The statistics show:
In Australia, dental health has improved since water fluoridation began in the 1950s. Compared to their parents’ generation, Australians born after 1970 (when the majority of water fluoridation programs commenced in Australia) have about half the level of tooth decay (source).
Unfortunately there is a significant amount of misinformation available widely about fluoridated water. Most of this has been generated by those vehemently opposed to fluoridation of water.
To start with there is no such thing as a shortage of fluoride in the human body as it is not required. Secondly previous comments missed the issue that the fluoride added to our water at least in Queensland Australia comes from waste removed from fertiliser manufactures flues. It contains heavy metals such as cadimum, arsenic, chromium just a few of the impurities . Pharmaceutical grade fluoride is no used in our water. In America due to the amount of fluoride added to town water parents have been warned/advised not to prepare baby formula with tap water.
LAST BUT NOT LEAST FLUORIDE IS A NEUROTOXIN. CROSSED THE BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER.
Hi @Activist.bw, welcome to the community.
This isn’t correct. While it is from a US source, it also applies to sources of fluoride used in water fluoridation in Queensland:
According to the American Water Works Association Standards Committee on Fluorides, the sources of fluoride products used for water fluoridation in the United States are as follows:
- Approximately 90% are produced during the process of extracting phosphate from phosphoric ore.
- Approximately 5% come from the production of hydrogen fluoride or sodium fluoride.
- Approximately 5% come from the purification of high-quality quartz.
This website addresses the claims of being a waste.
If fluoride is classed as a waste, every drop of water we drink would also be classed as a waste as it has been used in the past for something else and is returned for another use.
Most things we consume have metals as contaminants. Like fluoride used in water purification, these are at very low levels. While these are at low levels in fluoride added to water, in its undiluted form it is less than the concentrations permitted in Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. This is even before the fluoride is added to water and diluted so that the fluoride is about 1 mg of F per litre of water.
Rather than relying on websites with misinformation, it is worth reading the NSW government factsheet ‘Water Fluoridation: Questions and Answers’. It has information based on the proven science of fluoridation.
If this was the case we need to avoid many food or even water (which has not been fluoridated), as many of these contain fluoride or fluoride compounds.
At the levels within water and naturally occurring in foods/water not fluoridated, they are safe as shown by the science.
This website provides some of the natural sources and also address the claims about claims that fluoridated town water and babies:
The US CDC also says that fluoride water can be used for infant formula:
This was stated in someones suggestions.“Like fluoride used in water purification, these are at very low levels. While these are at low levels in fluoride added to water, in its undiluted form it is less than the concentrations permitted in Australian Drinking Water Guidelines”
Fluoride doesn’t purify water. It is added just for our teeth. However we have more dells in out body to consider than our teeth. Fluroide occurs naturally in a lot of areas and before they added fluoride it was never tested to know which areas.
That’s correct. I think the statement is ambiguous and possibly should have been
Like fluoride used at the time of water purification
If you mean that fluoride is not an essential mineral for human metabolism you are right. That does not mean it has no function. Confusing the two ideas does not help understanding.
The remainder of your post has several problems.
You mention a list of things can be toxic under some circumstances without ever mentioning dose. If fluorine compounds were toxic at any dose at all we would all be sick or dead as they occur naturally in many foods and in the ground water in many parts of the world. For any kind of pollution or foreign substance (including drugs) the dose is extremely important.
Blood thinners save many lives in the right dose as they prevents blood clotting that can be very harmful. Used in excess they are rat poison.
You indulge in biased interpretation. You claim fluoride is a neurotoxin, where overall studies are not conclusive - and you ignore the question of dose and duration. Another area of bias is you repeat a list of anti-fluoride talking points without once mentioning the established benefits to dental health.
If we are going to talk about the risks or benefits of any medical treatment, and they all have both, covering both is essential.
Other problems with your material have already been covered by phb.
Indeed. 100% pure water itself is toxic at a high enough dose.
We don’t need it and we don’t want it, but it is being forced onto us by bullies thinking that they will make some money out of it. There are many people intolerant to flouride and I am one of them. Especially if you have a low thyroid problem. We should be able to choose.
There are many in the community with concerns for food allergies. Nut allergies are one regularly commented on. Others have problems with gluten in the diet. In our household one has a need to manage carbs and avoid sugars.
There are low cab or low gluten food choices. It’s also possible to substitute different types of carbs, purchase zero sugar products and avoid products that contain or may contain nuts. We are able to choose.
It’s reassuring to note there are also bottled water choices which are fluoride free.
The majority of the community can and do choose to eat nuts, consume hot potato chips, and indulge guilt free on all sorts of sweet pastry treats. Relative health benefits debatable.
Whether fluoride in tap water is good or not so good for us. It’s noted the majority of consumers have chosen to benefit from it and are happy to do so. Especially considering the cost of dental health care these days. Those not able to or so inclined are also able to choose alternatives and to not drink the tap water.
I feel for you as your diet must be extremely restrictive since fluoride naturally occurs in many foods/drinks most of us enjoy on a daily basis.
Like many other (assume it is medically diagnosed) intolerances, finding water alternatives would be challenging as most bottled water which comes from springs or was travelled over the land surface will contain natural levels of fluoride, albeit at levels less than reticulated water where fluoride has been added.
Rainwater can have negligible fluoride if it is sourced from areas without any pollution and the collection system doesn’t contain materials containing fluoride.
You are talking aboout peanuts, carbs, sugar. At least it woulod be their choice. They are not forced onto them. It costs approx $350 per year to install and have water filters changed. Not many pensioners can afford this. How do yo9u or anyone know that it is not causing the increase in all these ailments appearing since the introduction of fluoride - including some cancers.
I don’t doubt that you believe you are intolerant of fluoride but did a doctor diagnose you with this condition? If not how do you know?
How do you know many people are intolerant?
There are people who are allergic to or have an intolerence to many things that are important to the health of the greater population.
In Australia things like folic acid and thiamine are added to flour used in baking. By regulation. But in some rare cases a few people have problems there.
Gluten has an issue there, but that is a natural part of wheat.
Believe it or not, some people are allergic to water. Aquagenic urticaria. Plug in anything followed by allergy in a search and there will be some who are allergic to it.
Can one imagine a public water supply that did not chlorinate the water? I can’t. But yes some people have problems with chlorine.
Water authorities around the world determined that adding fluoride to the water supply had a very beneficial effect on dental health.
The benefit of the many outweigh the detriment of the few.
If one has a problem with fluoride in the public water supply, then the solution is easy. Filter it out. But that won’t address the issue that fluoride occurs naturally in many foods. Because all water will contain it.
Politely most would suggest it was not their choice to be intolerant of nut products, or have diabetes of either type. IE It has been forced onto them, and there are costs. Real and social.
Comment:
It’s not uncommon for some in the community to hold different views about food products and water quality. Usually in difference to the greater community and accepted scientific evidence.
The consensus of scientific views is consistently in favour, whether responding to specific concerns, or the greater expectations of the community. Always ongoing and with supportive outcomes.
EG ‘Research shows water fluoridation is safe for children - UQ News - The University of Queensland, Australia
The health policies supporting fluoridation are part of each state or territory health system. A suitable resource for anyone with concerns for or against to go. There after approaching the respective minister and or local member suggested.
Here’s a more general article about aquagenic urticaria:
It is very rare. The above article says ~100 confirmed instances worldwide. It’s believed to be a reaction to something present on the skin when it dissolves in water, rather than being a reaction to the water itself.
If it were really an allergy to water, the sufferer wouldn’t be able to drink water, so wouldn’t live long after developing the allergy.
