Jan 4, 2010
Big Pharma & Its Allies > Fluoride Toxicity Issues
Danny Leskiw (DL) speaks with University of Toronto Dentistry Faculty Dr. David Locker (Dr.).
Dr. Locker dispels myths about health risks of fluoridation, and addresses misinterpretations of the current science.
DL - Briefly outline the history of Fluoride in the water…
Dr. - Across the range of statistics, there was an association between the amount of Fluoride in the water supply and rates of dental carries rates in children. Then the second world came into being, so it wasn't until just after the war, that they started to do actual clinical trials …or community trials. Where they matched communities and added Fluoride to the water supply of one of them, and followed them for a number of years…umm…and tried to determine what happened in the caries rate in children, and there was a dramatic decline in decay rate in those communities that had the Fluoride in the water. And subsequent to that, water fluoridation became adopted quite widely…umm…in Canada at least, and in parts of the U.S. as a public health measure to prevent dental decay in children.
DL - Now can you talk about the new research regarding fluoride in the water and ah, possibly the benefits as opposed to risks.
Dr. - Well this is a topic that has subject to study over the last forty or fifty years, and the studies that are currently available, do continue to show that there is a beneficial effect, but the effect is not quite as pronounced as it was in the forties, fifties and sixties, when decay rates in children were much higher. And probably for that is, that children are now getting fluoride from multiple sources…toothpaste, food, even the air. But there is still a role, at least in some communities, for water fluoridation, to bring about further reductions in dental decay.
DL - What is the evidence, to support these health concerns, which the people are concerned that there are, risks involved in the fluoride, in the drinking water…could you talk about those risks?
Dr. - Well the only risk that's been well documented, and that is accepted by the scientific community world wide, is that; if the level of fluoride in the water exceeds a certain level, then you do get a condition called dental fluorosis. Which is a kind of mottling of the enamel on the teeth, a white mottling. However that only occurs, to any significant degree, when fluoride is present at much higher levels than is being put in the water, currently. Now its been claimed over the years, that there are, many many other, risks from; cancer, to bone cancer, and I think I've even seen reports, that people believe it causes cognitive impairment and AIDS but, again universally accepted by the scientific community, that those studies are deeply flawed, and that the evidence that they provide, really isn't worth the paper that its written on.
DL - Now isn't topical application of fluoride more effective, than drinking fluoride in the water?
Dr. - Ah…well fluoride can have three different mechanisms…it can have a systemic mechanism, a topical mechanism, and it also has a bit of an anti-bacterial…mechanism. So it operates through those three different mechanisms. Now…ah…I think that we would now accept, that the main mechanism of action, is a topical one. But the problem is, getting that topical fluoride to the children who really need it…water fluoridation actually does that…very simply and cost effectively, where other methods of mechanisms, are less successful and, not as cost effective.
DL - Now fluoride may cause children to get dental fluorosis, and some recommend that children under three, should not drink fluoridated water, nor should they use fluoridated toothpaste. Would you agree?
Dr. - Oh yes, that's generally accepted within the dental community…that umm…fluorosis only occurs, when fluoride is ingested through a narrow period of time, and that's when the second set of teeth that a child gets is developing within the jawbone, so, fluoride is best avoided or at least minimized, during that period of time…yes.
DL - Now, Dr. Locker, fluoride is known to accumulate in the body, as a result, residents in Toronto, who have been drinking fluoridated for the last forty six years, have double the fluoride in their hips, than the other population…does this give rise for you, for concern over this issue.
Dr. - Well…maybe the case that fluoride does accumulate in the body, and that fluoride levels in the hip bones of people in Toronto are higher, that that of people living in non-fluoridated areas, but the question you really need to ask is; what is the clinical significance, of that. Does it have any clinical significance, is it clinically important, does it cause significant changes to the bone, or does it cause an increase an increase in fracture rates, or stuff like that…so that's the real question...its not, whether or no fluoride accumulates in the bones…its what's the clinical significance, of that accumulation.
DL - Are you concerned about the issue of mass medication of an un-approved drug, without the expressed informed consent, of each individual?
Dr, - Well that's a very difficult political question you're asking me…umm…do you want my personal opinion?
DL - Yes, please.
Dr. - Well I happen to be a democrat, and I think every community should make the decision for itself, whether it wants its water fluoridated. They should do so having all the scientific evidence, available to them.
DL - Now according to a living experiment today, between two Canadian cities…here in Toronto we've been fluoridation for forty six years, yet in Vancouver, which has never fluoridated, has a cavity rate lower than Toronto's…how important is this finding?
Dr. - Well…decay rates, in communities, are not affected solely by the amount of fluoride in the water, you'd have to look at the socioeconomic structure of the communities…umm…there are many many factors involved in…you know, personal family, and community level factors, which do influence decay rates, so simply comparing two cities like that, you'd really have to control, for a lot of those other factors, to be able to make statements like…Vancouver has a lower rate of dental decay irrespectable of the fact that it is not fluoridated.
DL - What other factors could be involved, do you think?
Dr. - Well socioeconomic status, for example, or the ethnic composition, of a population…umm…oral hygiene…practices of a population, and, other sources…the people in Vancouver may actually be getting the fluoride from many different sources.
It's very very difficult to avoid fluoride, I mean its in the air, its in the soil, its probably going to be found in a lot of the drinks that people are buying over the counter and consuming, because they were made in areas where the water is fluoridated, and that's called the halo effect. So, you know whether or not Vancouver is truly a non-fluoridated city, is a bit of a question that we'd want to look at.
DL - Now I understand that in Europe also, many communities have not been using fluoride, and yet their rates of decay, are not any higher, in fact some are lower, are you aware of any reports to that extent.
Dr. - Oh yes, there are reports coming out of, or that have come out of countries such as Scandinavia, that tend to suggest that in their communities, decay rates are quite low, even in the absence of water fluoridation. But Scandinavian countries are very very different, in terms of their health and welfare profiles than are North American communities.
DL - Now, where does the fluoride come from that we put into the water supply?
Dr. - My understanding is, that it's a by-product of one or more other industries.
DL - Yes, I also read to this extent that it comes from these places in Tampa, Florida, these smoke stacks, where they actually collect the actual fluoride, which apparently is very toxic, it has lead, arsenic, radium, which are all carcinogenic…are you concerned about that?
Dr. - Well, you know the federal and provincial governments, do have the responsibility for ensuring water quality, in Canada, and I can't imagine that they would allow, public health authorities to be dropping into our water, you know, stuff that was contaminated with heavy metals, in fact only yesterday I was reading a federal government report which was talking about that very issue and I could give you the reference to that if you wish.
DL - No it's ok, but they're not using pharmaceutical grade fluoride, which to me, would be the correct thing to do, because at least it would prevent having these additives and toxic materials in it because I don't understand that they remove those toxicity products and that's leaving our bodies to risk it seems to me, would you not think so?
Dr. - Well…umm…I not familiar with the actual processes that are used to ensure that the fluoride that goes into the water is pure you'd have to talk to an expert on the chemistry of fluoride and I'm not an expert on that, I'm an expert on human health.
DL - Right…so do you think that we need a lot more research to determine first of all the risks of the fluoride in the drinking water and the benefits…how do you think we stand today at this point, because there is this tremendous controversy and, as I read so many reports that the details, and the concerns with health are very very significant, because of this accumulation of fluoride in the body.
Dr. - So you think the risks to health are significant?
DL - Well, I don't know, I mean, according to the reports that I've read, it seems many people are putting up red flag signs here saying; well wait a minute, what are we doing here, we could be doing our bodies a lot more harm, than good, and should we not either, stop it for awhile, or do more research until we determine the risks involved.
Dr. - Well…we've been studying water fluoridation for…let me see…well over sixty years. It's certainly the case that there are, communities both in the States and in Canada that have very very high, natural levels of fluoride in the water, and they've been studied endlessly, to determine whether they're any negative health effects, and nothing has ever been found.
DL - I see…so you…ok…now, so ok we're coming to the end of our program, perhaps we should leave the people with maybe something to think about, and also some direction. So again, based on the current research, and toxicology reports, which indicate that, from what I read; that long-term exposure to fluoride, has potential serious health risks, such as skeletal fluorosis and cancer and other conditions, ah.
Dr. - But, but, you're also neglecting to quote the research, that has demonstrated, that…some studies anyway…that have demonstrated that hip fracture rates in fluoridated communities are actually lower, than in non-fluoridated communities, so, you know, some studies show a slight increase risk of hip fracture rates, due to the skeletal accumulation of fluoride, other studies show actually a beneficial or a protective effect, now when you put all that research together you come up with a conclusion, that there's probably no effect at all.
DL - I see…based on the fact that there are these conflicting reports, would you recommend that a moratorium be placed on fluoridation for now.
Dr. - Ah, no I don't think so…umm…again as I said though…to me there are basically two questions…Is there any evidence that putting fluoride in the water has major risk to health, and the answer to that is no. We do know that if the fluoride level increases beyond a certain point then, you do get dental fluorosis, which is a cosmetic, rather than a health procedure. And then the second question is; what benefit are we getting from fluoridating the water. And again, that's, you know, something that could be researched, because as caries rates are declined, the amount of benefit you're going to get has declined. But, that needs to be qualified, because most decay now occurs within disadvantaged and deprived child populations. So by removing fluoride from the water, you're actually, you're probably taking away the benefit of fluoride that might otherwise accrue to them.
DL - As we discussed prior to this; we mentioned that children under three should not be exposed to drinking fluoride water…correct?
Dr. - Well I believe, that what the recommendation is, is that baby formulas are not, constituted, with fluoridated tap water, yes, so that the ingestion of fluoride at that important window of a child's life, is kept minimal, because of that slight risk of fluorosis. And it should be said that the levels of fluorosis that we are seeing are very very mild, and even a trained professional working with a bright light would often have a great deal of trouble in spotting it.
DL - Now keeping that in mind, if there are people who are concerned, and not certain that the research proves that there is no health danger…would you recommend individuals, who are concerned stop drinking fluoridated water.
Dr. - Well, I mean, you know, hey…I would recommend it if anybody is concerned about any health risk to themselves as an individual, they should avoid what they believe is placing them at risk, I mean, you know…every time I step out of my house I'm at risk of being hit by a car, quite frankly, you know life is full of risks. I mean I could avoid that risk by staying home, but I choose to accept the fact that I go out, and, you know, the drivers on the streets, particularly Toronto streets, aren't that very well trained, I can see, so you know, it's very personal decision. And, you can buy water that's not fluoridated you can buy toothpaste that is not fluoridated. So I think if you feel personally very strongly about fluoride, then there's things that you can do to avoid it.
DL - So people could drink bottled water as a precaution?
Dr. - If they felt that that's what they wanted to do, yes, I'm not sure what they're protecting themselves against, but if they feel that that lowers their risk of, any health outcomes from fluoride, real or imagined, then yes, they are quite free to do that as individuals.
DL - Wonderful…ok well Dr. Locker thanks you for being our guest today.
[back to articles]
|
