Hello :

DEBUNKING THE MYTHS – EPISODE #1

In Canada and the United States, our governments and professional health authorities both of which advocate for fluoridation of drinking water, pride themselves on promoting a public health measure. This is allegedly based on rigorous, thoughtful science that has evaluated all possible impacts on health and the environment. This is, again allegedly, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), among the ten greatest achievements of the 20th century in public health. These authorities are so entrenched in their blind belief in fluoridation that they are unable to see the scientific flaws, however obvious. Even in the face of irrefutable evidence, they are not swayed. Yet fluoridation rests on faulty premises. It would suffice to demonstrate the falsehood of just one of the premises of this "public health measure" for it to collapse, and yet, it has survived for more than 75 years…just like leaded gasoline!!

We will therefore be producing a series of newsletters to discuss in detail each of the flawed premises upon which fluoridation is based. We will take them one at a time, in order to make a more in-depth analysis by confronting them with scientific studies and systematic reviews.  First, let's see how fluoridation is defined. 

DEFINITION OF FLUORIDATED MUNICIPAL DRINKING WATER

In 2013, we spared no effort to obtain the best possible definition of fluoridation from the highest health authority in Quebec: the then-minister responsible in Quebec for the Public Health Act, Dr. Réjean Hébert, MD. A Doctor and researcher in geriatrics and gerontology, he was the Minister of Health and Social Services, the Minister responsible for Seniors, as well as the Minister responsible for the Eastern Township region in the government of the Parti Québécois, led by Pauline Marois. He represented the constituency of Saint-François in the National Assembly of Quebec from the election of September 4, 2012 until April 7, 2014.

In our discussions with him, he acknowledged the following definition of fluoridation from Water fluoridation: Analysis of Health Benefits and Risks. (Quebec Institute of Public Health), as being "…exact, but could be improved":

"Fluoridation of drinking water is the adjustment of the fluoride concentration of drinking water by adding fluoride to the desired concentration, set at 0.7 ppm in Quebec, using water treatment chemical sources of fluoride; in order to use drinking water as a vehicle to administer fluoride to prevent dental caries and to reduce its incidence in a given population, thereby modifying the composition of the dental enamel (in fluoroapatite) to make it more resistant to decay. This is a public health measure."

Note that in this definition, the fluorinating agent is relegated to the classification of "water treatment product" even though it also meets the criteria for the definition of a "drug" as described in the Food and Drug Act from Health Canada. We covered this in Newsletter #5.

The Minister of Health and Social Services is responsible for the Public Health Act (2001).  The purpose of this law is to protect the health of the population of Quebec and to put in place conditions favourable to the maintenance and improvement of the state of health and well-being of the population in general. Here are the articles of this law relating to fluoridation. (Note this is not an official translation.)

 SECTION II – FLUORIDATION OF DRINKING WATER

57 – Any owner of a drinking water treatment plant who fluorinates the water that they distribute must monitor the quality of this fluorination so that it reaches the optimal fluorine concentration set by ministerial regulation to prevent tooth decay.
2001, c. 60, a. 57

58 – The Minister may, by regulation, fix standards on the manner of monitoring the quality of the fluoridation of drinking water.
2001, c. 60, a. 58

59 – The national public health program must include actions to encourage the fluoridation of water.
2001, c. 60, a. 59

60 – The Minister may, to the extent he considers appropriate, pay a subsidy to any owner of a drinking water treatment plant who so requests, in order to cover the costs of purchasing, developing, installing or repairing a fluorination device, as well as the cost of the fluoride used.  It may make the award of this grant subject to conditions it considers appropriate.
2001, c. 60, a. 60 

Note that the law confuses fluorine with fluoride, does not specify the legal classification of the fluorinating agent, and the level of government or body that is responsible for it.

1. That the health authorities know the optimal concentration of fluoride in the enamel of the tooth to make it resistant to decay.
    
2. That, therefore, these authorities know exactly how much fluoride is needed each day to ensure that the apatite crystals in dental enamel will be transformed into a sufficient level of fluoroapatite to make it resistant to tooth decay.
    
3. That drinking water is an excellent vehicle for the administration of an appropriate dose of fluoride to prevent cavities, without risk to health.
    
4. That an optimal concentration of 0.7 ppm of fluoride in drinking water will ensure the administration of an optimal and safe daily dose of fluoride for health to each citizen, without being dose-adjusted according to his/her weight and age, gender, state of health, diet, environmental and physical activities, regardless of the amount of water consumed.
    
5. That the optimum safe intake of fluoride in milligrams/per kilogram of body weight/per day required for dental health is well known.
    
6. That it is possible to control the daily fluoride intake for the entire population regardless of all other sources of fluoride exposure.
    
7. That fluoridation will not materially alter dietary fluoride intake.
    
8. That environmental pollution cannot increase the daily intake of fluoride.
    
9. That fluoride is an essential nutrient, especially for dental health.
    
10. That tooth decay is caused in part by a fluoride deficiency in tooth enamel.
     
11. That nutritional fluoride deficiency is widespread because tooth decay is a major health problem in the population.
     
12. That there are thousands of studies demonstrating the effectiveness of fluoridation in reducing tooth decay.
     
13. That fluoridation is safe, as demonstrated by thousands of scientific studies.
     
14. That fluoride added to tap water has absolutely no adverse health effects on the consumer of fluoridated water.
     
15. That excess fluoride is completely eliminated by the body.
     
16. That even moderate dental fluorosis is a beautification of the tooth and not a disease.
     
17. That fluoridation is a universally used and recognized health measure.
     
18. That Health Canada regulates and approves fluoridation products to ensure their efficacy and safety.
     
19. That Health Canada regulates fluoridation products as a source of nutrition for food or water fortification.
     
20. That toxicology testing reviews have been performed to ensure the safety of fluoridation and that an organization such as Health Canada, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) certainly have done these reviews of toxicology testing to ensure safety.
     
21. That there are no carcinogenic and other health hazard elements present in the raw fluoridation industrial product used in most fluoridation schemes.
     
22. That the fluoride used for fluoridation is not a medication.
     
23. That there is no risk that fluoridation could have to negatively impact the aquatic environment related to the discharge of effluents from fluoridated municipalities.
     
24. That the law and medical ethics allow the use of a “water treatment product”, thus classified according to the health authorities, to treat a population against a disease by its administration for therapy and prevention.

Discussion of tooth enamel:  What is the optimum concentration of fluoride in tooth enamel to make it resistant to decay? Initially, the fluoridation of water is based on the erroneous assumption that by transforming a significant part of the crystals of the tooth enamel consisting of hydroxyapatite into fluoroapatite, (by incorporating fluorine atoms, during the tooth formation) this enamel will be more resistant to tooth decay. Fluoroapatite is, in fact, less soluble in an acidic medium than hydroxyapatite whose formula is Ca10 (PO4) 6 (OH) 2). The high percentage of minerals in the enamel is responsible not only for its strength and hardness (which is superior to bone tissue), but also for its friability.

Dentin, which is less mineralized and less friable, is essentially a support and compensates for the weaknesses of the enamel.  Hydroxyapatite is a mineral substance composed of calcium and phosphate and hydroxylated. It is the major natural constituent of dental enamel (97%) and dentin (70%).

Discussion of resistance to decay:  Official health authorities' fluoridation theory of the systemic action of fluoride, suggests that fluoride ingested during tooth formation will make teeth resistant to decay. To illustrate this assertion, take as an example, the Position Statement on community water fluoridation by the Alberta Department of Health (page 3) which states:

“Fluoride is known to have a protective effect against dental caries throughout life. In infants and children with pre-erupted teeth, ingested fluoride is incorporated into the structure of developing tooth enamel, making it more resistant to decay after eruption."

The analysis reported in a document from the same government, A Review of Water Fluoridation (page 17), scientifically demolishes this position statement:

“Sound enamel, except in its outer few micrometers, generally contains fluoride at levels of about 20 to 100 parts per million (or ppm), depending upon the fluoride ingested during tooth development. Teeth in children who lived in areas with fluoridated drinking water during tooth development have fluoride content toward the higher end of this range. The outer few micrometers of enamel can have fluoride levels of 1,000 to 2,000 ppm.

Fluoride in the solution surrounding CAP crystals has been shown to be much more effective in inhibiting demineralization than fluoride incorporated into the crystals at the levels found in enamel. Ten Cate, Nelson and colleagues, and Featherstone and colleagues, found no measurable reduction in the acid solubility of synthetic CAP (3 percent CO3 by weight, comparable to that of dental enamel mineral) with about 1,000 ppm fluoride incorporated. Importantly, this means that fluoride incorporated during tooth mineral development at normal levels of 20 to 100 ppm (even in areas that have fluoridated drinking water or with the use of fluoride supplements) does not measurably alter the acid solubility of the mineral. Even when the outer enamel has higher fluoride levels, such as 1,000 ppm, it does not measurably withstand acid-induced dissolution any better than enamel with lower levels of fluoride... The fluoride incorporated developmentally—that is, systemically into the normal tooth mineral—is insufficient to have a measurable effect on acid solubility."  [our emphasis]

Discussion of "optimum" levels:  If fluoridation is not able to incorporate a sufficient quantity of fluoride to reach a sufficient level of fluoroapatite to confer resistance of the enamel to the acid generated by the bacteria responsible for the decay, the theory of the systemic action of fluoridation collapses. The primary goal of fluoridation is to make the tooth enamel resistant to acidity. However, this goal is not achieved with water fluoridation. It must therefore be concluded that fluoridation, at the concentration of 0.7 ppm and even at the previously determined concentration of 1.2 ppm, is absolutely incapable of increasing the concentration of fluoride in the enamel at a concentration of 100 ppm, a completely ineffective concentration against decay. Even at 2,000 ppm, or 20 times more, the dissolution of the crystals in the enamel would change little. The systemic theory of fluoridation does not hold up to science.

Discussion of Dental Fluorosis:  At concentrations higher than 0.7 ppm of fluoride which is that fixed for fluoridation, we would have unacceptable or even catastrophic rates and severities of dental fluorosis. Worse yet, dental fluorosis, which is the result of excess fluoride intake, due to the porous and soluble nature of the abnormalities in the enamel, makes teeth more susceptible to decay. However, the gap between the recommended dose of fluoride and the toxic dose that causes dental fluorosis is non-existent, that is to say, that the recommended dose is already toxic, as illustrated by dental fluorosis.

Conclusion:  If the systemic action of fluoride is not the mode of action of fluoride, then why promote fluoridation, which is based on the erroneous theory of the systemic action of fluoride? If nature had really wanted to give teeth resistance to decay by fluoride, the kidneys would not bother to eliminate 50% of the dose consumed, breast milk that hardly contains any would have much more and dental fluorosis would not occur with such a high incidence of 65% with water fluoridation. — Neurath, C. Limeback, H, Osmunson, B., Dental Fluorosis Trends in US Oral Health Surveys: 1986 to 2012, JDR Clinical and Translational Research, March 6th, 2019.

FLUORIDE FACT

The health authorities DO NOT KNOW the optimal concentration of fluoride in the enamel of the tooth to make it resistant to decay.

HOW CAN YOU HELP TODAY?

There have been updates to the Fluoride Free Canada website.  To make the updates easier to locate, a ***What's New*** link has been added to the home menu.  Check it out!

Sincerely,

Dr. James Winter, Ph.D.

Fluoride Free Canada

Newsletter Director

Newsletter Archives

Si vous préférez recevoir des communications de Canada sans fluorure en français,
prière de compléter ce formulaire