In this 5-part series,
I look at the history, benefits, and safety of water fluoridation,
and why I changed my mind about it.
"Why Is There Fluoride in Water? Is It Effective?"
A meta-analysis of all the studies
on the dental health implications
of vegetarian diets
showed significantly fewer decayed teeth,
missing teeth,
and the number of teeth with fillings.
One of the studies that bucked the trend
and showed that vegetarians had more cavities
blamed the excess decay on the fact that vegetarians
were significantly less likely to choose
fluoride-containing toothpaste,
supported by the fact that those who did use
toothpaste with fluoride had significantly fewer
decayed teeth than those who didn't.
Fluoride is thought to protect teeth by improving the intrinsic
stability of the mineral structure of dental enamel.
A recent meta-analysis of nearly 100 randomized controlled trials
of fluoride toothpaste involving more than 10,000 people
found "high-certainty" evidence
that toothpaste containing the typical amount of fluoride
reduces tooth decay significantly more
than non-fluoride toothpaste in both children and adults.
But what about the addition of fluoride to the water supply?
A medical consensus
of public health authorities around the world
has considered water fluoridation
at appropriate levels
as a safe and effective means
to prevent cavities on a community-wide scale.
In fact, the CDC,
the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
deemed fluoridation of drinking water
as one of the top ten public health achievements
of the 20th century.
However, community water fluoridation
has long been a flashpoint of polemic and polarization.
Anti-fluoridation activists underscore that there is
no human dietary requirement for fluoride
and argue that water fluoridation
isn't effective enough to justify the costs,
which may include health risks.
First, some background before I dive into the controversy.
Fluoride is a mineral element in the Earth's crust
that naturally occurs in most water supplies.
This is one of the reasons fluoridation has withstood
Constitutional challenges.
Courts have ruled that, rather than an added medication,
fluoride can be seen as a nutrient found naturally
in some areas but not others,
and fluoridation of water supplies
is a matter of just leveling the playing field,
particularly for poor communities
who may have limited access to dental care.
Fluoridation can be defined as
"the upward or downward adjustment
of the level of fluoride content in drinking water
to an optimal level just enough to prevent cavities
but not enough to cause fluorosis,"
or cosmetic changes to the teeth.
It all started in 1901
with an investigation into Colorado Brown Stain,
"grotesque" brown stains
on the teeth of Colorado Springs residents.
At the same time, teeth afflicted by the condition were
"surprisingly and inexplicably resistant to decay."
After fluoride was identified as the basis for these changes,
a nationwide survey of fluoride levels in drinking water
in the 1930s led to the discovery
that fluoride could reach levels around 1 part per million
without causing serious fluorosis.
Hoping to get the best of both worlds,
Grand Rapids, Michigan, in 1945,
became the first city in the world
to fluoridate its water supply.
Within 11 years, cavity rates among children in Grand Rapids
were reportedly down more than 60 percent,
and a fluoridation movement was born.
Today, about two dozen countries fluoridate their drinking water.
Dozens of others have naturally fluoridated water
or instead add fluoride to milk or table salt.
Fluoridation pushback started almost immediately
in the United States.
The obsession of Dr. Strangelove's
Colonel Ripper with the purity of his "precious bodily fluids"
was based on real-life right-wing Red Scare
conspiracy theories
that fluoridation was meant to produce
"moronic, atheistic slaves" who would bow to the communists.
Today's social media is also rife
with anti-fluoridation messages.
Studies have found that 63 percent of Instagram posts
regarding fluoride could be classified as anti-fluoride,
64 percent of tweets on Twitter,
99 percent of YouTube videos,
and up to 100 percent of fluoride groups and pages
found on Facebook were anti-fluoride.
Years before COVID,
the antifluoridation crusade was considered a case study
of "digital pandemics of public health misinformation."
In the year before COVID,
the first worldwide survey
of the crisis of confidence in science
of 140,000 people in 140 countries
found that only 18 percent of humanity
appeared to have a "high" level of trust in science.
To my pleasant surprise though,
despite so many institutional failures,
a 2020 follow-up of the survey found trust in science
actually increased after COVID.
Where does the science land on water fluoridation?
First, let me address efficacy.
The CDC attributes the steep decline in dental decay
in the United States in the latter half of the 20th century
to water fluoridation,
but similar declines were noted in non-fluoridated countries,
attributed in large part to the widespread global distribution
of fluoride toothpaste.
The best evidence we have
comes from prospective studies with concurrent controls,
comparing cavity rates over time
in fluoridated versus non-fluoridated populations.
There have been more than 100 such studies to date,
and overall,
fluoridation results in 35 percent fewer decayed,
missing, or filled baby teeth
and 26 percent fewer decayed, missing,
or filled permanent teeth.
So, community fluoridation does indeed help
to cut down on cavities.
The question then becomes, at what cost,
which we'll discuss next.