"The simplest and quickest way to restore public trust in the CDC is for both Democrats and Republicans to put a commitment to end fluoridation into their party platforms," says Paul Connett, Ph.D., FAN's Executive Director.
According to Connett, "Fluoridated water contains 250 times more fluoride than in mothers' milk. In 1950, when the Public Health Service first endorsed fluoridation, no studies had investigated possible adverse health effects. Today, many published studies show fluoride is harmful, but the CDC is ignoring these studies and continues its relentless promotion and funding of this outdated practice."
The only risk that the CDC acknowledges is dental fluorosis – a tooth discoloration – which impacts 32% of American children (1). Both the ADA and the CDC now advise that fluoridated water not be used to prepare infant formula (2,3).
According to Connett, "this marking of the enamel indicates a child has been over-exposed to fluoride. We are concerned about how fluoride may be affecting the rest of the child's body. Over 20 studies show that fluoride can lower IQ (4,5)."
A 2006 National Research Council fluoride report revealed many health risks, including potential damage to the bones, brain and thyroid gland. The panel concluded that drinking fluoridated water can pose risks to those with thyroid or kidney disorders, diabetics, high water drinkers and infants and recommended that the US EPA lower their safe drinking water standard (6).
This new research has prompted over 1,800 professionals to call for an end to fluoridation worldwide (7).
Meanwhile, researchers reporting in the British Medical Journal (Oct 2007) showed that tooth decay has come down as fast in non-fluoridated countries as fluoridated ones (8).
"It is clear that the CDC's Oral Health Division is misleading the public about the safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation," says Connett.
"They must be held accountable for this. We need both political parties to resist the well-heeled dental lobby. Our children's health and the public's trust in government health agencies is at stake," says Connett.
Fluoride Action Network http://www.FluorideAction.Net
1) CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2008. Enamel fluorosis among persons aged 6-39 years, by selected characteristics – United States, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999-2002. Table 23 from MMWR Weekly, Populations Receiving Optimally Fluoridated Public Drinking Water --- United States, 1992--2006, 57(27): 737-741. July 11, 2008 .
2) ADA (American Dental Association). 2006. Interim guidance on reconstituted infant formula. E-gram. November 9.
3) CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2007. Background: infant formula and the risk for enamel fluorosis. August 9.
4) Tang QQ, Du J, Ma HH, Jiang SJ, Zhou XJ. 2008. Fluoride and children's intelligence: a meta-analysis. Biological Trace Element Research. August 10. [Epub ahead of print].
5) Fluoride, Quarterly Journal of the International Society for Fluoride Research, April-June 2008,
http://fluoridealert.org/fluoride.v41.2.2008.pdf. See also http://www.Fluoridealert.org/brain
6) National Research Council. 2006. Fluoride in drinking water: a scientific review of EPA’s standards. Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Division on Earth and Life Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies. March.
7) Fluoride Action Network. 2007-2008. Professionals’ statement calling for an end to fluoridation and Congressional hearings.
8) Cheng KK, Chalmers I, Sheldon TA. 2007. Adding fluoride to water supplies. British Medical Journal 335(7622): 699–702. October 6.