On May 15, Florida made waves when it became the second state in US history to ban the fluoridation of public drinking water. Utah was the first state to make this big move. This landmark ruling has triggered a robust discussion within the dental community and among public health advocates. Not surprisingly, they are very concerned about its possible negative effects on dental health, particularly for children. For over 50 years, fluoride supplements have improved dental health without harmful effects, lowering cavity rates by as much as 40 to 60%. This leads to a ban lacking clarity for those working in the medical field.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) appears ready to act. They will get harmful fluoride products designed for children off the market. The agency points to evidence that some drugs pose high risks to gut microbes. It further notes links to thyroid disease, obesity, and lower IQ. In response, dental professionals have claimed that these claims do not have strong support and are founded on poor studies. With worries dramatically brewing about fluoride’s effectiveness and security, experts are now calling for reassessing the ban.
Concerns Over Fluoride Safety and Efficacy
Historically, exposure to fluoride has been thought to be vital to the prevention of tooth decay, particularly among children. And the typical dose of fluoride is one milligram, usually given to kids from six to 16 years old. But the FDA’s recent moves have set off warning bells. Specifically, they have focused their ire on fluoride, claiming that it disrupts gut health and cognitive development.
Scott Tomar, DrPH, DMD, is a dentist and epidemiologist with more than 30 years of experience with fluorides and fluoridation. EPA’s Dr. He added, “The evidence behind these claims linking water fluoridation to reductions in IQ is pathetically weak. When challenged by experts and advocates, the FDA agreed that three-quarters of the literature they used as a basis for the reports was of low quality. This data was fraught with significant risk of bias.
The American Dental Association has weighed in on the issue, stating that “a review of the studies offered … [does] not in fact demonstrate any harmful effects.” This view highlights why most dental professionals are convinced that the advantages of fluoride greatly exceed any risks.
The Quality of Research Under Scrutiny
The credibility of a majority of the studies cited by the FDA has been challenged. Caroline Orr, a microbiologist at Teesside University, lambasted the quality of the research that was being cited to back up these claims by the FDA. She stated that “every study that we’ve done in the lab and everything that I’ve ever read has showed that that level of fluoride [in drinking water] either has no impact on bacteria or actually has a positive impact on some of the good probiotic bacteria.”
Orr’s other focus was to highlight how the studies that the FDA based their decisions on were often of poor quality. In fact, three-quarters of them were at high risk of bias. This underlying conflict of interest has cast a serious shadow upon claims of objectivity and reliability made by the data calling for public policy decisions against fluoride.
Dr. Gary Moran, of Trinity College Dublin, corroborated that fluoride concentrations aren’t enough to affect gut health. He mentioned that while fluoride can be detrimental to beneficial bacteria at certain levels, “it’s nowhere near the level seen in fluoridated water.” This is yet more evidence of how far science has diverged from the science-based actions required by regulatory action.
International Perspectives on Fluoride Exposure
Other countries such as Denmark, New Zealand, Australia, Spain and Sweden have justly pursued research regarding fluoride exposure. They’re looking at its effects on IQ and overall neurodevelopment. Unfortunately, despite the time and resources spent on these studies, all of them find no association between fluoride levels in the body and negative outcomes in cognitive functioning.
Tomar highlighted that levels of fluoride exposure in the United States are “thousands of times lower than the dose used in high-quality studies.” This statement goes right to the heart of the FDA’s alarming assertions about fluoride’s effects on health.
In light of these findings, many experts believe that public health decisions should be grounded in robust scientific evidence rather than speculative claims. The FDA is focusing its safety inquiry on serious adverse effects. Such a focus risks overshadowing the most effective cavity prevention strategies, including regular dental care practices and reduced sugar consumption.
“It is a complete mystery to me why they think that this is an appropriate way to make the American public healthier,” – Scott Tomar
Leave a Reply