–57 |date=February 1979 |pmid=287207 |url=}}</ref> He took part in the debate in Sweden, where he helped to convince Parliament that it should be illegal due to ethics. He believes that it violates modern pharmacological principles, which indicate that medications should be tailored to individuals.<ref>{{cite book |author=Bryson, Christopher |title=The Fluoride Deception |page=[http://books.google.com/books?id=q3v_JgjZ6fsC&printsec=frontcover#PPA240,M1 240] }}</ref>
[[Arvid Carlsson]], winner of the 2000 [[Nobel Prize for Medicine]], opposes water fluoridation.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/artikel_498843.svd |title=(title in Swedish) |trans_title=Fluoride in drinking water can cause cancer |newspaper=Svenska Dagbladet |language=Swedish}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |author=Torell, P.; Forsman, B. |title=(title in Swedish) |trans_title=Arvid Carlsson's fluoride ponderings 1978 |language=Swedish |journal=Tandlakartidningen |volume=71 |issue=3 |pages=142–57 |date=February 1979 |pmid=287207 |url=}}</ref> He took part in the debate in Sweden, where he helped to convince Parliament that it should be illegal due to ethics. He believes that it violates modern pharmacological principles, which indicate that medications should be tailored to individuals.<ref>{{cite book |author=Bryson, Christopher |title=The Fluoride Deception |page=[http://books.google.com/books?id=q3v_JgjZ6fsC&printsec=frontcover#PPA240,M1 240] }}</ref>

[[Yael German]], Minister of Health of [[Israel]] Opposes Water fluoridation. In 2014, She has ended Israel decades of water fluoridation practice. In her view it is better to provide fluoride in other ways to “target audiences” such as poor children, who were unlikely to brush their teeth regularly with fluoride toothpaste, she sees water fluoridation as a health risk: “It must be known to you that fluoridation can cause harm to the health of the chronically ill and pregnant women,".<ref>
* [[Ynet]]: http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-4366896,00.html
* [[The Jerusalem Post]]: http://www.jpost.com/Health/Article.aspx?id=310965
* [[Calcalist]]: http://www.calcalist.co.il/local/articles/0,7340,L-3599895,00.html
* [[Israel HaYom]]: http://www.israelhayom.co.il/article/83141
* [[Maariv (newspaper)]]: http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/459/984.html?hp=1&cat=479&loc=12
* [[Haaretz]]: http://www.haaretz.co.il/news/health/1.1991841
* [[TheMarker]]: http://www.themarker.com/consumer/health/1.1991891
* [[Supreme Court of Israel]], July 2013, ruling: "''We have noted before us the State’s obligation to stop the fluorination of drinking water within one year''. Due to the cancellation of the Original Regulations and the fact that Regulation 20 of the New Regulations shall expire within a year, and since neither the Petitioners nor the Respondents have indicated another source of authorization for water fluorination, the Petition has been exhausted and is to be stricken. Incidentally, it should be noted that apparently, the way by which the New Regulations were phrased is not optimal as far as the clarity of the law is concerned – once the Respondents have decided to stop the water fluorination, it would have been better to set the rule of non-fluorination as a primary arrangement, and the continuation of the fluorination as a temporary transitory provision, instead of the manner by which it had been done. http://elyon1.court.gov.il/files/12/730/081/a12/12081730.a12.pdf (page 2, #3) </ref><ref>
* The "Public Health Regulations-2013" have [http://www.health.gov.il/Subjects/Environmental_Health/drinking_water/Pages/default.aspx officially commenced] on August 25, 2013 (See in Hebrew: תקנות מי השתיה בתוקף מ - 25.8.2013)
*A copy of the regulations is available on the Health Ministry website [http://www.health.gov.il/Subjects/Environmental_Health/drinking_water/Documents/Briut47-Eng.pdf in English as well]. '''Regulation #20 (Fluoridation)''', is the regulation that has enforced and enforces public water fluoridation in israel. '''Regulation #40 (Temporary Provision -Fluoridation)''' says "Regulation 20 shall remain in force for a period of one year from the commencement date."</ref>

Leading water fluoridation critic<ref>[http://www.ncahf.org/digest13/13-15.html Consumer Health Digest #13-15], [[The National Council Against Health Fraud]]</ref><ref>[http://www.psr.org/chapters/oregon/paul-connett.html Paul Connett], [[Physicians for Social Responsibility]]</ref>, Paul Connett, [[emeritus professor]] of chemistry at [[St. Lawrence University]] and executive director of the Fluoride Action Network<ref>[https://pubs.acs.org/cen/government/84/8436gov1.html Fluoride Risks Are Still A Challenge], [[Chemical & Engineering News]]</ref>, one of the largest organizations opposing water fluoridation<ref>[http://www.cdha.ca/pdfs/Profession/Resources/ProbeFluoride.pdf The Fluoride Dialogue:
CDHA Position Statements], [[Canadian Dental Hygienists Association]]</ref>, compiled and presented to the Irish Fluoridation Forum<ref>http://www.fluoridationforum.ie</ref> in October 2000 "50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation".<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2001050/ Controversy - Adding fluoride to water supplies], (Reference #21) , [[BMJ]] </ref><ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2222595/ When public action undermines public health: a critical examination of antifluoridationist literature], (References #57, #84), [[Aust New Zealand Health Policy (Journal)]]</ref>, The paper led the Department of Health of Ireland, and the Ministry of Health of New Zealand, in 2005 to post their rebuttal to Connet's paper<ref>[http://www.dohc.ie/other_health_issues/dental_research/ A critical appraisal of, and commentary on, “50 Reasons to oppose fluoridation”], [[Department of Health (Ireland)]]</ref><ref>[http://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/response-50-reasons-oppose-fluoridation_1.pdf Response to a list of “50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation” compiled by Dr Connett*], [[Ministry of Health (New Zealand)]]</ref>, to which Connett responded on his website.


== Neutral statement ==
== Neutral statement ==

Revision as of 17:58, 2 April 2014

The water fluoridation controversy arises from moral, ethical,[1] political, and safety concerns regarding the fluoridation of public water supplies. The controversy occurs mainly in English-speaking countries, as Continental Europe has ceased water fluoridation.[2] Those opposed argue that water fluoridation may cause serious health problems, is not effective enough to justify the costs, and has a dosage that cannot be precisely controlled.[3][4][5] In some countries, fluoride is added to table salt.[6]

At the dosage recommended for water fluoridation, the only known adverse effect is dental fluorosis, which can alter the appearance of children's teeth during tooth development.[7] Dental fluorosis is cosmetic and unlikely to represent any other effect on public health.[8] Despite opponents' concerns, water fluoridation has been effective at reducing cavities in both children and adults.[7]

Opposition to fluoridation has existed since its initiation in the 1940s.[2] During the 1950s and 1960s, some opponents of water fluoridation suggested that fluoridation was a communist plot to undermine public health.[9]

Ethics

Many who oppose water fluoridation consider it to be a form of compulsory mass medication.[10] They argue that consent by all water consumers cannot be achieved, nor can water suppliers accurately control the exact levels of fluoride that individuals receive, nor monitor their response.

Water fluoridation was characterized in at least one journal publication as a violation of the Nuremberg Code and the Council of Europe's Biomedical Convention of 1999.[1] A dentistry professor and a philosopher argued in a dentistry journal that the moral status for advocating water fluoridation is "at best indeterminate" and could even be considered immoral. They asserted that it infringes upon autonomy based on uncertain evidence, with possible negative effects.[11] Another journal article suggested applying the precautionary principle to this controversy, which calls for public policy to reflect a conservative approach to minimize risk in the setting where harm is possible (but not necessarily confirmed) and where the science is not settled.[12]

In the United Kingdom, the Green Party refers to fluoride as a poison, claims that water fluoridation violates Article 35 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, is banned by the UK poisons act of 1972, violates Articles 3 and 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and raises issues under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.[10]

Safety

Main article: Water fluoridation § Safety

Fluoridation has little effect on risk of bone fracture (broken bones); it may result in slightly lower fracture risk than either excessively high levels of fluoridation or no fluoridation.[8] There is no clear association between fluoridation and cancer or deaths due to cancer, both for cancer in general and also specifically for bone cancer and osteosarcoma.[8][13] Other adverse effects lack sufficient evidence to reach a confident conclusion.[13] A Finnish study published in 1997 showed that fear that water is fluoridated may have a psychological effect with a large variety of symptoms, regardless of whether the water is actually fluoridated.[14]

Fluoride can occur naturally in water in concentrations well above recommended levels, which can have several long-term adverse effects, including severe dental fluorosis, skeletal fluorosis, and weakened bones.[15] The World Health Organization recommends a guideline maximum fluoride value of 1.5 mg/L as a level at which fluorosis should be minimal.[16]

In rare cases improper implementation of water fluoridation can result in overfluoridation that causes outbreaks of acute fluoride poisoning, with symptoms that include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Three such outbreaks were reported in the U.S. between 1991 and 1998, caused by fluoride concentrations as high as 220 mg/L; in the 1992 Alaska outbreak, 262 people became ill and one person died.[17] In 2010, approximately 60 gallons of fluoride were released into the water supply in Asheboro, North Carolina in 90 minutes—an amount that was intended to be released in a 24-hour period.[18]

Like other common water additives such as chlorine, hydrofluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride decrease pH and cause a small increase of corrosivity, but this problem is easily addressed by increasing the pH.[19] Although it has been hypothesized that hydrofluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride might increase human lead uptake from water, a 2006 statistical analysis did not support concerns that these chemicals cause higher blood lead concentrations in children.[20] Trace levels of arsenic and lead may be present in fluoride compounds added to water, but no credible evidence exists that their presence is of concern: concentrations are below measurement limits.[19]

The effect of water fluoridation on the natural environment has been investigated, and no adverse effects have been established. Issues studied have included fluoride concentrations in groundwater and downstream rivers; lawns, gardens, and plants; consumption of plants grown in fluoridated water; air emissions; and equipment noise.[19]

Efficacy

Main article: Water fluoridation § Effectiveness

Water fluoridation is effective at reducing cavities in both children and adults.[7] Earlier studies showed that water fluoridation led to reductions of 50–60% in childhood cavities; more recent studies show lower reductions (18–40%), likely due to increasing use of fluoride from other sources, notably toothpaste, and also to the halo effect of food and drink made in fluoridated areas and consumed in unfluoridated ones.[21]

A 2000 systematic review found that water fluoridation was statistically associated with a decreased proportion of children with cavities (the median of mean decreases was 14.6%, the range −5 to 64%), and with a decrease in decayed, missing, and filled primary teeth (the median of mean decreases was 2.25 teeth, the range 0.5–4.4 teeth),[13] which is roughly equivalent to preventing 40% of cavities.[22] The review found that the evidence was of moderate quality: many studies did not attempt to reduce observer bias, control for confounding factors, report variance measures, or use appropriate analysis. Although no major differences between natural and artificial fluoridation were apparent, the evidence was inadequate to reach a conclusion about any differences.[13] Fluoride also prevents cavities in adults of all ages. There are fewer studies in adults however, and the design of water fluoridation studies in adults is inferior to that of studies of self- or clinically applied fluoride. A 2007 meta-analysis found that water fluoridation prevented an estimated 27% of cavities in adults (95% confidence interval [CI] 19–34%), about the same fraction as prevented by exposure to any delivery method of fluoride (29% average, 95% CI: 16–42%).[23] A 2002 systematic review found strong evidence that water fluoridation is effective at reducing overall tooth decay in communities.[24]

Most countries in Europe have experienced substantial declines in cavities without the use of water fluoridation.[25] For example, in Finland and Germany, tooth decay rates remained stable or continued to decline after water fluoridation stopped. Fluoridation may be useful in the U.S. because unlike most European countries, the U.S. does not have school-based dental care, many children do not visit a dentist regularly, and for many U.S. children water fluoridation is the prime source of exposure to fluoride.[26] The effectiveness of water fluoridation can vary according to circumstances such as whether preventive dental care is free to all children.[27]

Some studies suggest that fluoridation reduces oral health inequalities between the rich and poor, but the evidence is limited.[25] There is anecdotal but not scientific evidence that fluoride allows more time for dental treatment by slowing the progression of tooth decay, and that it simplifies treatment by causing most cavities to occur in pits and fissures of teeth.[28]

Statements against water fluoridation

American biochemist Dean Burk, after his retirement, devoted himself to his opposition to water fluoridation.[29][30] According to Burk "fluoridation is a form of public mass murder."[31][32]

The International Chiropractor's Association opposes mass water fluoridation, considering it "possibly harmful and deprivation of the rights of citizens to be free from unwelcome mass medication."[33]

In the United States, the Sierra Club opposes mandatory water fluoridation. Some reasons cited include possible adverse health effects, harm to the environment, and risks involving sensitive populations.[34]

Citing impacts on the environment, the economy and on health, the Green Party of Canada seeks a ban on artificial fluoridation products. The Canadian Green Party adopted in 2010 a platform position which considers water fluoridation to be unsustainable.[35]

Arvid Carlsson, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, opposes water fluoridation.[36][37] He took part in the debate in Sweden, where he helped to convince Parliament that it should be illegal due to ethics. He believes that it violates modern pharmacological principles, which indicate that medications should be tailored to individuals.[38]

Yael German, Minister of Health of Israel Opposes Water fluoridation. In 2014, She has ended Israel decades of water fluoridation practice. In her view it is better to provide fluoride in other ways to “target audiences” such as poor children, who were unlikely to brush their teeth regularly with fluoride toothpaste, she sees water fluoridation as a health risk: “It must be known to you that fluoridation can cause harm to the health of the chronically ill and pregnant women,".[39][40]

Leading water fluoridation critic[41][42], Paul Connett, emeritus professor of chemistry at St. Lawrence University and executive director of the Fluoride Action Network[43], one of the largest organizations opposing water fluoridation[44], compiled and presented to the Irish Fluoridation Forum[45] in October 2000 "50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation".[46][47], The paper led the Department of Health of Ireland, and the Ministry of Health of New Zealand, in 2005 to post their rebuttal to Connet's paper[48][49], to which Connett responded on his website.

Neutral statement

On 15 April 2008, the United States National Kidney Foundation (NKF) updated their position on fluoridation for the first time since 1981.[50] Formerly an endorser of water fluoridation, the group is now neutral on the practice. The report states, "Individuals with CKD [Chronic kidney disease] should be notified of the potential risk of fluoride exposure by providing information on the NKF website including a link to the report in brief of the NRC and the Kidney Health Australia position paper."[51][52][53] Calling for additional research, the foundation's 2008 position paper states, however, that there is insufficient evidence to recommend fluoride-free drinking water for patients with renal disease.[54]

Statements for water fluoridation

The fluoridation of public water has been hailed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control as one of the top medical achievements of the 20th century.[55] It is ranked No. 9 on this list ahead of "Recognition of tobacco use as a health hazard."[56]

The American Dental Association calls water fluoridation "one of the safest and most beneficial, cost-effective public health measures for preventing, controlling, and in some cases reversing, tooth decay."[57]

Health Canada supports fluoridation, citing a number of international scientific reviews that indicate "there is no link between any adverse health effects and exposure to fluoride in drinking water at levels that are below the maximum acceptable concentration of 1.5 mg/L."[58]

The World Health Organization says fluoridation is an effective way to prevent tooth decay in poor communities. "In some developed countries, the health and economic benefits of fluoridation may be small, but particularly important in deprived areas, where water fluoridation may be a key factor in reducing inequalities in dental health."[59]

A 2008 meta-analysis of published research into fluoride's effect on osteoporosis found that daily doses of up to 20 mg fluoride significantly increased bone mineral density and reduced fracture risk.[60]

Sociologist Brian Martin states that sociologists have typically viewed opposition to water fluoridation as irrational, although critics of this position have argued that this rests on an uncritical attitude toward scientific knowledge.[2]

Use throughout the world

Main article: Fluoridation by country

Water fluoridation is used in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, and Australia, and a handful of other countries. The following nations previously fluoridated their water, but stopped the practice, with the years when water fluoridation started and stopped in parentheses:

  • Federal Republic of Germany (1952–1971)
  • Sweden (1952–1971)
  • Netherlands (1953–1976)
  • Czechoslovakia (1955–1990)
  • German Democratic Republic (1959–1990)
  • Soviet Union (1960–1990)
  • Finland (1959–1993)
  • Japan (1952–1972)[61]

In the United Kingdom a Strategic Health Authority can direct a water company to fluoridate the water supply in an area if it is technically possible. The strategic health authority must consult with the local community and businesses in the affected area. The water company will act as a contractor in any new schemes and cannot refuse to fluoridate the supply.[62]

In areas with complex water sources, water fluoridation is more difficult and more costly. Alternative fluoridation methods have been proposed, and implemented in some parts of the world. The World Health Organization (WHO) is currently assessing the effects of fluoridated toothpaste, milk fluoridation and salt fluoridation in Africa, Asia, and Europe. The WHO supports fluoridation of water in some areas.[63]

History

Main article: History of water fluoridation

The first large fluoridation controversy occurred in Wisconsin in 1950. Fluoridation opponents questioned the ethics, safety, and efficacy of fluoridation.[64] New Zealand was the second country to fluoridate, and similar controversies arose there.[65] Fears about fluoride were likely exacerbated by the reputation of fluoride compounds as insect poisons and by early literature which tended to use terms such as "toxic" and "low grade chronic fluoride poisoning" to describe mottling from consumption of 6 mg/L of fluoride prior to tooth eruption, a level of consumption not expected to occur under controlled fluoridation.[66] When voted upon, the outcomes tend to be negative, and thus fluoridation has had a history of gaining through administrative orders in North America.[64] Theories for why the public tends to reject fluoridation include "alienation from mainstream" society, but evidence for that is weak. Another interpretation is confusion introduced during the referendum.[64] Some studies of the sociology of opposition to water fluoridation have been criticized for having an uncritical attitude toward scientific knowledge.[2]

Outside North America, water fluoridation was adopted in some European countries, but in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Denmark and Sweden banned fluoridation when government panels found insufficient evidence of safety, and the Netherlands banned water fluoridation when "a group of medical practitioners presented evidence" that it caused negative effects in a percentage of the population.

Conspiracy theories

Flier issued in May 1955 by the Keep America Committee, alleging a conspiracy theory that water fluoridation is a communist plot.

Water fluoridation has frequently been the subject of conspiracy theories. During the "Red Scare" in the United States during the late 1940s and 1950s, and to a lesser extent in the 1960s, activists on the far right of American politics routinely asserted that fluoridation was part of a far-reaching plot to impose a socialist or communist regime. They also opposed other public health programs, notably mass vaccination and mental health services.[67] Their views were influenced by opposition to a number of major social and political changes that had happened in recent years: the growth of internationalism, particularly the UN and its programs; the introduction of social welfare provisions, particularly the various programs established by the New Deal; and government efforts to reduce perceived inequalities in the social structure of the United States.[68]

Some took the view that fluoridation was only the first stage of a plan to control the American people. Fluoridation, it was claimed, was merely a stepping-stone on the way to implementing more ambitious programs. Others asserted the existence of a plot by communists and the United Nations to "deplete the brainpower and sap the strength of a generation of American children". Dr. Charles Bett, a prominent anti-fluoridationist, charged that fluoridation was "better THAN USING THE ATOM BOMB because the atom bomb has to be made, has to be transported to the place it is to be set off while POISONOUS FLUORINE has been placed right beside the water supplies by the Americans themselves ready to be dumped into the water mains whenever a Communist desires!" Similarly, a right-wing newsletter, the American Capsule News, claimed that "the Soviet General Staff is very happy about it. Anytime they get ready to strike, and their 5th column takes over, there are tons and tons of this poison "standing by" municipal and military water systems ready to be poured in within 15 minutes."[9]

This viewpoint led to major controversies over public health programs in the US, most notably in the case of the Alaska Mental Health Enabling Act controversy of 1956.[69] In the case of fluoridation, the controversy had a direct impact on local programs. During the 1950s and 1960s, referendums on introducing fluoridation were defeated in over a thousand Florida communities. Although the opposition was overcome in time, it was not until as late as the 1990s that fluoridated water was drunk by the majority of the population of the United States.[67]

The communist conspiracy argument declined in influence by the mid-1960s, becoming associated in the public mind with irrational fear and paranoia. It was portrayed in Stanley Kubrick's 1964 film Dr. Strangelove, in which the character General Jack D. Ripper initiates a nuclear war in the hope of thwarting a communist plot to "sap and impurify" the "precious bodily fluids" of the American people with fluoridated water. Another satire appeared in the 1967 movie In Like Flint, in which a character's fear of fluoridation is used to indicate that he is insane. Some anti-fluoridationists claimed that the conspiracy theories were damaging their goals; Dr. Frederick Exner, an anti-fluoridation campaigner in the early 1960s, told a conference: "most people are not prepared to believe that fluoridation is a communist plot, and if you say it is, you are successfully ridiculed by the promoters. It is being done, effectively, every day ... some of the people on our side are the fluoridators' 'fifth column'."[9]

In 1987, Ian E. Stephens authored a self-published booklet, an extract of which was published in the Australian new age publication Nexus Magazine in 1995. In it he claimed he was told by and individual named "Charles Elliot Perkins" that: "Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluoride will in time reduce an individual's power to resist domination by slowly poisoning and narcotising a certain area of the brain and will thus make him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him ... Both the Germans and the Russians added sodium fluoride to the drinking water of prisoners of war to make them stupid and docile."

These statements have been dismissed by reputable Holocaust historians as untrue, but they are regularly repeated to the present day in conspiracy publications and websites.[70]

In 2004, on the U.S. television program Democracy Now, investigative journalist and author of the book The Fluoride Deception, Christopher Bryson claimed that, “the post-war campaign to fluoridate drinking water was less a public health innovation than a public relations ploy sponsored by industrial users of fluoride—including the government’s nuclear weapons program.”[71]

Court cases

Europe

Water was fluoridated in large parts of the Netherlands from 1960 to 1973, at which point the Supreme Court of the Netherlands declared fluoridation of drinking water unauthorized.[72] The Dutch Court decided that authorities had no legal basis for adding chemicals to drinking water if they did not also improve safety. It was also stated as support that consumers cannot choose a different tap water provider.[73] Drinking water has not been fluoridated in any part of the Netherlands since 1973.

In Ryan v. Attorney General (1965), the Supreme Court of Ireland held that water fluoridation did not infringe the plaintiff's right to bodily integrity.[74] The court found that such a right to bodily integrity did exist, despite the fact that it was not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution of Ireland, thus establishing the doctrine of unenumerated rights in Irish constitutional law.

United States

See also: Water fluoridation in the United States

Fluoridation has been the subject of many court cases wherein activists have sued municipalities, asserting that their rights to consent to medical treatment and due process are infringed by mandatory water fluoridation.[1] Individuals have sued municipalities for a number of illnesses that they believe were caused by fluoridation of the city's water supply. In most of these cases, the courts have held in favor of cities, finding no or only a tenuous connection between health problems and widespread water fluoridation.[75] To date, no federal appellate court or state court of last resort (i.e., state supreme court) has found water fluoridation to be unlawful.[76]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c Cross DW, Carton RJ (2003). "Fluoridation: a violation of medical ethics and human rights". Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health. 9 (1): 24–9. PMID 12749628.
  2. ^ a b c d Martin B. (1989) The sociology of the fluoridation controversy: a reexamination. Sociological Quarterly.
  3. ^ American Public Health Association Community Water Fluoridation in the United States 10-28-’08 http://www.apha.org/advocacy/policy/policysearch/default.htm?id=1373
  4. ^ Recommendations for using Fluoride to Prevent and Control Dental Caries in the United States, Centers for Disease Control 8-17-’01 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm
  5. ^ Autio-Gold, Jaana; Courts, Frank, Assessing the effect of fluoride varnish on early enamel carious lesions in the primary dentition, J. Amer. Dent. Assn. http://www.jada.info/cgi/content/full/132/9/1247
  6. ^ "Critical review of any new evidence on the hazard profile, health effects, and human exposure to fluoride and the fluoridating agents of drinking water" (PDF)., citing Götzfried, Franz (2006). "Production of fluoridated salt". Schweizer Monatsschrift fur Zahnmedizin. 116 (4): 367–370. PMID 16708522.
  7. ^ a b c Parnell C, Whelton H, O'Mullane D. Water fluoridation. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2009;10(3):141–8. PMID 19772843.
  8. ^ a b c National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia). A systematic review of the efficacy and safety of fluoridation [PDF]. 2007 [Retrieved 2009-10-13]. ISBN 1-86496-415-4. Summary: Yeung CA. A systematic review of the efficacy and safety of fluoridation. Evid Based Dent. 2008;9(2):39–43. doi:10.1038/sj.ebd.6400578. PMID 18584000.
  9. ^ a b c Johnston, Robert D (2004). The Politics of Healing. Routledge. p. 136. ISBN 0-415-93339-0.
  10. ^ a b UK Green Party. (2003). Water fluoridation contravenes UK law, EU directives and the European Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Press office briefing. accessdate 2008-08-03
  11. ^ Cohen H, Locker D. (2002). The Science and Ethics of Water Fluoridation. J. Can. Dent. Assoc., 2001; 67(10) 578–80.
  12. ^ Tickner J, Coffin M (March 2006). "What does the precautionary principle mean for evidence-based dentistry?". J. Evid. Based Dent. Pract. 6 (1): 6–15. doi:10.1016/j.jebdp.2005.12.006. PMID 17138389.
  13. ^ a b c d McDonagh M, Whiting P, Bradley M et al. A systematic review of public water fluoridation [PDF]; 2000. Report website: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Fluoridation of drinking water: a systematic review of its efficacy and safety; 2000 [Retrieved 2009-05-26]. Authors' summary: McDonagh MS, Whiting PF, Wilson PM et al.. Systematic review of water fluoridation [PDF]. BMJ. 2000;321(7265):855–9. doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7265.855. PMID 11021861. PMC 27492. Authors' commentary: Treasure ET, Chestnutt IG, Whiting P, McDonagh M, Wilson P, Kleijnen J. The York review—a systematic review of public water fluoridation: a commentary. Br Dent J. 2002;192(9):495–7. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.4801410a. PMID 12047121.
  14. ^ Lamberg M, Hausen H, Vartiainen T. Symptoms experienced during periods of actual and supposed water fluoridation. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997;25(4):291–5. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0528.1997.tb00942.x. PMID 9332806.
  15. ^ Fawell J, Bailey K, Chilton J, Dahi E, Fewtrell L, Magara Y. Fluoride in Drinking-water [PDF]. World Health Organization; 2006. ISBN 92-4-156319-2. Human health effects. p. 29–36.
  16. ^ Fawell J, Bailey K, Chilton J, Dahi E, Fewtrell L, Magara Y. Fluoride in Drinking-water [PDF]. World Health Organization; 2006. ISBN 92-4-156319-2. Guidelines and standards. p. 37–9.
  17. ^ Balbus JM, Lang ME. Is the water safe for my baby?. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2001;48(5):1129–52, viii. doi:10.1016/S0031-3955(05)70365-5. PMID 11579665.
  18. ^ Asheboro notifies residents of over-fluoridation of water. 2010-06-29. Fox 8.
  19. ^ a b c Pollick HF. Water fluoridation and the environment: current perspective in the United States [PDF]. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2004;10(3):343–50. PMID 15473093.
  20. ^ Macek MD, Matte TD, Sinks T, Malvitz DM. Blood lead concentrations in children and method of water fluoridation in the United States, 1988–1994. Environ Health Perspect. 2006;114(1):130–4. doi:10.1289/ehp.8319. PMID 16393670. PMC 1332668.
  21. ^ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommendations for using fluoride to prevent and control dental caries in the United States. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001;50(RR-14):1–42. PMID 11521913.
  22. ^ Worthington H, Clarkson J. The evidence base for topical fluorides. Community Dent Health. 2003;20(2):74–6. PMID 12914024.
  23. ^ Griffin SO, Regnier E, Griffin PM, Huntley V. Effectiveness of fluoride in preventing caries in adults. J Dent Res. 2007;86(5):410–5. doi:10.1177/154405910708600504. PMID 17452559. Summary: Yeung CA. Fluoride prevents caries among adults of all ages. Evid Based Dent. 2007;8(3):72–3. doi:10.1038/sj.ebd.6400506. PMID 17891121.
  24. ^ Truman BI, Gooch BF, Sulemana I et al.. Reviews of evidence on interventions to prevent dental caries, oral and pharyngeal cancers, and sports-related craniofacial injuries [PDF]. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(1 Suppl):21–54. doi:10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00449-X. PMID 12091093.
  25. ^ a b Pizzo G, Piscopo MR, Pizzo I, Giuliana G. Community water fluoridation and caries prevention: a critical review. Clin Oral Investig. 2007;11(3):189–93. doi:10.1007/s00784-007-0111-6. PMID 17333303.
  26. ^ Burt BA, Tomar SL. Changing the face of America: water fluoridation and oral health. In: Ward JW, Warren C. Silent Victories: The History and Practice of Public Health in Twentieth-century America. Oxford University Press; 2007. ISBN 0-19-515069-4. p. 307–22.
  27. ^ Hausen HW. Fluoridation, fractures, and teeth. BMJ. 2000;321(7265):844–5. doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7265.844. PMID 11021844.
  28. ^ Kumar JV. Is water fluoridation still necessary?. Adv Dent Res. 2008;20(1):8–12. doi:10.1177/154407370802000103. PMID 18694870.
  29. ^ J Yiamouyiannis, D Burk "Fluoridation and cancer, age-dependence of cancer mortality related to artificial fluoridation" Fluoride 1977.
  30. ^ Co9nsummer Health Articles: FLUORIDATION
  31. ^ 619 F. 2d 932 – Yiamouyiannis v. Consumers Union of United States Inc
  32. ^ John Yiamouyiannis, Appellant, v. Consumers Union of the United States
  33. ^ "ICA Policy Position Statements". International Chiropractors Association. Retrieved 28 August 2008.
  34. ^ Board of Directors (19 June 2008). "Sierra Club Policy on Fluoride in Drinking Water".
  35. ^ Rodriguez-Larrain, Claudia. "Ban on artificial water fluoridation, a new policy". Green Party of Canada.
  36. ^ "(title in Swedish)". Svenska Dagbladet (in Swedish). {{cite news}}: Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)
  37. ^ Torell, P.; Forsman, B. (February 1979). "(title in Swedish)". Tandlakartidningen (in Swedish). 71 (3): 142–57. PMID 287207. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  38. ^ Bryson, Christopher. The Fluoride Deception. p. 240.
  39. ^
  40. ^
    • The "Public Health Regulations-2013" have officially commenced on August 25, 2013 (See in Hebrew: תקנות מי השתיה בתוקף מ - 25.8.2013)
    • A copy of the regulations is available on the Health Ministry website in English as well. Regulation #20 (Fluoridation), is the regulation that has enforced and enforces public water fluoridation in israel. Regulation #40 (Temporary Provision -Fluoridation) says "Regulation 20 shall remain in force for a period of one year from the commencement date."
  41. ^ Consumer Health Digest #13-15, The National Council Against Health Fraud
  42. ^ Paul Connett, Physicians for Social Responsibility
  43. ^ Fluoride Risks Are Still A Challenge, Chemical & Engineering News
  44. ^ [http://www.cdha.ca/pdfs/Profession/Resources/ProbeFluoride.pdf The Fluoride Dialogue: CDHA Position Statements], Canadian Dental Hygienists Association
  45. ^ http://www.fluoridationforum.ie
  46. ^ Controversy - Adding fluoride to water supplies, (Reference #21) , BMJ
  47. ^ When public action undermines public health: a critical examination of antifluoridationist literature, (References #57, #84), Aust New Zealand Health Policy (Journal)
  48. ^ A critical appraisal of, and commentary on, “50 Reasons to oppose fluoridation”, Department of Health (Ireland)
  49. ^ Response to a list of “50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation” compiled by Dr Connett*, Ministry of Health (New Zealand)
  50. ^ "Kidney Patients Should be Notified of Potential Risk from Fluorides and Fluoridated Drinking Water". Organic Consumers Association. 3 June 2008. Retrieved 16 June 2008.
  51. ^ National Research Council (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. ISBN 0-309-10128-X. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |laydate= ignored (help); Unknown parameter |laysource= ignored (help); Unknown parameter |laysummary= ignored (help). See also the CDC statement on the NRC report.
  52. ^ "The risks of consumption of fluoridated water for people with chronic kidney disease". Kidney Health Australia. 2007.
  53. ^ "2011 Review of Kidney Health Australia fluoride position statement".
  54. ^ "Fluoride Intake in Chronic Kidney Disease". National Kidney Foundation. 15 April 2008.
  55. ^ "Ten Great Public Health Achievements – United States, 1900–1999". U.S. Centers for Disease Control.
  56. ^ Division of Oral Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC. Achievements in public health, 1900–1999: Fluoridation of drinking water to prevent dental caries. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999;48(41):933–40.
  57. ^ "Fluoride & Fluoridation". American Dental Association.
  58. ^ "Fluoride in Drinking Water". Health Canada.
  59. ^ "Water fluoridation". World Water Day 2001: Oral health. World Health Organization.
  60. ^ Vestergaard P, Jorgensen NR, Schwarz P, Mosekilde L (March 2008). "Effects of treatment with fluoride on bone mineral density and fracture risk—a meta-analysis". Osteoporos Int. 19 (3): 257–68. doi:10.1007/s00198-007-0437-6. PMID 17701094.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  61. ^ Attention: This template ({{cite pmid}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by PMID 21959658, please use {{cite journal}} with |pmid=21959658 instead.
  62. ^ "About your water". United Utilities.
  63. ^ "World Oral Health Report" (PDF). World Health Organization. Retrieved 4 March 2006.
  64. ^ a b c Musto RJ (October 1987). "Fluoridation: why is it not more widely adopted?". CMAJ. 137 (8): 705–8. PMC 1267306. PMID 3651941.
  65. ^ Wrapson J (2005). "Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies in New Zealand:'Magic Bullet,'Rat Poison, or Communist Plot?". Health and History. 7 (2): 17–29. doi:10.2307/40111610. JSTOR 40111610.
  66. ^ Richmond VL (January 1985). "Thirty years of fluoridation: a review". Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 41 (1): 129–38. PMID 3917599.
  67. ^ a b Henig, Robin Marantz (1997). The People's Health. Joseph Henry Press. p. 85. ISBN 0-309-05492-3.
  68. ^ Rovere, Richard H. (1959). Senator Joe McCarthy. University of California Press. pp. 21–22. ISBN 0-520-20472-7.
  69. ^ Marmor, Judd (1974). "Psychodynamics of Group Opposition to Mental Health Programs". Psychiatry in Transition. Brunner/Mazel. ISBN 0-87630-070-0.
  70. ^ Politifact Florida "Say water fluoridation started in Nazi Germany ghettos and death camps to pacify the Jews." Politifact Florida accessed on 27 March 2014
  71. ^ Bryson, Christopher. "The Fluoride Deception: How a Nuclear Waste Made its Way Into the Nation’s Drinking Water", Democracy Now, 17 June 2004
  72. ^ Bram van der Lek (1976). "De strijd tegen fluoridering". De Gids. 139 (2).
  73. ^ Leonardus Johannes Antonius Damen, Peter Nicolaï, J.L. Boxum, K.J. de Graaf, J.H. Jans, A.P. Klap, A.T. Marseille, A.R. Neerhof, B.K. Olivier, B.J. Schueler, F.R. Vermeer, R.L. Vucsán (2005). "Deel 1: systeem, bevoegdheid, bevoegdheidsuitoefening, handhaving". Bestuursrecht. Boom juridische studieboeken (in Dutch). Boom Juridische uitgevers. pp. 54–55. ISBN 978-90-5454-537-8. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |trans_title= ignored (|trans-title= suggested) (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  74. ^ "Ryan v. A.G. IESC 1; IR 294 (3 July, 1965)". Irish Supreme Court.
  75. ^ Beck v. City Council of Beverly Hills, 30 Cal. App. 3d 112, 115 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1973) ("Courts through the United States have uniformly held that fluoridation of water is a reasonable and proper exercise of the police power in the interest of public health. The matter is no longer an open question." (citations omitted)).
  76. ^ Pratt, Edwin, Raymond D. Rawson & Mark Rubin, Fluoridation at Fifty: What Have We Learned, 30 J.L. Med. & Ethics 117, 119 (Fall 2002)

Further reading

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Water_fluoridation_controversy&oldid=602449209"