Growing Opposition to Public Water Fluoridation in the U.S.

USA: According to an article published on NBC News (https://www.nbcnews.com/), written by Erika Edwards, Jason Kane and Erin McLaughlin, communities across the United States are ending public water fluoridation programs, often spurred by groups that insist people should decide whether they want the mineral added to their water supplies.

The article states that “Since 2010, more than 150 towns or counties throughout the country have voted to keep fluoride out of public water systems or to stop adding it, according to the Fluoride Action Network, an anti-fluoride group.”

Fluoride Debate Intensifies as More US Towns Remove Additive from Drinking Water

Reasons for Opposition

The resistance to fluoride appears to be fueled by pandemic-related mistrust of government and misleading claims that fluoride is harmful, according to experts cited in the article.

Dr. Meg Lochary, a pediatric dentist in Union County, North Carolina, is quoted as saying, “The anti-fluoridation movement gained steam with Covid. We’ve seen an increase of people who either don’t want fluoride or are skeptical about it.”

The article mentions that a sticking point for some opponents is about control and consent. Brian Helms, a Union County commissioner who voted against adding fluoride to the local water supply, is quoted as saying, “The real deciding factor for my vote was a matter of consent.”

Abigail Prado, the chair of a right-wing group called Moms For Liberty, is quoted as saying, “It’s the only treatment that the government just mass issues to its citizens. That’s not right.”

Scientific Support for Fluoride

However, the article also highlights the scientific consensus supporting the use of fluoridated water. It cites major public health groups, including the American Dental Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, all of which support the use of fluoridated water and cite studies showing it reduces tooth decay by 25%.

The CDC is quoted as saying, “Drinking fluoridated water keeps teeth strong and reduces cavities.”

US EPA Sets National Standard for ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Drinking Water

The article mentions that one tactic used by anti-fluoride activists is to strike fear in parents by citing a 2019 study published in JAMA Pediatrics, which suggested that higher levels of fluoride in pregnant women’s urine were associated with slightly lower IQ levels in their children.

However, the article notes that the study’s author, Dr. Bruce Lanphear, stopped short of saying fluoride should be pulled from water supplies, and acknowledged that more research is needed.

Impact on Children’s Dental Health

Also highlighted is the potential impact of ending water fluoridation on children’s dental health, particularly in low-income communities with limited access to dental care.

Dr. Charlotte Lewis, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Washington School of Medicine, is quoted as saying, “Community water fluoridation was revolutionary in terms of how it improved the oral health and dental health in our country, with the most dramatic effect in those populations that are lower-income and have less access to dental care.”

The article cites data from North Carolina, where kindergartners in a county with fluoridated water had a much lower rate of treated tooth decay (10.1%) compared to a county without fluoridated water (44.4%), despite similar income levels and poverty rates.

Water fluoridation offers “modest benefits” to children’s oral health

Ongoing Research and Debate

The article mentions that researchers at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, are conducting a study recruiting 200 children under 6 months old to use either fluoridated or nonfluoridated bottled water in their formula and drinking water, with plans to follow them for four years to observe the development of their teeth.

The study’s lead researcher, Gary Slade, a professor of dentistry at UNC-Chapel Hill, is quoted as saying, “I took that as a particular challenge,” referring to the lack of a double-blinded, randomized, controlled clinical trial on the effects of fluoride on children.

Overall, the debate presents a balanced view of the ongoing debate around public water fluoridation, highlighting concerns from both sides while acknowledging the scientific consensus supporting its use and the potential impact of ending fluoridation programs on children’s dental health, particularly in underserved communities.

Read the full article.