The "Fuzzy Math" of Fluoride Promotion

Red Flags Weekly ^ | July 1, 2002 | Paul Connet, Ph.d

[TomB]

Anytime I fight against the anti-fluoridationists, this it the only argument they make that has weight. However, I'd like to point out that this is exactly how government should operate, each municipality determining for itself what is best. There are still cities in this country that don't fluoridate the water because of strong local opposition. That is the way it should be.

However, the reason the anti-fluoridationists have been ridiculed so much in the past is because of the silly arguments they use. It seems any fluoride thread brings the hypochondriacs out of the woodwork, and they complain about every malady under the sun being due to fluoride.

[JameRetief]

Regarding the neccessity of fats in the diet:

Check out the website, www.udoerasmus.com. It has alot of good information about both the good oils(unprocessed and protected oils, like fresh Omega 3 aand Omega 6 containing oils and virgin olive oil) and the bad oils (any processed or refined oils).

I highly recommend reading his book on the subject, Fats That Heal Fats That Kill. LOTS of great information on our health and how important the essential fatty acids Omega 3 and 6 are in our diets.

[nyscof]

Basically, fluoride was added to water supplies because it was believed to incorporate into developing teeth to make them resist decay. Science has proven this theory wrong.
Fluoride's beneficial effects, are topical only. So there's no good reason to add fluoride to water except if you want an expensive mouthwash. The CDC says the amounts that emerge from saliva are too low to be therapeutic

Fluoridation was expected to level out tooth decay rates to the low levels experienced by residents in southwestern USA who had high levels of calcium fluoride in their water supplies and also disfiguring mottled or discolored teeth. Researchers knew fluoride discolored teeth so they assumed the fluoride caused the decay resistence. They neglected the calcium, magnesium and other bone and teeth building components of the water supply.

Now that over 62% of the USA is fluoridated, tooth decay rates have not been leveled out. The same disparities according to region exist today as it did back in the early 1900's.

Tooth decay, like most other diseases, is caused by poor nutrition in the womb and in life. That's why the U.S.s poor and minority populations suffer the most tooth decay despite living in fluoridated areas. They also often suffer the most of any recordable disease and it's mortality rates.

Without going off on a tangent, fluoridation has failed to eliminate tooth decay like it promised. However, dental fluorosis rates are skyrocketing in the US while the Surgeon General reports an epidemic of tooth decay in certain segments of the US population.

And anecdotal evidence from dentists tell us that their "fluoride protected" patients are also suffering more tooth decay - usually because they drink too much soda.

Dental researchers now tell us that fluoride in doses above "optimal" can actually cause tooth decay (like any drug causes what it can cure)

Fluoride supplements have proved to cause more dental fluorosis without any benefit. Many dental groups no longer routinely recommend them.

Your children probably have little decay because they eat well and have good dental care.

And the fluoride that's add to over 90% of US water supplies are silicofluorides, never tested for safety in humans or animals. Silicofluorides are the arsenic- and lead- contaminated waste products of phosphate fertilizer manufacturing. Published studies by Masters and Coplan show that children who live in silicofluoridated communities have higher blood lead levels than childen who live in sodium fluoridated or non-fluoridated communities.

And how wise is it these days to have this unnecessary, odorless, tasteless chemical sitting next to most water plants in the US.

New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nys cof

[TomB]

Just joined today to post your nonsense?

[TomB]

Cleanup aisle 23.....

We've got a live one here ;-)

[TomB]

I was busy all weekend, so I didn't have time to properly respond to your post.

Basically, fluoride was added to water supplies because it was believed to incorporate into developing teeth to make them resist decay. Science has proven this theory wrong. Fluoride's beneficial effects, are topical only. So there's no good reason to add fluoride to water except if you want an expensive mouthwash. The CDC says the amounts that emerge from saliva are too low to be therapeutic

You are either very confused or deliberately misleading here, bad start. While early theory may have held that fluoride could affect developing teeth prior to eruption, there is no current thought that that is the case. Fluoride is effective as a topical agent, whether in water, toothpaste, or as a treatment at the dentist's office. Nobody claims otherwise.

They neglected the calcium, magnesium and other bone and teeth building components of the water supply.

Of course they didn't. "Colorado Brown Stain" was noted in the 19th century in the southwest and mountain states, and concurrent with that was high levels of fluoride (many times higher than what is added to water supplies). There was a direct relationship between fluoride levels in the water and caries suseptability. Because they didn't know which substance present in the water was causing the stain, they had to eliminate everything that wasn't, including the minerals mentioned above.

Now that over 62% of the USA is fluoridated, tooth decay rates have not been leveled out. The same disparities according to region exist today as it did back in the early 1900's.

Obviously, because the diets of present day children differ so radically from those of the early 1900's, you are comparing apples to oranges. Although I'd appreciate a link to your information on decay rates, since they seem out of step with mine.

Tooth decay, like most other diseases, is caused by poor nutrition in the womb.....

What?! Care to rephrase that?

Without going off on a tangent, fluoridation has failed to eliminate tooth decay like it promised.

Could you show where present day researchers have "promised" that fluoride would eliminate tooth decay? While I can't say that someone has never made that claim, I've never heard it. And it would be silly to do so. There are too many other factors involved.

However, dental fluorosis rates are skyrocketing in the US while the Surgeon General reports an epidemic of tooth decay in certain segments of the US population.

Links to those studies, please.

And anecdotal evidence from dentists tell us that their "fluoride protected" patients are also suffering more tooth decay - usually because they drink too much soda.

Who is "us"? And why would you think that fluoride can protect you from abusing your teeth? Could you point me to dental literature which says "Put fluoride in the water, and you can eat and drink anything you want, and never get decay!"

That's a mighty big strawman you're beating up.

Dental researchers now tell us that fluoride in doses above "optimal" can actually cause tooth decay (like any drug causes what it can cure)

Once again, please post a link to support this. In cases of extereme fluoride exposure the teeth can be deformed, and maybe then decay easier, I'm not aware of very many cases. In over 10 years of practice, I have never seen one severe case of fluorosis, and very few cases of anything but mild white spotting. As a matter of fact, I've only had to cosmetically repair 4 or 5 cases in over a decade of looking.

And how wise is it these days to have this unnecessary, odorless, tasteless chemical sitting next to most water plants in the US.

I guess it was only a matter of time before the anti-fluoridationists would exploit 9-11 for their own purposes. That's really low. If a terrorist is going to poison the water supply, they're going to use something more potent that fluoride.

[TomB]

As far as the silicofluoride study goes, it seems that it is terribly flawed, and the results have yet to be reproduced.

Here is what the CDC says:

"This manuscript is poorly written and provides insufficient detail on study method to allow a full evaluation. Based on the information presented, this study used a flawed analytic approach, which undermines the validity of its conclusions. ....Much of the authors' contentions regarding the relation between fluoridation chemicals (or lead, for that matter) and crime rates is weakly supported, and is likely to highly confounded by complex social factors including, for example, unemployment rates, occupational chemical exposures, and socioeconomic factors not captured in this simplistic analysis." Also, they said, "This is a very poor conceived and developed piece of research. The review of the literature is highly selective and one of the key documents to support the author's point of view is authored by one of the authors."

There is also a new paper to be published in the International Journal of Environmental Studies. This paper, authored by Urbansky and Schock, examines Master and Coplan and their various studies. Anyine inclined to take the Master study seriously should look at their other work, it is, to say the least, unusual.

From the paper:

"Recent reports have attempted to show that fluoridated potable water is linked to increased levels of lead (II) in blood. ...Overall, we conclude that no credible evidence exists to show that water fluoridation has any quantitatable effects on the solubility, bioavailability, bioaccumulation, or reactivity of lead (0) or lead (II) compounds". "Masters and Coplan's conclusions are unsupported even by their own limited data and are inconsistent with established scientific literature. The paper will not stand up to rigorous review by expert scientists experienced in the relevant disciplines. There are no credible data in any report or letter they have written thus far to suggest any link between fluoridation and anything else."

So this leaves us with the unanswerable question, at least to the anti-fluoridationists. Since fluoride is a naturally occurring substance, and many areas of the country have it in concentrations many times higher than what is added to water supplies, and communities have been drinking that water for hundreds of years, why don't we see pockets of illness in all these areas?

[nyscof]

To: nyscof

Basically, fluoride was added to water supplies because it was believed to incorporate into developing teeth to make them resist decay. Science has proven this theory wrong. Fluoride's beneficial effects, are topical only. So there's no good reason to add fluoride to water except if you want an expensive mouthwash. The CDC says the amounts that emerge from saliva are too low to be therapeutic

Tom said: You are either very confused or deliberately misleading here, bad start. While early theory may have held that fluoride could affect developing teeth prior to eruption, there is no current thought that that is the case. Fluoride is effective as a topical agent, whether in water, toothpaste, or as a treatment at the dentist's office. Nobody claims otherwise.

NYSCOF says: Well, I’m glad you know this but it seems a majority of your colleagues do not. It would be nice if you spent as much time educating them as you do trying to discredit us.

From the Journal of the Public Health Association,

"We surveyed all dentists and hygienists in the state and through 2,391
responses (40 percent) learned that dental professionals' knowledge about
fluoride was far behind the science. . . .Dental professionals in our states
need to learn the implications of the new understanding of fluoride's mode
of action and need to understand the possible implications of the
significant increase in dental fluorosis . . . If we don't educate health
professionals and the public, who will? The antifluoridationists?"
http://www.apha.org/sections/newsletters/oralhealthwinter2001.htm

Here’s another sad example of misinformation distributed by dentists via a newspaper:
http://www.examiner.net/stories/070602/new_070602020.shtml

This is what the newspaper quotes the dentist as saying:
"Systemic (flouride) is better because it goes into the system and prevents
dental disease," he said. "The systemic benefit is to children ages zero to
5. That's really a biggie because their teeth are forming then. All children
who are born after we start this will see a 70 percent reduction in tooth
decay over time."

In fact, in a letter wen sent to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, our organization compiled a list of newspapers and websites that continue to disseminate misinformation. Scroll down to “Examples of Misinformation by Proponents of Fluoridation” http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof/_pgg10.php3 This letter went out in 2001.

---

They neglected the calcium, magnesium and other bone and teeth building components of the water supply.

Tom said: Of course they didn't. "Colorado Brown Stain" was noted in the 19th century in the southwest and mountain states, and concurrent with that was high levels of fluoride (many times higher than what is added to water supplies). There was a direct relationship between fluoride levels in the water and caries suseptability. Because they didn't know which substance present in the water was causing the stain, they had to eliminate everything that wasn't, including the minerals mentioned above.

NYSCOF says: From “The Fight for Fluoridation” by Donald H. McNeil 1957

“In April 1947, a research team head by Dean Conrad Elvehjem put out a release claiming that in a series of experiments at the University, 1 ppm fluorine had ‘absolutely no effect on rats’ and that additions of raw, whole milk produced more positive reslts than fluorine in preventing decay.

“Frisch (a spokesman for dentists who zealously pushed fluoridation - it was like a religion with him ) exploded with wrath when he read the statement. Calling the conclusions ‘hogwash from the biochemistry department,’ ...Thoroughly angered, Frisch asked the University for the amounts received by the biochemistry department earmarked for dairy research. University officials revealed that of $53,000 received by the University for dairy promotion during the 1946-47 school year, more than $12,000 had been allocated to the biochemistry department. Frisch used the figures widely in refuting the argument that milk, not fluorine, prevent decay...”

---

Now that over 62% of the USA is fluoridated, tooth decay rates have not been leveled out. The same disparities according to region exist today as it did back in the early 1900's.

Tom said: Obviously, because the diets of present day children differ so radically from those of the early 1900's, you are comparing apples to oranges. Although I'd appreciate a link to your information on decay rates, since they seem out of step with mine.

NYSCOF says: Tooth Decay Trends fluoridated vs. nonfluoridated http://www.fluoridealert.org/WHO-DMFT.htm

Dental decay is rising rapidly in the 1990's in children in the United States. Recent study's results were published in the American Academy of Dentistry for children in its November-December 1998 issue. This journal is only received by dentists, and it showed that dental decay in children under the age of five years has doubled in the past ten years. The average child in the study had seven cavities prior to their sixth birthday, and the same population of children in 1987 had three and one half cavities.
http://www.drbranam.com/pgeArticle_Early.htm

Here’s more evidence of fluoridation’s failure:
http://www.enn.com/direct/display-release.asp?id=6812

---

Tooth decay, like most other diseases, is caused by poor nutrition in the womb.....

Tom said: What?! Care to rephrase that?

NYSCOF says: “Good Oral Health Starts In the Womb” American Dental Association news release

http://www.ada.org/public/media/newsrel/0202/nr-01.html

CHICAGO - Pregnant women can help ensure their children get a good start on their oral health by focusing on staying healthy, including a proper diet, because teeth begin developing between the third and sixth month of pregnancy, says the American Dental Association (ADA).

---

Without going off on a tangent, fluoridation has failed to eliminate tooth decay like it promised.

Tom said: Could you show where present day researchers have "promised" that fluoride would eliminate tooth decay? While I can't say that someone has never made that claim, I've never heard it. And it would be silly to do so. There are too many other factors involved.

NYSCOF says: I didn’t say *present* day researchers promised anything. Early researchers thought fluoride deficiency caused tooth decay just like vitamin deficiency caused disease. Just like Vitamin C cured scurvy dentists believed fluoride would cure tooth decay.

"The Newburgh Kingston Caries Fluorine Study IV Dental Findings After Six Years of Water Fluoridation," published January 1953) Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Oral Pathology, Vol. 6, No. 1, Pages 114-123, “six years into the New York State experiment that launched fluoridation - the additon of fluoride into water supplies to irradicate tooth decay.”

The Surgeon General still reports that fluoridation will help eliminate early childhood caries, ignoring that most children with this disease already live in fluoridated communities and in a fluoride-saturated society.

---

However, dental fluorosis rates are skyrocketing in the US while the Surgeon General reports an epidemic of tooth decay in certain segments of the US population.

Links to those studies, please.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=PubMed

---

Dental researchers now tell us that fluoride in doses above "optimal" can actually cause tooth decay (like any drug causes what it can cure)

Tom said: Once again, please post a link to support this. In cases of extereme fluoride exposure the teeth can be deformed, and maybe then decay easier, I'm not aware of very many cases. In over 10 years of practice, I have never seen one severe case of fluorosis, and very few cases of anything but mild white spotting. As a matter of fact, I've only had to cosmetically repair 4 or 5 cases in over a decade of looking.

NYSCOF says: Cavities increase in people with severe fluorosis according to the dental textbook, “Dentistry, Dental Practice and the Community,” by Burt and Eklund. But few practicing dentists seem to know this. Burt and Eklund explain that fluoride concentrations in drinking water, form a J-shaped curve. With increasing fluoride levels, cavity experience diminishes to a certain point and then starts to rise again. The true relationship between water fluoride levels and dental decay is the J-shaped curve, with the turning point in the J being something between 3 and 4 times the optimal level, they write. Studies show this level is already exceeded by many American children Burt (also editor of Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology) & Eklund use published scientific studies as the basis for this book.

---

And how wise is it these days to have this unnecessary, odorless, tasteless chemical sitting next to most water plants in the US.


Tom said: I guess it was only a matter of time before the anti-fluoridationists would exploit 9-11 for their own purposes. That's really low. If a terrorist is going to poison the water supply, they're going to use something more potent that fluoride.

NYSCOF says: Water Fluoride Poisons 23 Californians
http://www.enn.com/direct/display-release.asp?id=7099

Here's more fluoride accidents and poisonings:
http://www.fluoridealert.org/accidents.htm

New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

[TomB]

Well, I?m glad you know this but it seems a majority of your colleagues do not. It would be nice if you spent as much time educating them as you do trying to discredit us.

You claim that we don't know the action of fluoride, yet I gave you the correct answer. A quick look at the ADA, CDC and other websites all have it correct, so I'm not sure what your complaint is. I question those links becasue I know of NOBODY who thinks fluoride works systemically. And given the anti-fluoridationists history of "stretching" the truth, I doubt you assertions have any basis in fact.

?In April 1947, a research team head by Dean Conrad Elvehjem put out a release claiming that in a series of experiments at the University, 1 ppm fluorine had ?absolutely no effect on rats? and that additions of raw, whole milk produced more positive reslts than fluorine in preventing decay.

And I have over 800 studies (the last I checked) that show fluoride is effective. The fact you have to go back to a study from 1947 shows the weakness of your case.

Dental decay is rising rapidly in the 1990's in children in the United States. Recent study's results were published in the American Academy of Dentistry for children in its November-December 1998 issue. This journal is only received by dentists, and it showed that dental decay in children under the age of five years has doubled in the past ten years. The average child in the study had seven cavities prior to their sixth birthday, and the same population of children in 1987 had three and one half cavities.

You didn't discuss my point, which is that diet has a large impact on caries. Obviously rates would be much higher without fluoride.

CHICAGO - Pregnant women can help ensure their children get a good start on their oral health by focusing on staying healthy, including a proper diet, because teeth begin developing between the third and sixth month of pregnancy, says the American Dental Association (ADA).

You made the statement that "Tooth decay, like most other diseases, is caused by poor nutrition in the womb..... ". That is a patently FALSE statement and is an example of your inablility to understand the subject. Illness and malnutrition during fetal development can cause tooth malformation and other developmental problems in some cases, NOT DECAY. If you don' understand the difference, you have no business passing yourself off as some kind of expert.

NYSCOF says: I didn?t say *present* day researchers promised anything. Early researchers thought fluoride deficiency caused tooth decay just like vitamin deficiency caused disease. Just like Vitamin C cured scurvy dentists believed fluoride would cure tooth decay.

Then you don't have a point, it's just whining.

NYSCOF says: Cavities increase in people with severe fluorosis according to the dental textbook, ?Dentistry, Dental Practice and the Community,? by Burt and Eklund. But few practicing dentists seem to know this. Burt and Eklund explain that fluoride concentrations in drinking water, form a J-shaped curve. With increasing fluoride levels, cavity experience diminishes to a certain point and then starts to rise again. The true relationship between water fluoride levels and dental decay is the J-shaped curve, with the turning point in the J being something between 3 and 4 times the optimal level, they write. Studies show this level is already exceeded by many American children Burt (also editor of Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology) & Eklund use published scientific studies as the basis for this book.

At what concentrations does this occur? What percentage of the population has this problem? I say again that I have NEVER seen a case of severe fluorosis. Reading from a textbook shows that the probelm exists in theory, but where is it in the real world?

NYSCOF says: Water Fluoride Poisons 23 Californians http://www.enn.com/direct/display-release.asp?id=7099

Here's more fluoride accidents and poisonings: http://www.fluoridealert.org/accidents.htm

New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

Doesn't seem like a great terror weapon, does it? If terrorists attack our water supply, it will be to kill people, and fluoride is a poor choice of poison. And please answer the question I asked, I realize there are probably no cut-and-paste answers, but do your best:

So this leaves us with the unanswerable question, at least to the anti-fluoridationists. Since fluoride is a naturally occurring substance, and many areas of the country have it in concentrations many times higher than what is added to water supplies, and communities have been drinking that water for hundreds of years, why don't we see pockets of illness in all these areas?

[TomB]

BTW, your link is bad:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=PubMed

[aruanan]

Early researchers thought fluoride deficiency caused tooth decay just like vitamin deficiency caused disease. Just like Vitamin C cured scurvy dentists believed fluoride would cure tooth decay.

This is idiocy. I've read the original journal article (in the actual, original journal) by the researcher who first noticed that people in areas of high naturally-occurring levels of fluoride had very low levels of tooth decay, in spite of the fact that they had highly-compromised tooth enamel due to fluorosis. Based on observation, he concluded that 1 ppm fluoride in water would give the maximum protection with the minimum fluorosis. Nowhere did he consider fluoride to have a vitamin-like action or capacity. Nowhere in any of the review articles I've studied for journal club presentations on fluoride did anyone suggest a role for fluoride in the prevention of tooth decay as vitamin C had for prevention of scurvy.

[TomB]

This is idiocy.

A cogent comment, my friend. But let's examine the matter a little closer. Take for example our paranoid friend's comment:

NYSCOF: Tooth decay, like most other diseases, is caused by poor nutrition in the womb.....

I incredulously ask what he means by that, and, as proof, he posts this, from the ADA:

CHICAGO - Pregnant women can help ensure their children get a good start on their oral health by focusing on staying healthy, including a proper diet, because teeth begin developing between the third and sixth month of pregnancy, says the American Dental Association (ADA).

Obviously, to any rational person reading that blurb, the meaning is that one of the reasons pregnant women should maintain a proper diet is to help with the proper DEVELOPMENT of the teeth. Nowhere does it say anything about tooth decay.

Unfortunately, this is how these people read medical journals, if at all. The see one small portion of a study and make sweeping generalizations from them, failing to understand the limitations and purposes of the study.

Par for the course, I guess.

[nyscof]

Well, I?m glad you know this but it seems a majority of your colleagues do not. It would be nice if you spent as much time educating them as you do trying to discredit us.

You claim that we don't know the action of fluoride, yet I gave you the correct answer. A quick look at the ADA, CDC and other websites all have it correct, so I'm not sure what your complaint is. I question those links becasue I know of NOBODY who thinks fluoride works systemically. And given the anti-fluoridationists history of "stretching" the truth, I doubt you assertions have any basis in fact.

NYSCOF says: Obviously you choose not to see the truth because if you clicked on many of those links you would see that I’ve proved my case over and over again. Dentists continue to give out fluoride misinformation and the media believes them.


?In April 1947, a research team head by Dean Conrad Elvehjem put out a release claiming that in a series of experiments at the University, 1 ppm fluorine had ?absolutely no effect on rats? and that additions of raw, whole milk produced more positive reslts than fluorine in preventing decay.
And I have over 800 studies (the last I checked) that show fluoride is effective. The fact you have to go back to a study from 1947 shows the weakness of your case.

NYSCOF says: Please show me one study that proves drinking fluoridated water at 1 ppm is safe to the entire population while being effective in reducing tooth decay

Dental decay is rising rapidly in the 1990's in children in the United States. Recent study's results were published in the American Academy of Dentistry for children in its November-December 1998 issue. This journal is only received by dentists, and it showed that dental decay in children under the age of five years has doubled in the past ten years. The average child in the study had seven cavities prior to their sixth birthday, and the same population of children in 1987 had three and one half cavities.
You didn't discuss my point, which is that diet has a large impact on caries. Obviously rates would be much higher without fluoride.

NYSCOF says: Show me studies that compare decay rates of fluoride users vs. non-users taking their diet into account.

NYSCOF says: Cavities increase in people with severe fluorosis according to the dental textbook, ?Dentistry, Dental Practice and the Community,? by Burt and Eklund. But few practicing dentists seem to know this. Burt and Eklund explain that fluoride concentrations in drinking water, form a J-shaped curve. With increasing fluoride levels, cavity experience diminishes to a certain point and then starts to rise again. The true relationship between water fluoride levels and dental decay is the J-shaped curve, with the turning point in the J being something between 3 and 4 times the optimal level, they write. Studies show this level is already exceeded by many American children Burt (also editor of Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology) & Eklund use published scientific studies as the basis for this book.
At what concentrations does this occur? What percentage of the population has this problem? I say again that I have NEVER seen a case of severe fluorosis. Reading from a textbook shows that the probelm exists in theory, but where is it in the real world?

NYSCOF says:
JADA The Journal of the American Dental Association - February 2002

Prevalence and Trends in Enamel Fluorosis in the United States From the 1930s to the 1980s
Beltrán-Aguilar E.D.[1], Griffin S.O.[2], Lockwood S.A.[3]
AbstractBackground. The National Survey of Dental Caries in U.S. School Children: 1986-1987 conducted by the National Institute of Dental Research, or NIDR, remains the only source of national data about the prevalence of enamel fluorosis. The authors analyze these data and describe changes in the prevalence of enamel fluorosis since the 1930s, as reported by H. Trendley Dean.Methods. A sample of children comparable to those described in the 1930s was selected from the NIDR data set among children living in households served by public water systems during the child's first eight years of life. The type of water system (that is, natural, optimal and suboptimal) for each household had been recorded in the NIDR data set using data from the 1985 U.S. Fluoridation Census. The NIDR data set included information about the children's history of fluoride exposure obtained from parents.Results. In the 1986-1987 period, the prevalence of enamel fluorosis (ranging from very mild to severe) was 37.8 percent among children living in residences with natural fluoride (0.7 to 4.0 parts per million fluoride ions, or F–), 25.8 percent in the optimal fluoride group (0.7 to 1.2 ppm F–) and 15.5 percent in the suboptimal fluoride group (< 0.7 ppm F–). The largest increase in fluorosis prevalence from the 1930s to the 1980s was in the suboptimal fluoride group (6.5 to 15.5 percent).Conclusions and Clinical Implications. Exposure to multiple sources of fluoride may explain the increase in enamel fluorosis from the 1930s to the 1980s. The exposure to fluoride from sources such as dietary supplements has decreased since the 1980s because of reductions in the recommended dosage, but these changes occurred too late to have an effect on the study cohort. Evidence of simultaneous use of systemic fluorides indicates the need to reinforce guidelines for the appropriate use of fluorides and promote research on measuring total fluoride exposure.
Fluoridation Damaging Teeth: J Am Dental Assoc
From New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridaton
Thursday, February 21, 2002

NEW YORK — Current water fluoride levels are damaging children’s teeth, according to a research article in the February Journal of the American Dental Association.(1)

Up to 63 percent of children living in optimally fluoridated areas (from 0.7-1.2 parts per million, ppm) show fluoride overdose symptoms as dental fluorosis (white-spotted, yellow or brown permanently stained, sometimes pitted teeth), according to Beltran-Aguilar and colleagues in “Prevalence and trends in enamel fluorosis in the United States from the 1930s to the 1980s.”(1)

“We are now spending more money treating dental fluorosis than we would spend treating new decay if water fluoridation halted," says Canada's leading fluoride authority, dentist and researcher, Hardy Limeback, head of the Department of Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto, and past-president of the Canadian Association for Dental Research.

“The...implication is the need to determine whether current enamel fluorosis prevalence warrants a re-evaluation and possible reduction in the fluoride concentration in water, as has been suggested by some investigators,” reports Beltran-Aguilar and colleagues.

Optimally fluoridated water is supposed to reduce tooth decay without unwanted dental fluorosis. But Beltran-Aguilar and colleagues found children, even in sub-optimally (less than 0.7 ppm) fluoridated areas, with moderate and severe fluorosed teeth which is characterized by crumbling or pitting teeth that usually decay faster. “This severity was not observed in the 1930s among children drinking water with less than 1.3 ppm fluoride,” the authors report.

The American Dental Association describes severe fluorosis: “All tooth surfaces affected; discrete or confluent pitting; brown stain present,” The ADA describes moderate fluorosis: “All tooth surfaces affected; marked wear on biting surfaces; brown stain may be present.”(2)

The researchers further suggest parents avoid mixing fluoridated water into infant foods and that “Children younger than 8 years of age should receive fluoride according to their needs rather than routinely." The ADA currently recommends children be supplemented based on water fluoride levels.

---

SCIENTISTS FIND FLUORIDATION OUTDATED & QUESTION ITS MORALITY: Journal of the Canadian Dental Association

NEW YORK — Fluoridation may be immoral with benefits exaggerated and risks minimized, reports Howard Cohen, Ph.D., and David Locker, BDS, Ph.D., professor and director of the Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto in the November, 2001, Journal of the Canadian Dental Association (http://www.cda-adc.ca/jcda/vol-67/issue-10/578.html).

“Ethically, it cannot be argued that past benefits, by themselves, justify continuing the practice of fluoridation,” write Cohen and Locker.

Fluoridation is a scientific controversy and substantial benefits recorded in early fluoridation trials, 50 years ago, are no longer found today, they write.

“Although current studies indicate that water fluoridation continues to be beneficial, recent reviews have shown that the quality of the evidence provided by these studies is poor,” report the authors. The few sound studies that exist indicate small differences in decay between fluoridated and nonfluoridated child populations, they found. Studies on Canadian populations show even less evidence that systemic fluoride reduces tooth decay, they report; further, studies on adults are largely absent.

Fluoridation does have risks. “Fluoridation increases the prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis” (white spotted, yellow or brown permanently stained teeth), they report.

“Currently, the benefits of water fluoridation are exaggerated by the use of misleading measures of effect, such as percent reductions,” writes Locker and Cohen. “The risks are minimized by the characterization of dental fluorosis as a ‘cosmetic’ problem.”

"The impact of dental fluorosis from water fluoridation should not be
underestimated.” says Hardy Limeback, PhD., DDS, Head of the Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto. “The percentage of the population with severe enough dental
fluorosis requiring costly dental restorations to repair defective tooth
structure has been steadily increasing. Dental fluorosis should never have been
classified as a simple 'cosmetic' side effect - it is a biomarker for systemic
fluoride poisoning during early childhood. Research being conducted at the
University of Toronto has shown that low daily doses of systemic fluoride from
drinking water and other sources permanently affect bone and tooth growth and
the mechanical properties of these hard tissues," says Limeback.

“Standards regarding the optimal level of fluoride in the water supply were developed on the basis of epidemiological data collected more than 50 years ago. There is a need for new guidelines for water fluoridation that are based on sound, up-to-date science and sound ethics. In this context, we would argue that sound ethics presupposes sound science,” they write.

“In the absence of comprehensive, high-quality evidence with respect to the benefits and risks of water fluoridation, the moral status of advocacy for this practice is, at best, indeterminate, and could perhaps be considered immoral.” writes authors Locker and Cohen. “In the absence of a full account of benefits and risks, communities cannot make a properly informed decision whether or not to fluoridate...”

Locker and Cohen also recognize that fluoridation doesn’t allow individuals to opt out, thereby, eliminating their freedom to choose. And, they explain, psychological studies on adolescents show effects of dental fluorosis are as serious a concern as overbite and overcrowded teeth.

---

[TomB]

While it may be OK on other forums, around here wholesale cut-and-paste jobs are frowned upon. Your verbosity scores no points with many people here.

BUT, if you want to play "who can cut-and-paste more", I'll play along.

Studies showing the effectiveness and safety of fluoridation in all forms:

1. Bratthall D, Hänsel Petersson G, Sundberg H. Reasons for the caries decline: what do the experts believe? Eur J Oral Sci 1996;104:416--22.

2. Blaney JR, Tucker WH. The Evanston Dental Caries Study. II. Purpose and mechanism of the study. J Dent Res 1948;27:279--86.

3. Ast DB, Finn SB, McCaffrey I. The Newburgh-Kingston Caries Fluorine Study. I. Dental findings after three years of water fluoridation. Am J Public Health 1950;40:716--24.

4. Dean HT, Arnold FA, Jay P, Knutson JW. Studies on mass control of dental caries through fluoridation of the public water supply. Public Health Rep 1950;65:1403--8.

5. Hutton WL, Linscott BW, Williams DB. The Brantford fluorine experiment: interim report after five years of water fluoridation. Can J Public Health 1951;42:81--7.

6. Pao EM. Changes in American food consumption patterns and their nutritional significance. Food Technol 1981;35:43--53.

7. Heller KE, Sohn W, Burt BA, Eklund SA. Water consumption the United States in 1994--1996 and implications for water fluoridation policy. J Public Health Dent 1999;59:3--11.

8. Public Health Service Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs. Review of fluoride: benefits and risk. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 1991.

9. National Research Council Committee on Toxicology. Health effects of ingested fluoride. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1993.

10. World Health Organization. Environmental health criteria 36: fluorine and fluorides. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1984.

11. Institute of Medicine. Fluoride. In: Dietary reference intakes for calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, vitamin D, and fluoride. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997:288--313.

12. Featherstone JDB. Prevention and reversal of dental caries: role of low level fluoride. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1999;27:31--40.

13. Koulourides T. Summary of session II: fluoride and the caries process. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):558.

14. Tatevossian A. Fluoride in dental plaque and its effects. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):645--52.

15. Chow LC. Tooth-bound fluoride and dental caries. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):595--600.

16. Ericsson SY. Cariostasis mechanisms of fluorides: clinical observations. Caries Res 1977;11(suppl 1):2--23.

17. Kidd EAM, Thylstrup A, Fejerskov O, Bruun C. Influence of fluoride in surface enamel and degree of dental fluorosis on caries development in vitro. Caries Res 1980;14:196--202.

18. Thylstrup A. Clinical evidence of the role of pre-eruptive fluoride in caries prevention. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):742--50.

19. Thylstrup A, Fejerskov O, Bruun C, Kann J. Enamel changes and dental caries in 7-year-old children given fluoride tablets from shortly after birth. Caries Res 1979;13:265--76.

20. White DJ, Nancollas GH. Physical and chemical considerations of the role of firmly and loosely bound fluoride in caries prevention. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):587--94.

21. Hamilton IR. Biochemical effects of fluoride on oral bacteria. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):660--7.

22. Bowden GHW. Effects of fluoride on the microbial ecology of dental plaque. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):653--9.

23. Bowden GHW, Odlum O, Nolette N, Hamilton IR. Microbial populations growing in the presence of fluoride at low pH isolated from dental plaque of children living in an area with fluoridated water. Infect Immun 1982;36:247--54.

24. Marquis RE. Diminished acid tolerance of plaque bacteria caused by fluoride. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):672--5.

25. Rosen S, Frea JI, Hsu SM. Effect of fluoride-resistant microorganisms on dental caries. J Dent Res 1978;57:180.

26. Van Loveren C. The antimicrobial action of fluoride and its role in caries inhibition. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):676--81.

27. Oliveby A, Twetman S, Ekstrand J. Diurnal fluoride concentration in whole saliva in children living in a high- and a low-fluoride area. Caries Res 1990;24:44--7.

28. Rölla G, Ekstrand J. Fluoride in oral fluids and dental plaque. In: Fejerskov O, Ekstrand J, Burt BA, eds. Fluoride in dentistry. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1996:215--29.

29. LeGeros RZ. Chemical and crystallographic events in the caries process. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):567--74.

30. Dean HT, Dixon RM, Cohen C. Mottled enamel in Texas. Public Health Rep 1935;50:424--42.

31. McClure FJ, Likins RC. Fluorine in human teeth studied in relation to fluorine in the drinking water. J Dent Res 1951;30:172--6.

32. Marthaler TM. Fluoride supplements for systemic effects in caries prevention. In: Johansen E, Taves DR, Olsen TO, eds. Continuing evaluation of the use of fluorides. Boulder, CO: Westview, 1979:33--59. (American Assocation for the Advancement of Science selected symposium no. 11).

33. Murray JJ. Efficacy of preventive agents for dental caries. Systemic fluorides: water fluoridation. Caries Res 1993;27(suppl 1):2--8.

34. Groeneveld A, Van Eck AAMJ, Backer Dirks O. Fluoride in caries prevention: is the effect pre- or post-eruptive? J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):751--5.

35. Levine RS. The action of fluoride in caries prevention: a review of current concepts. Br Dent J 1976;140:9--14.

36. Margolis HC, Moreno EC. Physicochemical perspectives on the cariostatic mechanisms of systemic and topical fluorides. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):606--13.

37. Clarkson BH, Fejerskov O, Ekstrand J, Burt BA. Rational use of fluorides in caries control. In: Fejerskov O, Ekstrand J, Burt BA, eds. Fluorides in dentistry. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1996:347--57.

38. Arends J, Christoffersen J. Nature and role of loosely bound fluoride in dental caries. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):601--5.

39. Burt BA, Eklund SA. Dentistry, dental practice, and the community. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders, 1999. 40. National Institute of Dental Research. The prevalence of dental caries in United States children, 1979--1980. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Public Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, 1981; NIH publication no. 82-2245.

41. Kelly JE, Harvey CR. Basic dental examination findings of persons 1--74 years. In: Basic data on dental examination findings of persons 1--74 years, United States, 1971--1974. Hyattsville, MD: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Office of Health Research, Statistics, and Technology, National Center for Health Statistics, 1979; DHEW publication no. (PHS) 79-1662. (Vital and health statistics data from the National Health Interview Survey; series 11, no. 214).

42. National Institute of Dental Research. Oral health of United States children. The National Survey of Dental Caries in U.S. School Children: 1986--1987. National and regional findings. Bethesda, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Dental Research, 1989; NIH publication no. 89-2247.

43. Kaste LM, Selwitz RH, Oldakowski RJ, Brunelle JA, Winn DM, Brown LJ. Coronal caries in the primary and permanent dentition of children and adolescents 1--17 years of age: United States, 1988--1991. J Dent Res 1996;75(special issue):631--41.

44. Meskin LH, ed. Caries diagnosis and risk assessment: a review of preventive strategies and management. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126(suppl):15--245.

45. Pitts NB. Risk assessment and caries prediction. J Dent Educ 1998;62:762--70.

46. Vargas CM, Crall JJ, Schneider DA. Sociodemographic distribution of pediatric dental caries: NHANES III, 1988--1994. J Am Dent Assoc 1998;129:1229--38.

47. Edelstein BL. The medical management of dental caries. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125(suppl):31--9.

48. US Department of Health and Human Services. Oral health in America: a report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Health, 2000:63, 74--94, 245--74.

49. Fejerskov O, Manji F, Baelum V. The nature and mechanisms of dental fluorosis in man. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):692--700.

50. Avery JK. Agents affecting tooth and bone development. In: Avery JK, ed. Oral development and histology. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Theime Medical Publishers, 1994:130--41.

51. DenBesten PK, Thariani H. Biological mechanisms of fluorosis and level and timing of systemic exposure to fluoride with respect to fluorosis. J Dent Res 1992;71:1238--43.

52. Evans RW, Stamm JW. Dental fluorosis following downward adjustment of fluoride in drinking water. J Public Health Dent 1991;51:91--8.

53. Dean HT. The investigation of physiological effects by the epidemiological method. In: Moulton FR, ed. Fluorine and dental health. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1942;19:23--31.

54. Fejerskov O, Manji F, Baelum V, Møller IJ. Dental fluorosis---a handbook for health workers. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1988.

55. Kaminsky LS, Mahoney MC, Leach J, Melius J, Miller MJ. Fluoride: benefits and risks of exposure. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1990;1:261--81.

56. Clark DC, Hann HJ, Williamson MF, Berkowitz J. Aesthetic concerns of children and parents in relation to different classifications of the Tooth Surface Index of Fluorosis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1993;21:360--4.

57. Dean HT. Endemic fluorosis and its relation to dental caries. Public Health Rep 1938;53:1443--52.

58. Clark DC. Trends in prevalence of dental fluorosis in North America. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1994;22:148--52.

59. Szpunar SM, Burt BA. Trends in the prevalence of dental fluorosis in the United States: a review. J Public Health Dent 1987;47:71--9.

60. Brunelle JA. The prevalence of dental fluorosis in U.S. children, 1987. J Dent Res 1989;68(special issue):995.

61. Heller KE, Eklund SA, Burt BA. Dental caries and dental fluorosis at varying water fluoride concentrations. J Public Health Dent 1997;57:136--43.

62. Pendrys DG, Katz RV, Morse DR. Risk factors for enamel fluorosis in a fluoridated population. Am J Epidemiol 1994;140:461--71.

63. Osuji OO, Leake JL, Chipman ML, Nikiforuk G, Locker D, Levine N. Risk factors for dental fluorosis in a fluoridated community. J Dent Res 1988;67:1488--92.

64. Pendrys DG, Katz RV. Risk for enamel fluorosis associated with fluoride supplementation, infant formula, and fluoride dentifrice use. Am J Epidemiol 1989;130:1199--208.

65. Pendrys DG. Risk for fluorosis in a fluoridated population: implications for the dentist and hygienist. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126:1617--24.

66. US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Public Health Service drinking water standards, revised 1962. Washington, DC: US Public Health Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1962; PHS publication no. 956.

67. Galagan DJ, Vermillion JR. Determining optimum fluoride concentrations. Public Health Rep 1957;72:491--3.

68. CDC. Engineering and administrative recommendations for water fluoridation, 1995. MMWR 1995;44(No. RR-13):1--40.

69. US Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR Part 141.62. Maximum contaminant levels for inorganic contaminants. Code of Federal Regulations 1998:402.

70. US Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR Part 143. National secondary drinking water regulations. Code of Federal Regulations 1998;514--7.

71. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. 21 CFR Part 165.110. Bottled water. Federal Register 1995;60:57124--30.

72. US Food and Drug Administration. 21 CFR Part 355. Anticaries drug products for over-the-counter human use. Code of Federal Regulations 1999:280--5.

73. American Dental Association. ADA guide to dental therapeutics. 1st ed. Chicago, IL: American Dental Association, 1998.

74. American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Special issue: reference manual 1995. Pediatr Dent 1994--95;16(special issue):1--96.

75. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition. Fluoride supplementation for children: interim policy recommendations. Pediatrics 1995;95:777.

76. Singer L, Jarvey BA, Venkateswarlu P, Armstrong WD. Fluoride in plaque. J Dent Res 1970;49:455.

77. Dabeka RW, McKenzie AD, Lacroix GMA. Dietary intakes of lead, cadmium, arsenic and fluoride by Canadian adults: a 24-hour duplicate diet study. Food Addit Contam 1987;4:89--102.

78. Kramer L, Osis D, Wiatrowski E, Spencer H. Dietary fluoride in different areas of the United States. Am J Clin Nutr 1974;27:590--4.

79. Osis D, Kramer L, Wiatrowski E, Spencer H. Dietary fluoride intake in man. J Nutr 1974;104:1313--8.

80. Singer L, Ophaug RH, Harland BF. Fluoride intake of young adult males in the United States. Am J Clin Nutr 1980;33:328--32.

81. Ophaug RH, Singer L, Harland BF. Estimated fluoride intake of average two-year-old children in four dietary regions of the United States. J Dent Res 1980;59:777--81.

82. Ophaug RH, Singer L, Harland BF. Estimated fluoride intake of 6-month-old infants in four dietary regions of the United States. Am J Clin Nutr 1980;33:324--7.

83. Singer L, Ophaug RH, Harland BF. Dietary fluoride intake of 15-19-year-old male adults residing in the United States. J Dent Res 1985;64:1302--5.

84. Pang DTY, Phillips CL, Bawden JW. Fluoride intake from beverage consumption in a sample of North Carolina children. J Dent Res 1992;71:1382--8.

85. Levy SM, Kohout FJ, Guha-Chowdhury N, Kiritsy MC, Heilman JR, Wefel JS. Infants' fluoride intake from drinking water alone, and from water added to formula, beverages, and food. J Dent Res 1995;74:1399--407.

86. Levy SM, Kiritsy MC, Warren JJ. Sources of fluoride intake in children. J Public Health Dent 1995;55:39--52.

87. Johnson J Jr, Bawden JW. The fluoride content of infant formulas available in 1985. Pediatr Dent 1987;9:33--7.

88. Dean HT, Jay P, Arnold FA Jr, Elvove E. Domestic water and dental caries. II. A study of 2,832 white children, aged 12--14 years, of 8 suburban Chicago communities, including Lactobacillus acidophilus studies of 1,761 children. Public Health Rep 1941;56:761--92.

89. Dean HT, Arnold FA Jr, Elvove E. Domestic water and dental caries. V. Additional studies of the relation of fluoride domestic water to dental caries experience in 4,425 white children, aged 12 to 14 years, of 13 cities in 4 states. Public Health Rep 1942;57:1155--79.

90. Galagan DJ. Climate and controlled fluoridation. J Am Dent Assoc 1953;47:159--70.

91. Galagan DJ, Lamson GG Jr. Climate and endemic dental fluorosis. Public Health Rep 1953;68:497--508. 92. Galagan DJ, Vermillion JR, Nevitt GA, Stadt ZM, Dart RE. Climate and fluid intake. Public Health Rep 1957;72:484--90.

93. CDC. Fluoridation census 1992 summary. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, CDC, 1993.

94. Arnold FA Jr, Likins RC, Russell AL, Scott DB. Fifteenth year of the Grand Rapids Fluoridation Study. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;65:780--5.

95. Ast DB, Fitzgerald B. Effectiveness of water fluoridation. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;65:581--7.

96. Blayney JR, Hill IN. Fluorine and dental caries. J Am Dent Assoc 1967;74(special issue):225--302.

97. Hutton WL, Linscott BW, Williams DB. Final report of local studies on water fluoridation in Brantford. Can J Public Health 1956;47:89--92.

98. Brunelle JA, Carlos JP. Recent trends in dental caries in U.S. children and the effect of water fluoridation. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):723--7.

99. Newbrun E. Effectiveness of water fluoridation. J Public Health Dent 1989;49(special issue):279--89.

100. Ripa LW. A half-century of community water fluoridation in the United States: review and commentary. J Public Health Dent 1993;53:17--44.

101. Grembowski D, Fiset L, Spadafora A. How fluoridation affects adult dental caries: systemic and topical effects are explored. J Am Dent Assoc 1992;123:49--54.

102. Wiktorsson A-M, Martinsson T, Zimmerman M. Salivary levels of lactobacilli, buffer capacity and salivary flow rate related to caries activity among adults in communities with optimal and low water fluoride concentrations. Swed Dent J 1992;16:231--7.

103. Eklund SA, Burt BA, Ismail AI, Calderone JJ. Highfluoride drinking water, fluorosis, and dental caries in adults. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;114:324--8.

104. Sreebny LM, Schwartz SS. A reference guide to drugs and dry mouth---2nd ed. Gerodontology 1997;14:33--47.

105. Burt BA, Ismail AI, Eklund SA. Root caries in an optimally fluoridated and a high-fluoride community. J Dent Res 1986;65:1154--8.

106. Stamm JS, Banting DW, Imrey PB. Adult root caries survey of two similar communities with contrasting natural water fluoride levels. J Am Dent Assoc 1990;120:143--9.

107. Brustman B. Impact of exposure to fluorideadequate water on root surface caries in elderly. Gerodontics 1986;2:203--7.

108. Jones CM, Taylor GO, Whittle JG, Evans D, Trotter DP. Water fluoridation, tooth decay in 5 year olds, and social deprivation measured by the Jarman score: analysis of data from British dental surveys. BMJ 1997;315:514--7.

109. Provart SJ, Carmichael CL. The relationship between caries, fluoridation, and material deprivation in five-year-old children in County Durham. Community Dent Health 1995;12:200--3.

110. Slade GD, Spencer AJ, Davies MJ, Stewart JF. Influence of exposure to fluoridated water on socioeconomic inequalities in children's caries experience. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1996;24:89--100.

111. Kumar JV, Swango PA, Lininger LL, Leske GS, Green EL, Haley VB. Changes in dental fluorosis and dental caries in Newburgh and Kingston, New York. Am J Public Health 1998;88:1866--70.

112. Graves RC, Bohannan HM, Disney JA, Stamm JW, Bader JD, Abernathy JR. Recent dental caries and treatment patterns in US children. J Public Health Dent 1986;46:23--9.

113. Ast DB, Smith DJ, Wachs B, Cantwell KT. Newburgh-Kingston caries-fluorine study. XIV. Combined clinical and roentgenographic dental findings after ten years of fluoride experience. J Am Dent Assoc 1956;52:314--25.

114. Russell AL. Dental fluorosis in Grand Rapids during the seventeenth year of fluoridation. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;65:608--12.

115. Lewis DW, Banting DW. Water fluoridation: current effectiveness and dental fluorosis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1994;22:153--8.

116. Kumar JV, Swango PA. Fluoride exposure and dental fluorosis in Newburgh and Kingston, New York: policy implications. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1999;27:171--80.

117. Szpunar SM, Burt BA. Dental caries, fluorosis, and fluoride exposure in Michigan schoolchildren. J Dent Res 1988;67:802--6.

118. Horowitz HS. School fluoridation for the prevention of dental caries. Int Dent J 1973;23:346--53.

119. Horowitz HS, Law FE, Pritzker T. Effect of school water fluoridation on dental caries, St. Thomas, V.I. Public Health Rep 1965;80:381--8.

120. Horowitz HS, Heifetz SB, Law FE, Driscoll WS. School fluoridation studies in Elk Lake, Pennsylvania, and Pike County, Kentucky---results after eight years. Am J Public Health 1968;58:2240--50.

121. Horowitz HS, Heifetz SB, Law FE. Effect of school water fluoridation on dental caries: final results in Elk Lake, PA, after 12 years. J Am Dent Assoc 1972;84:832--8.

122. Heifetz SB, Horowitz HS, Brunelle JA. Effect of school water fluoridation on dental caries: results in Seagrove, NC, after 12 years. J Am Dent Assoc 1983;106:334--7.

123. King RS, Iafolla TJ, Rozier RG, Satterfield WC, Spratt CJ. Effectiveness of school water fluoridation and fluoride mouthrinses. J Dent Res 1995;74(special issue):192. 124. CDC. Acute fluoride poisoning---North Carolina. MMWR 1974;23:199.

125. Hoffman R, Mann J, Calderone J, Trumbull J, Burkhart M. Acute fluoride poisoning in a New Mexico elementary school. Pediatrics 1980;65:897--900.

126. Vogt RL, Witherell L, LaRue D, Klaucke DN. Acute fluoride poisoning associated with an on-site fluoridator in a Vermont elementary school. Am J Public Health 1982;72:1168--9.

127. Stannard J, Rovero J, Tsamtsouris A, Gavris V. Fluoride content of some bottled waters and recommendations for fluoride supplementation. J Pedod 1990;14:103--7.

128. Weinberger SJ. Bottled drinking waters: are the fluoride concentrations shown on the label accurate? Int J Paediatr Dent 1991;1:143--6.

129. Van Winkle S, Levy SM, Kiritsy MC, Heilman JR, Wefel JS, Marshall T. Water and formula fluoride concentrations: significance for infants fed formula. Pediatr Dent 1995;17:305--10.

130. Mark AM. Americans taking to the bottle: loss of important fluoride source may be result. ADA News 1998;29:12. 131. US Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR Part 141 Subpart O. Consumer confidence reports. Federal Register 1998;63:44526--36.

132. Duckworth RM, Morgan SN, Burchell CK. Fluoride in plaque following use of dentifrices containing sodium monofluorophosphate. J Dent Res 1989;68:130--3.

133. Duckworth RM, Morgan SN. Oral fluoride retention after use of fluoride dentifrices. Caries Res 1991;25:123--9.

134. Sidi AD. Effect of brushing with fluoride toothpastes on the fluoride, calcium, and inorganic phosphorus concentrations in approximal plaque of young adults. Caries Res 1989;23:268--71.

135. Reintsema H, Schuthof J, Arends J. An in vivo investigation of the fluoride uptake in partially demineralized human enamel from several different dentifrices. J Dent Res 1985;64:19--23.

136. Stookey GK, Schemehorn BR, Cheetham BL, Wood GD, Walton GV. In situ fluoride uptake from fluoride dentifrices by carious enamel. J Dent Res 1985;64:900--3.

137. Bruun C, Givskov H, Thylstrup A. Whole saliva fluoride after toothbrushing with NaF and MFP dentifrices with different F concentrations. Caries Res 1984;18:282--8.

138. Levy SM. Review of fluoride exposures and ingestion. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1994;22:173--80.

139. Horowitz HS, Law FE, Thompson MB, Chamberlin SR. Evaluation of a stannous fluoride dentifrice for use in dental public health programs. I. Basic findings. J Am Dent Assoc 1966;72:408--22.

140. James PMC, Anderson RJ. Clinical testing of a stannous fluoride-calcium pyrophosphate dentifrice in Buckinghamshire school children. Br Dent J 1967;123:33--9.

141. Jordan WA, Peterson JK. Caries-inhibiting value of a dentifrice containing stannous fluoride: final report of a two year study. J Am Dent Assoc 1959;58:42--4.

142. Muhler JC. Effect of a stannous fluoride dentifrice on caries reduction in children during a three-year study period. J Am Dent Asoc 1962;64:216--24.

143. Stookey GK. Are all fluoride dentifrices the same? In: Wei SHY, ed. Clinical uses of fluorides: a state of the art conference on the uses of fluorides in clinical dentistry: May 11 and 12, 1984, Holiday Inn, Union Square, San Francisco, California. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger, 1985:105--31.

144. Clarkson JE, Ellwood RP, Chandler RE. A comprehensive summary of fluoride dentifrice caries clinical trials. Am J Dent 1993;6(special issue):59--106.

145. Stamm JW. The value of dentifrices and mouthrinses in caries prevention. Int Dent J 1993;43:517--27.

146. Mellberg JR, Ripa LW. Fluoride dentifrices. In: Mellberg JR, Ripa LW. Fluoride in preventive dentistry: theory and clinical applications. Chicago, IL: Quintessence Publishing Co., 1983:215--41.

147. Mellberg JR. Fluoride dentifrices: current status and prospects. Int Dent J 1991;41:9--16.

148. Richards A, Banting DW. Fluoride toothpastes. In: Fejerskov O, Ekstrand J, Burt BA, eds. Fluoride in dentistry. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1996:328--46.

149. Lind OP, von der Fehr FR, Joost Larsen M, Möller IJ. Anti-caries effect of a 2% Na2PO3F-dentifrice in a Danish fluoride area. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1976;4:7--14.

150. O'Mullane DM, Clarkson J, Holland T, O'Hickey S, Whelton H. Effectiveness of water fluoridation in the prevention of dental caries in Irish children. Community Dent Health 1988;5:331--44.

151. Stookey GK, Beiswanger BB. Topical fluoride therapy. In: Harris NO, Christen AG, eds. Primary preventive dentistry. 4th ed. Stamford, CT: Appleton & Lang, 1995:193--233.

152. Horowitz HS, Ismail AI. Topical fluorides in caries prevention. In: Fejerskov O, Ekstrand J, Burt BA, eds. Fluorides in dentistry. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1996:311--27.

153. Ronis DL, Land WP, Passow E. Tooth brushing, flossing, and preventive dental visits by Detroitarea residents in relation to demographic and socioeconomic factors. J Public Health Dent 1993;53:138--45.

154. Wagener DK, Nourjah P, Horowitz AM. Trends in childhood use of dental care products containing fluoride: United States, 1983--89. Hyattsville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, CDC, 1992. (Advanced data from vital health statistics; no. 219).

155. Peffley GE, Muhler JC. The effect of a commercially available stannous fluoride dentifrice under controlled brushing habits on dental caries incidence in children: preliminary report. J Dent Res 1960;39:871--5.

156. Bixler D, Muhler JC. Experimental clinical human caries test design and interpretation. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;65:482--90.

157. Chesters RK, Huntington E, Burchell CK, Stephen KW. Effect of oral care habits on caries in adolescents. Caries Res 1992;26:299--304.

158. Chesnutt IG, Schafer F, Jacobson APM, Stephen KW. The influence of toothbrushing frequency and post-brushing rinsing on caries experience in a caries clinical trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1998;26:406--11.

159. Duckworth RM, Knoop DTM, Stephen KW. Effect of mouthrinsing after toothbrushing with a fluoride dentifrice on human salivary fluoride levels. Caries Res 1991;25:287--91.

160. Sjögren K, Birkhed D, Ruben J, Arends J. Effect of post-brushing water rinsing on caries-like lesions at approximal and buccal sites. Caries Res 1995;9:337--42.

161. Conti AJ, Lotzkar S, Daley R, Cancro L, Marks RG, McNeal DR. A 3-year clinical trial to compare efficacy of dentifrices containing 1.14% and 0.76% sodium monofluorophosphate. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1988;16:135--8.

162. Fogels HR, Meade JJ, Griffith J, Miragliuolo R, Cancro LP. A clinical investigation of a high-level fluoride dentifrice. J Dent Child 1988;55:210--5.

163. Hanachowicz L. Caries prevention using a 1.2% sodium monofluorophosphate dentifrice in an aluminum oxide trihydrate base. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1984;12:10--6.

164. O'Mullane DM, Kavanagh D, Ellwood RP, et al. A three-year clinical trial of a combination of trimetaphosphate and sodium fluoride in silica toothpastes. J Dent Res 1997;76:1776--81.

165. Lalumandier JA, Rozier RG. The prevalence and risk factors of fluorosis among patients in a pediatric dental practice. Pediatr Dent 1995;17:19--25.

166. Mascarenhas AK, Burt BA. Fluorosis risk from early exposure to fluoride toothpaste. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1998;26:241--8.

167. Milsom K, Mitropoulos CM. Enamel defects in 8-year-old children in fluoridated and non-fluoridated parts of Cheshire. Caries Res 1990;24:286--9.

168. Riordan PJ. Dental fluorosis, dental caries and fluoride exposure among 7-year-olds. Caries Res 1993;27:71--7.

169. Skotowski MC, Hunt RJ, Levy SM. Risk factors for dental fluorosis in pediatric dental patients. J Public Health Dent 1995;55:154--9.

170. Pendrys DG, Katz RV, Morse DE. Risk factors for enamel fluorosis in a nonfluoridated population. Am J Epidemiol 1996;143:808--15.

171. Nacacche H, Simard PL, Trahan L, et al. Factors affecting the ingestion of fluoride dentrifice by children. J Public Health Dent 1992;52:222--6.

172. Simard PL, Naccache H, Lachapelle D, Brodeur JM. Ingestion of fluoride from dentifrices by children aged 12 to 24 months. Clin Pediatr 1991;30:614--7.

173. Barnhart WE, Hiller LK, Leonard GJ, Michaels SE. Dentifrice usage and ingestion among four age groups. J Dent Res 1974;53:1317--22.

174. Baxter PM. Toothpaste ingestion during toothbrushing by school children. Br Dent J 1980;148:125--8.

175. Hargreaves JA, Ingram GS, Wagg BJ. A gravimetric study of the ingestion of toothpaste by children. Caries Res 1972;6:236--43.

176. Beltrán ED, Szpunar SM. Fluoride in toothpastes for children: suggestion for change. Pediatr Dent 1988;10:185--8.

177. Levy SM. A review of fluoride intake from fluoride dentifrice. J Dent Child 1993;61:115--24.

178. Koch G, Petersson L-G, Kling E, Kling L. Effect of 250 and 1000 ppm fluoride dentifrice on caries: a three-year clinical study. Swed Dent J 1982;6:233--8.

179. Mitropoulos CM, Holloway PJ, Davies TGH, Worthington HV. Relative efficacy of dentifrices containing 250 or 1000 ppm F- in preventing dental caries---report of a 32-month clinical trial. Community Dent Health 1984;1:193--200.

180. Winter GB, Holt RD, Williams BF. Clinical trial of a low-fluoride toothpaste for young children. Int Dent J 1989;39:227--35.

181. Holt RD, Morris CE, Winter GB, Downer MC. Enamel opacities and dental caries in children who used a low fluoride toothpaste between 2 and 5 years of age. Int Dent J 1994;44:331--41.

182. Horowitz HS. The need for toothpastes with lower than conventional fluoride concentrations for preschool-aged children. J Public Health Dent 1992;52:216--21.

183. Zero DT, Raubertas RF, Fu J, Pedersen AM, Hayes AL, Featherstone JDB. Fluoride concentrations in plaque, whole saliva, and ductal saliva after application of home-use topical fluorides. J Dent Res 1992;71:1768--75.

184. Horowitz HS, Creighton WE, McClendon BJ. The effect on human dental caries of weekly oral rinsing with a sodium fluoride mouthwash: a final report. Arch Oral Biol 1971;16:609--16.

185. Rugg-Gunn AJ, Holloway PJ, Davies TGH. Caries prevention by daily fluoride mouthrinsing: report of a three-year clinical trial. Br Dent J 1973;135:353--60.

186. DePaola PF, Soparkar P, Foley S, Bookstein F, Bakhos Y. Effect of high-concentration ammonium and sodium fluoride rinses in dental caries in schoolchildren. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1977;5:7--14.

187. Leverett DH, Sveen OB, Jensen ØE. Weekly rinsing with a fluoride mouthrinse in an unfluoridated community: results after seven years. J Public Health Dent 1985;45:95--100.

188. Ripa LW, Leske GS, Sposato A, Rebich T. Supervised weekly rinsing with a 0.2 percent neutral NaF solution: final results of a demonstration program after six school years. J Public Health Dent 1983;43:53--62.

189. Ripa LW, Leske GS, Sposato AL, Rebich T Jr. Supervised weekly rinsing with a 0.2% neutral NaF solution: results after 5 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1983;11:1--6.

190. Ripa LW, Leske G. Effect on the primary dentition of mouthrinsing with a 0.2 percent neutral NaF solution: results from a demonstration program after four school years. Pediatr Dent 1981;3:311--5.

191. Ripa LW. A critique of topical fluoride methods (dentifrices, mouthrinses, operator-, and self-applied gels) in an era of decreased caries and increased fluorosis prevalence. J Public Health Dent 1991;51:23--41.

192. Haugejorden O, Lervik T, Riordan PJ. Comparison of caries prevalence 7 years after discontinuation of school-based fluoride rinsing or toothbrushing in Norway. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1985;13:2--6.

193. Leske GS, Ripa LW, Green E. Posttreatment benefits in a school-based fluoride mouthrinsing program: final results after 7 years of rinsing by all participants. Clin Prev Dent 1986;8:19--23.

194. Holland TJ, Whelton H, O'Mullane DM, Creedon P. Evaluation of a fortnightly school-based sodium fluoride mouthrinse 4 years following its cessation. Caries Res 1995;29:431--4.

195. Disney JA, Graves RC, Stamm JW, Bohannan HM, Abernathy JR. Comparative effects of a 4-year fluoride mouthrinse program on high and low caries forming grade 1 children. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1989;17:139--43.

196. Klein SP, Bohannan HM, Bell RM, Disney JA, Foch CB, Graves RC. The cost and effectiveness of school-based preventive dental care. Am J Public Health 1985;75:382--91.

197. Nourjah P, Horowitz AM, Wagener DK. Factors associated with the use of fluoride supplements and fluoride dentifrice by infants and toddlers. J Public Health Dent 1994;54:47--54.

198. Leverett DH, Adair SM, Vaughan BW, Proskin HM, Moss ME. Randomized clinical trial of the effect of prenatal fluoride supplements in preventing dental caries. Caries Res 1997;31:174--9.

199. Aasenden R, Peebles TC. Effects of fluoride supplementation from birth on human deciduous and permanent teeth. Arch Oral Biol 1974;19:321--6.

200. de Liefde B, Herbison GP. The prevalence of developmental defects of enamel and dental caries in New Zealand children receiving differing fluoride supplementation in 1982 and 1985. N Z Dent J 1989;85:2--8.

201. D'Hoore W, Van Nieuwenhuysen J-P. Benefits and risks of fluoride supplementation: caries prevention versus dental fluorosis. Eur J Pediatr 1992;151:613--6.

202. Allmark C, Green HP, Linney AD, Wills DJ, Picton DCA. A community study of fluoride tablets for school children in Portsmouth: results after six years. Br Dent J 1982;153:426--30.

203. Fanning EA, Cellier KM, Somerville CM. South Australian kindergarten children: effects of fluoride tablets and fluoridated water on dental caries in primary teeth. Aust Dent J 1980;25:259--63.

204. Marthaler TM. Caries-inhibiting effect of fluoride tablets. Helv Odont Acta 1969;13:1--13.

205. Widenheim J, Birkhed D. Caries-preventive effect on primary and permanent teeth and cost-effectiveness of an NaF tablet preschool program. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1991;19:88--92.

206. Widenheim J, Birkhed D, Granath L, Lindgren G. Preeruptive effect of NaF tablets on caries in children from 12 to 17 years of age. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1986;14:1--4.

207. Margolis FJ, Reames HR, Freshman E, Macauley JC, Mehaffey H. Fluoride: ten-year prospective study of deciduous and permanent dentition. Am J Dis Child 1975;129:794--800.

208. Bagramian RA, Narendran S, Ward M. Relationship of dental caries and fluorosis to fluoride supplement history in a non-fluoridated sample of schoolchildren. Adv Dent Res 1989;3:161--7.

209. Holm A-K, Andersson R. Enamel mineralization disturbances in 12-year-old children with known early exposure to fluorides. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1982;10:335--9.

210. Awad MA, Hargreaves JA, Thompson GW. Dental caries and fluorosis in 7--9 and 11--14 year old children who received fluoride supplements from birth. J Can Dent Assoc 1994;60:318--22.

211. Friis-Hasché E, Bergmann J, Wenzel A, Thylstrup A, Pedersen KM, Petersen PE. Dental health status and attitudes to dental care in families participating in a Danish fluoride tablet program. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1984;12:303--7.

212. Kalsbeek H, Verrips GH, Backer Dirks O. Use of fluoride tablets and effect on prevalence of dental caries and dental fluorosis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1992;20:241--5.

213. DePaola PF, Lax M. The caries-inhibiting effect of acidulated phosphate-fluoride chewable tablets: a two-year double-blind study. J Am Dent Assoc 1968;76:554--7.

214. Driscoll WS, Heifetz SB, Korts DC. Effect of chewable fluoride tablets on dental caries in schoolchildren: results after six years of use. J Am Dent Assoc 1978;97:820--4.

215. Stephen KW, Campbell D. Caries reduction and cost benefit after 3 years of sucking fluoride tablets daily at school: a double-blind trial. Br Dent J 1978;144:202--6.

216. Stephen KW, McCall DR, Gilmour WH. Incisor enamel mottling in child cohorts which had or had not taken fluoride supplements from 0--12 years of age. Proc Finn Dent Soc 1991;87:595--605.

217. Larsen MJ, Kirkegaard E, Poulsen S, Fejerskov O. Dental fluorosis among participants in a non-supervised fluoride tablet program. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1989;17:204--6.

218. Riordan PJ, Banks JA. Dental fluorosis and fluoride exposure in Western Australia. J Dent Res 1991;70:1022--8.

219. Suckling GW, Pearce EIF. Developmental defects of enamel in a group of New Zealand children: their prevalence and some associated etiological factors. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1984;12:177--84.

220. Wöltgens JHM, Etty EJ, Nieuwland WMD. Prevalence of mottled enamel in permanent dentition of children participating in a fluoride programme at the Amsterdam dental school. J Biol Buccale 1989;17:15--20.

221. Woolfolk MW, Faja BW, Bagramian RA. Relation of sources of systemic fluoride to prevalence of dental fluorosis. J Public Health Dent 1989;49:78--82.

222. Ismail AI, Brodeur J-M, Kavanagh M, Boisclair G, Tessier C, Picotte L. Prevalence of dental caries and dental fluorosis in students, 11--17 years of age, in fluoridated and non-fluoridated cities in Quebec. Caries Res 1990;24:290--7.

223. Margolis FJ, Burt BA, Schork A, Bashshur RL, Whittaker BA, Burns TL. Fluoride supplements for children: a survey of physicians' prescription practices. Am J Dis Child 1980;134:865--8.

224. Szpunar SM, Burt BA. Fluoride exposure in Michigan schoolchildren. J Public Health Dent 1990;50:18--23.

225. Levy SM, Muchow G. Provider compliance with recommended dietary fluoride supplement protocol. Am J Public Health 1992:82:281--3.

226. Pendrys DG, Morse DE. Use of fluoride supplementation by children living in fluoridated communities. J Dent Child 1990;57:343--7.

227. Pendrys DG, Morse DE. Fluoride supplement use by children in fluoridated communities. J Public Health Dent 1995;55:160--4.

228. Jackson RD, Kelly SA, Katz BP, Hull JR, Stookey GK. Dental fluorosis and caries prevalence in children residing in communities with different levels of fluoride in the water. J Public Health Dent 1995;55:79--84.

229. Lasagna L. Balancing risks versus benefits in drug therapy decisions. Clin Ther 1998;20(suppl C):72--9.

230. Dijkman TG, Arends J. The role of `CaF2-like' material in topical fluoridation of enamel in situ. Acta Odontol Scand 1988;46:391--7.

231. Houpt M, Koenigsberg S, Shey Z. The effect of prior toothcleaning on the efficacy of topical fluoride treatment: two-year results. Clin Prev Dent 1983;5:8--10.

232. Brudevold F, Savory A, Gardner DE, Spinelli M, Speirs R. A study of acidulated fluoride solutions. I. In vitro effects on enamel. Arch Oral Biol 1963;8:167--77.

233. Ripa LW. Professionally (operator) applied topical fluoride therapy: a critique. Int Dent J 1981;31:105--20. 234. Wei SHY, Yiu CKY. Evaluation of the use of topical fluoride gel. Caries Res 1993;27(suppl I):29--34.

235. Hagen PP, Rozier RG, Bawden JW. The caries-preventive effect of full- and half-strength topical acidulated phosphate fluoride. Pediatr Dent 1985;7:185--91.

236. Ripa LW. An evaluation of the use of professional (operator-applied) topical fluorides. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):786--96.

237. Horowitz HS, Doyle J. The effect on dental caries of topically applied acidulated phosphate-fluoride: results after three years. J Am Dent Assoc 1971;82:359--65.

238. Johnston DW, Lewis DW. Three-year randomized trial of professionally applied topical fluoride gel comparing annual and biannual application with/without prior prophylaxis. Caries Res 1995;29:331--6.

239. Petersson LG. Fluoride mouthrinses and fluoride varnishes. Caries Res 1993;27(suppl 1):35--42.

240. Mandel ID. Fluoride varnishes---a welcome addition [Editorial]. J Public Health Dent 1994;54:67.

241. Wakeen LM. Legal implications of using drugs and devices in the dental office. J Public Health Dent 1992;52:403--8.

242. Clark DC, Stamm JW, Tessier C, Robert G. The final results of the Sherbrooke-Lac Mégantic fluoride varnish study. J Can Dent Assoc 1987;53:919--22.

243. de Bruyn H, Arends J. Fluoride varnishes---a review. J Biol Buccale 1987;15:71--82.

244. Helfenstein U, Steiner M. Fluoride varnishes (Duraphat): a meta-analysis. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1994;22:1--5.

245. Twetman S, Petersson LG, Pakhomov GN. Caries incidence in relation to salivary mutans streptococci and fluoride varnish applications in preschool children from low- and optimal-fluoride areas. Caries Res 1996;30:347--53.

246. Seppä L. Studies of fluoride varnishes in Finland. Proc Finn Dent Soc 1991;87:541--7.

247. Seppä L, Leppänen T, Hausen H. Fluoride varnish versus acidulated phosphate fluoride gel: a 3-year clinical trial. Caries Res 1995;29:327--30.

248. Seppä L, Tolonen T. Caries preventive effect of fluoride varnish applications performed two or four times a year. Scand J Dent Res 1990;98:102--5.

249. Petersson LG, Arthursson L, Östberg C, Jönsson P, Gleerup A. Caries-inhibiting effects of different modes of Duraphat varnish reapplication: a 3-year radiographic study. Caries Res 1991;25:70--3.

250. Sköld L, Sundquist B, Eriksson B, Edeland C. Four-year study of caries inhibition of intensive Duraphat application in 11--15-year-old children. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1994;22:8--12.

251. Adriaens ML, Dermaut LR, Verbeeck RMH. The use of `Fluor Protector,' a fluoride varnish, as a caries prevention method under orthodontic molar bands. Eur J Orthod 1990;12:316--9.

252. Peyron M, Matsson L, Birkhed D. Progression of approximal caries in primary molars and the effect of Duraphat treatment. Scand J Dent Res 1992;100:314--8.

253. Marthaler TM. Cariostatic efficacy of the combined use of fluorides. J Dent Res 1990;69(special issue):797--800.

254. US Preventive Services Task Force. Guide to clinical preventive services. 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: International Medical Publishing, 1996.

255. McKay FS. Relation of mottled enamel to caries. J Am Dent Assoc 1928;15:1429--37.

256. Clark DC, Hann HJ, Williamson MF, Berkowitz J. Effects of lifelong consumption of fluoridated water or use of fluoride supplements on dental caries prevalence. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1995;23:20--4.

257. Murray JJ, Rugg-Gunn AJ. Fluorides in caries prevention. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Wright-PSG, 1982. (Dental practitioner handbook no. 20).

258. Warner KE, Luce BR. Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis in health care: principles, practice, and potential. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press, 1982.

259. Manski RJ, Moeller JF, Maas WR. Dental services: use, expenditures and sources of payment, 1987. J Am Dent Assoc 1999;130:500--8.

260. Burt BA, ed. Proceedings for the workshop: Cost-effectiveness of caries prevention in dental public health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, May 17--19, 1989. J Public Health Dent 1989;49(special issue):331--7.

261. Brown LJ, Lazar V. Dental procedure fees 1975 through 1995: how much have they changed? J Am Dent Assoc 1998;129:1291--5.

262. Downer MC, Blinkhorn AS, Attwood D. Effect of fluoridation on the cost of dental treatment among urban Scottish schoolchildren. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1981;9:112--6.

263. Attwood D, Blinkhorn AS. Reassessment of the effect of fluoridation on cost of dental treatment among Scottish schoolchildren. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1989;17:79--82.

264. Garcia AI. Caries incidence and costs of prevention programs. J Public Health Dent 1989:49(special issue):259--71.

265. Anonymous. Which toothpaste is right for you? Consumer Reports 1998;August:11--4.

266. Doherty NJG, Brunelle JA, Miller AJ, Li S-H. Costs of school-based mouthrinsing in 14 demonstration programs in USA. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1984;12:35--8.

267. Leverett DH. Effectiveness of mouthrinsing with fluoride solutions in preventing coronal and root caries. J Public Health Dent 1989;49(special issue):310--6.

268. van Rijkom HM, Truin GJ, van 't Hof MA. A meta-analysis of clinical studies on the caries-inhibiting effect of fluoride gel treatment. Caries Res 1998;32:83--92.

269. Eklund SA, Pittman JL, Heller KE. Professionally applied topical fluoride and restorative care in insured children. J Public Health Dent 2000;60:33--8.

270. Petersson LG, Westerberg I. Intensive fluoride varnish program in Swedish adolescents: economic assessment of a 7-year follow-up study on proximal caries incidence. Caries Res1994;28:59--63.

The are very few substances around that have been studied more than fluoride.

[TomB]

Oh, I almost forgot, I can post another couple hundred if you want. ;-)

Anyway, I noticed you forgot to mention your silly "decay starts in the womb" quote. I'd like to hear your explanation.

And you forgot (again) to answer my question, so I'll ask it again:

So this leaves us with the unanswerable question, at least to the anti-fluoridationists. Since fluoride is a naturally occurring substance, and many areas of the country have it in concentrations many times higher than what is added to water supplies, and communities have been drinking that water for hundreds of years, why don't we see pockets of illness in all these areas?

[M. Thatcher]

I vote to get rid of this nutjob crapola, or at least move it to "chat." Kookburger material in the category of vapor trails.

[HiTech RedNeck]

[snip]
In a number of small villages in Sicily, Turkey and India there is naturally occurring fluoride in the water ranging from 0.7 to 5.4 ppm. Here the villagers and their livestock are chronically ill, while neighboring villages with no fluoride have no such illnesses. Premature aging is the overall effect. Children have brown decaying teeth; young adults often have none. Young men are bent over and crippled with pain in their joints and hips. Their skin is wrinkled and they look 60 at age 30 to 40. There is premature hardening of the arteries, loss of appetite & sex drive by age 30. The rate of stillborn miscarriages by 4 months is extremely high.
[snip]

[HiTech RedNeck]

This is a political issue. It belongs in News/Activism.

[TomB]

So why don't we see it in all the areas with high natural fluoride levels in this country? Those areas, specifically in the mountain west and southwest, are common and were much more common in years past, yet absolutely NO illness was reported as widespread in these areas that weren't in similar areas without fluoride.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Why is it only fluoride being put into water? Why not vitamin C? Why not the essential minerals magnesium and calcium? (Oops, that's hard water)

For those who have had fluoride wished on them against their will (and whose local code probably forbids private wells) working around this is EXPENSIVE: special water softener resins, bottled water.

Think: why don't they make little plumbing add-ons that you can use to fluoridate your own house's water supply without affecting your neighbor? Because the chemical is so toxic, that's why.