Fluoride in Public Water Polarizing Subject

I have been amazed at how polarizing the subject of Fluoridation of drinking water can be to a community. Many years ago I innocently investigated the technical and cost implications of adding fluoride to the community water system for a small town where I was then living. I was surprised to find that the owner of the system would be willing to provide fluoridation for no additional cost, if I could provide documentation that the town supported the measure.

I had mistakenly believed that it would be technology, and ultimately money, that would be the restricting factor. I had begun my inquiry with the understanding that fluoride added to municipal water systems was responsible for a reduction in cavities of about 20-40%  in children assuming they were already brushing. My community had many people not receiving adequate health and dental care, so this appeared to be a reasonable line of inquiry to promote general health.

My first hint that this might be a bigger issue was when I talked to some local dentists. Each supported fluoridation, but just smiled when I suggested they join me in backing the measure. They would support fluoridation if asked individually, but would not support the effort on record. At the time I did not fully understand the difference in these semantics.

Others told me that fluoride was toxic and led to radical facial deformations in high percentages of children. My understanding was that the levels prescribed for public water were between 0.5-1.0 mg/l. When taken in significantly larger doses fluoride is in fact toxic, but that can be said for many of the minerals the body needs. The more people I talked to the more opposition I met.

I had become involved with this subject in hopes of helping children who may not have access to the appropriate dental care, but had somehow become viewed as a revolutionary intent on usurping the individual rights of American citizens. Today I see were the issue has been more carefully framed as an ethical issue. The practice is viewed by some as a mass medication where the consent of all users has not and can not be proven. The US Center for Disease Control and Prevention calls the practice one of the greatest public health achievements of the century, but the debate continues as a very polarizing subject.

The recent case in Clearwater, Florida is a good example of the current debate. I never went forward with any suggestion to add fluoride to the water after hearing some of the negative response. I thought at the time of only helping the children. Hopefully no one felt my acts as part of a plot "to keep the people stupid so they don't realize what's going on" as suggested in the Clearwater article.