Thursday, March 23, 2006
New Fluoride study released in US
The Hastings Safe Water Association
43 Willow Crescent PORT MACQUARIE 2444
Phone 02 6583 9622 – 0417 279 602
23/3/06
Dear Editor,
What response to newly released (March 22 2006) study “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards” has there been From the NSW Health Department and Mid North Coast Mayors in favour of Fluoridation?
We here in the Hastings Port Macquarie area have like most Mid North and North Coast areas been successful in stopping the artificial Fluoridation of our drinking water supplies in the past decades because time after time when voting at Council Elections is held on the subject of Fluoridation residents have said a loud “No. But since the last Council Elections there has been action as a block by all local Mayors to deny local people a voice and force Fluoridation upon us.
Yesterday in the US The National Academies on Science, Engineering and Medicine released their large study "Fluoride in Drinking Water - A Scientific Review of EPA'S Standards" sponsored by the Environmental Protection Association.
At the News Conference Professor John Doull Professor Emeritus of Pharmacology and Toxicology University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City and Chair, Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water said,
“After reviewing the collective evidence on adverse health effects associated with fluoride, our committee concluded unanimously that EPA should lower the maximum contaminant level goal for fluoride. Ongoing exposure to water fluoride levels at 4 mg/L puts children at risk of developing severe enamel fluorosis, which is characterized by discoloration, enamel loss, and pitting of the teeth. This condition occurs during tooth development in children, before the teeth erupt in the mouth. Once it develops, it is a permanent condition.On average, approximately 10 percent of children in communities with water fluoride concentrations at or near 4 mg/L develop severe enamel fluorosis. Previous assessments have considered all cases of enamel fluorosis, including serious ones, to be aesthetically displeasing because of the yellow and brown staining of teeth that occurs, but not adverse to health. However, the majority of the committee concluded that severe cases of enamel loss constitute an adverse health effect because one function of enamel is to protect the teeth and underlying dental tissue. There is some evidence that pitting of tooth enamel could increase the risk of cavities because it allows plaque and bacteria to become trapped in the enamel. The damage to teeth caused by severe enamel fluorosis is a toxic effect that is consistent with prevailing risk assessment definitions of an adverse health effect. However, two of the 12 members of the committee did not agree that enamel defects alone are sufficient to consider severe enamel fluorosis an adverse health effect, as opposed to a cosmetic one. Although these members disagreed over the characterization of severe enamel fluorosis, they concurred with our recommendation that EPA's maximum contaminant level goal should prevent the occurrence of this unwanted condition.Studies indicate that up to 15 percent of children in communities exposed at the secondary guideline level of 2 mg/L have moderate enamel fluorosis, a less severe form of enamel fluorosis that does not involve enamel loss or pitting. Although this moderate condition can also lead to tooth discoloration that may be aesthetically objectionable, there is inadequate data to categorize it as an adverse health effect.In addition to effects on teeth, the committee reviewed new studies of fluoride's effects on bone. Fluoride is readily incorporated and accumulates in the bone. Concerns about fluoride's effects on the musculoskeletal system historically have been and continue to be focused on bone fracture and skeletal fluorosis. Studies with laboratory animals show that fluoride incorporation can weaken bone and increase the risk of fracture. Evidence for this effect in humans was found in several new studies of populations exposed to fluoride at 4 mg/L or higher in drinking water, as well as in clinical studies of fluoride as a therapeutic agent. Overall, there was consensus among the committee that under certain conditions fluoride can weaken bone and increase the risk of fractures. The majority of the committee concluded that a population with lifetime exposure to fluoride in water at concentrations of 4 mg/L or higher is likely to experience more fractures than a group exposed to 1 mg/L. Three of the 12 committee members, however, supported a conclusion that EPA's 4 mg/L standard might not be protective against bone fractures. They said more evidence was needed that bone fractures occur at an appreciable frequency in human populations exposed to fluoride at 4 mg/L before drawing a firm conclusion about the risks at that level.”
But didn’t the Health Department, Doctors and Dentists assure us dummies that Fluoride was “benign”, a “nutrient” and a “mineral”. The outcome of this study should be read in full - it is four hundred plus pages - by local Mayors as a duty of care to the residents.
There is a four-page brief of the study, which makes very interesting reading and if there is any commonsense left in the world at all it should be the death knell for Fluoridation.
This information can be found at http://national-academies.org/. I am sorry for those who do not have access to the net but a visit to the local library and help from the librarian could point you to this article on the library's computer.
All of us need to read this before any more pressure is put upon us from NSW Health, who would not have access to this yet as they should, being too busy conducting flossy polls which tell us what they want us to think.
Yours sincerely Therese Mackay- Hastings Safe Water Association.
43 Willow Crescent PORT MACQUARIE 2444
Phone 02 6583 9622 – 0417 279 602
23/3/06
Dear Editor,
What response to newly released (March 22 2006) study “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards” has there been From the NSW Health Department and Mid North Coast Mayors in favour of Fluoridation?
We here in the Hastings Port Macquarie area have like most Mid North and North Coast areas been successful in stopping the artificial Fluoridation of our drinking water supplies in the past decades because time after time when voting at Council Elections is held on the subject of Fluoridation residents have said a loud “No. But since the last Council Elections there has been action as a block by all local Mayors to deny local people a voice and force Fluoridation upon us.
Yesterday in the US The National Academies on Science, Engineering and Medicine released their large study "Fluoride in Drinking Water - A Scientific Review of EPA'S Standards" sponsored by the Environmental Protection Association.
At the News Conference Professor John Doull Professor Emeritus of Pharmacology and Toxicology University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City and Chair, Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water said,
“After reviewing the collective evidence on adverse health effects associated with fluoride, our committee concluded unanimously that EPA should lower the maximum contaminant level goal for fluoride. Ongoing exposure to water fluoride levels at 4 mg/L puts children at risk of developing severe enamel fluorosis, which is characterized by discoloration, enamel loss, and pitting of the teeth. This condition occurs during tooth development in children, before the teeth erupt in the mouth. Once it develops, it is a permanent condition.On average, approximately 10 percent of children in communities with water fluoride concentrations at or near 4 mg/L develop severe enamel fluorosis. Previous assessments have considered all cases of enamel fluorosis, including serious ones, to be aesthetically displeasing because of the yellow and brown staining of teeth that occurs, but not adverse to health. However, the majority of the committee concluded that severe cases of enamel loss constitute an adverse health effect because one function of enamel is to protect the teeth and underlying dental tissue. There is some evidence that pitting of tooth enamel could increase the risk of cavities because it allows plaque and bacteria to become trapped in the enamel. The damage to teeth caused by severe enamel fluorosis is a toxic effect that is consistent with prevailing risk assessment definitions of an adverse health effect. However, two of the 12 members of the committee did not agree that enamel defects alone are sufficient to consider severe enamel fluorosis an adverse health effect, as opposed to a cosmetic one. Although these members disagreed over the characterization of severe enamel fluorosis, they concurred with our recommendation that EPA's maximum contaminant level goal should prevent the occurrence of this unwanted condition.Studies indicate that up to 15 percent of children in communities exposed at the secondary guideline level of 2 mg/L have moderate enamel fluorosis, a less severe form of enamel fluorosis that does not involve enamel loss or pitting. Although this moderate condition can also lead to tooth discoloration that may be aesthetically objectionable, there is inadequate data to categorize it as an adverse health effect.In addition to effects on teeth, the committee reviewed new studies of fluoride's effects on bone. Fluoride is readily incorporated and accumulates in the bone. Concerns about fluoride's effects on the musculoskeletal system historically have been and continue to be focused on bone fracture and skeletal fluorosis. Studies with laboratory animals show that fluoride incorporation can weaken bone and increase the risk of fracture. Evidence for this effect in humans was found in several new studies of populations exposed to fluoride at 4 mg/L or higher in drinking water, as well as in clinical studies of fluoride as a therapeutic agent. Overall, there was consensus among the committee that under certain conditions fluoride can weaken bone and increase the risk of fractures. The majority of the committee concluded that a population with lifetime exposure to fluoride in water at concentrations of 4 mg/L or higher is likely to experience more fractures than a group exposed to 1 mg/L. Three of the 12 committee members, however, supported a conclusion that EPA's 4 mg/L standard might not be protective against bone fractures. They said more evidence was needed that bone fractures occur at an appreciable frequency in human populations exposed to fluoride at 4 mg/L before drawing a firm conclusion about the risks at that level.”
But didn’t the Health Department, Doctors and Dentists assure us dummies that Fluoride was “benign”, a “nutrient” and a “mineral”. The outcome of this study should be read in full - it is four hundred plus pages - by local Mayors as a duty of care to the residents.
There is a four-page brief of the study, which makes very interesting reading and if there is any commonsense left in the world at all it should be the death knell for Fluoridation.
This information can be found at http://national-academies.org/. I am sorry for those who do not have access to the net but a visit to the local library and help from the librarian could point you to this article on the library's computer.
All of us need to read this before any more pressure is put upon us from NSW Health, who would not have access to this yet as they should, being too busy conducting flossy polls which tell us what they want us to think.
Yours sincerely Therese Mackay- Hastings Safe Water Association.
# posted by Middle Child @ Thursday, March 23, 2006 
