Off-Topic :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Posted by:
Rod
()
Date: January 17, 2009 06:25PM
Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Latest News from Ontario
Fluoride debate getting long in tooth
Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Sarnia: Council receives legal opinion on fluoride removal
Halton: Fluoride debate deferred again
Health committee 're-postpones' water fluoridation debate
Read more news from Ontario
The Bulletin of DowntownToronto
January 13, 2009
Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Toronto fluoridates its water, medicating residents without their permission and often without their knowledge
By Canadian Assoc. of Physicians for the Environment
(See original article)
The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment ( CAPE ) does not support fluoridation of drinking water for the following reasons.
1) The decline in caries in communities that are fluoridated has been highly significant -- but so has the decline that has occurred in non-fluoridated communities. There has, in fact, been a general decline in dental caries throughout the Western world, and the decline in fluoridated cities has not exceeded that in non-fluoridated communities. For example, BC drinking water is 95% non- fluoridated, whereas drinking water in Alberta is 75% fluoridated; yet the two provinces have similar rates of caries. Furthermore, Europe is 98% non-fluoridated, but global European dental health is generally equivalent to or better than that in North America. Whatever the reason for the decline in dental caries, it can not be concluded that it is the result of drinking water fluoridation.
2) The incidence of toxic effects in humans from fluoridation may well have been underestimated.
The most serious potential association is with osteosarcoma (bone cancer) in boys, which appears to have been loosely associated with age of exposure to fluoride. It is true that the CDC has (as has the original researcher) acknowledged that current data are tentative, but a further larger-scale study is pending from the Harvard School of Dentistry. At the very least, such data are grounds for caution.
3) Animal studies have shown a wide range of adverse effects associated with fluoride. It has been shown to be a potential immunotoxin, embryotoxin, neurotoxin and harmful to bony tissues, including both dental and ordinary bone. In addition, it can damage (inhibit) thyroid function in several species, including humans. Its effect on ecosystem balance has been little researched, but is unlikely to be positive.
4) The intake of fluoride from drinking water is uncontrolled, and can lead to dental fluorosis in children who are inclined to drink large amounts of water. Both natural and artificially flouridated water can cause this effect, which is, of course, simply a visible representation of an effect on the entire bony skeleton. The cost of repairing teeth damaged by fluorosis is not trivial; moderate to severe effects can require $15,000 or more in dental fees.
It seems clear that a) fluoridation is unlikely to be the cause of the decline in caries in Europe and North America b) the potential for adverse effects is real, and c) current evidence points in the direction of caution. Over the last decade, recommendations with respect to acceptable fluoride exposure have steadily declined, and cautions have increased. Any dental benefit that may accrue from fluoride exposure is fully achieved by controlled topical application of fluoride compounds by trained dental professionals, not by fluoride ingestion. [The analysis of Dr. Hardy Limeback, Head, Preventive Dentistry, at the University of Toronto, further clarifies these points.] On the basis of this "weight of evidence" we believe that fluoridation of drinking water is scientifically untenable, and should not be part of a public health initiative or program.
Latest News from Ontario
Fluoride debate getting long in tooth
Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Sarnia: Council receives legal opinion on fluoride removal
Halton: Fluoride debate deferred again
Health committee 're-postpones' water fluoridation debate
Read more news from Ontario
The Bulletin of DowntownToronto
January 13, 2009
Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Toronto fluoridates its water, medicating residents without their permission and often without their knowledge
By Canadian Assoc. of Physicians for the Environment
(See original article)
The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment ( CAPE ) does not support fluoridation of drinking water for the following reasons.
1) The decline in caries in communities that are fluoridated has been highly significant -- but so has the decline that has occurred in non-fluoridated communities. There has, in fact, been a general decline in dental caries throughout the Western world, and the decline in fluoridated cities has not exceeded that in non-fluoridated communities. For example, BC drinking water is 95% non- fluoridated, whereas drinking water in Alberta is 75% fluoridated; yet the two provinces have similar rates of caries. Furthermore, Europe is 98% non-fluoridated, but global European dental health is generally equivalent to or better than that in North America. Whatever the reason for the decline in dental caries, it can not be concluded that it is the result of drinking water fluoridation.
2) The incidence of toxic effects in humans from fluoridation may well have been underestimated.
The most serious potential association is with osteosarcoma (bone cancer) in boys, which appears to have been loosely associated with age of exposure to fluoride. It is true that the CDC has (as has the original researcher) acknowledged that current data are tentative, but a further larger-scale study is pending from the Harvard School of Dentistry. At the very least, such data are grounds for caution.
3) Animal studies have shown a wide range of adverse effects associated with fluoride. It has been shown to be a potential immunotoxin, embryotoxin, neurotoxin and harmful to bony tissues, including both dental and ordinary bone. In addition, it can damage (inhibit) thyroid function in several species, including humans. Its effect on ecosystem balance has been little researched, but is unlikely to be positive.
4) The intake of fluoride from drinking water is uncontrolled, and can lead to dental fluorosis in children who are inclined to drink large amounts of water. Both natural and artificially flouridated water can cause this effect, which is, of course, simply a visible representation of an effect on the entire bony skeleton. The cost of repairing teeth damaged by fluorosis is not trivial; moderate to severe effects can require $15,000 or more in dental fees.
It seems clear that a) fluoridation is unlikely to be the cause of the decline in caries in Europe and North America b) the potential for adverse effects is real, and c) current evidence points in the direction of caution. Over the last decade, recommendations with respect to acceptable fluoride exposure have steadily declined, and cautions have increased. Any dental benefit that may accrue from fluoride exposure is fully achieved by controlled topical application of fluoride compounds by trained dental professionals, not by fluoride ingestion. [The analysis of Dr. Hardy Limeback, Head, Preventive Dentistry, at the University of Toronto, further clarifies these points.] On the basis of this "weight of evidence" we believe that fluoridation of drinking water is scientifically untenable, and should not be part of a public health initiative or program.
Re: Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Posted by:
Gravis
()
Date: January 18, 2009 02:59PM
yeah, i would like to point out that these are canadians.
"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
Re: Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Posted by:
Genevieve
()
Date: January 18, 2009 04:27PM
I would like to point out that Canadians are awesome. Especially Canadians that grew up in PA and now post on Fairfax Underground under the name Genevieve.
Re: Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Posted by:
Radiophile
()
Date: January 18, 2009 05:05PM
Just go to a place that does not fluoridate the water. You will see a difference.
And Gen, I would like to discuss this whole big Canadian issue with you some time. Just so you know, at a business conference in Salt Lake City a few years back, I was made an "Honorary Canadian" by a tenured professor at McMaster University. I still have the cocktail napkin she wrote the decree on somewhere around here.
And Gen, I would like to discuss this whole big Canadian issue with you some time. Just so you know, at a business conference in Salt Lake City a few years back, I was made an "Honorary Canadian" by a tenured professor at McMaster University. I still have the cocktail napkin she wrote the decree on somewhere around here.
Re: Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Posted by:
Bob
()
Date: January 19, 2009 12:25AM
Radiophile Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just go to a place that does not fluoridate the
> water. You will see a difference.
>
a difference in what?
From what I've read about fluoridation, and how it pervades everything including our produce, canned goods and prepared foods, etc, even if a certain city doesn't fluoridate their water, fluoride is present in just about everything and consuming it is unavoidable.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just go to a place that does not fluoridate the
> water. You will see a difference.
>
a difference in what?
From what I've read about fluoridation, and how it pervades everything including our produce, canned goods and prepared foods, etc, even if a certain city doesn't fluoridate their water, fluoride is present in just about everything and consuming it is unavoidable.
Re: Canadian doctors spurn hazardous fluoridation of water
Posted by:
Alias
()
Date: January 19, 2009 02:15AM
The future for Canadians.
