Comment on Water Fluoridation Conspiracy Theories by nyscof.
It’s not a conspiracy – just one of the biggest medical blunders of all time.
JADA Study Proves Fluoridation is Money Down the Drain
New York – October 2009 — Children’s cavity rates are similar whether water is fluoridated or not, according to data published in the July 2009 Journal of the American Dental Association by dentist J.V. Kumar of the NY State Health Department (1).
In 2008, New York City spent approximately $24 million on water fluoridation ($5 million on fluoride chemicals)(1a). In 2010, NYC’s fluoride chemicals will cost $9 million (1b).
Fluoride in water at “optimal” levels (0.7 – 1.2 mg/L) is supposed to reduce tooth decay without creating excessive fluorosis (fluoride-discolored and/or damaged teeth). Yet cavities are rampant in NY’s fluoridated populations (1c).
Attempting to prove that fluorosed teeth have fewer cavities, Kumar uses 1986-1987 National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) data which, upon analysis, shows that 7- to 17-year-olds have similar cavity rates in their permanent teeth whether their water supply is fluoridated or not (Table 1).
In 1990, using the same NIDR data, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis published equally surprising results in a peer-reviewed journal. He concluded, “No statistically significant differences were found in the decay rates of permanent teeth or the percentages of decay-free children in the F [fluoridated], NF [non-fluoridated], and PF [partially fluoridated] areas.” (2).
Kumar divided children into four groups based on their community’s water fluoride levels:
Less than 0.3 mg/L where 55.5% had cavities
From 0.3 to 0.7 mg/L where 54.6% had cavities
Optimal 0.7 to 1.2 mg/L where 54.4% had cavities
Over 1.2 mg/L where 56.4% had cavities
“Dr. Kumar’s published data exposes more evidence that fluoridation doesn’t reduce tooth decay,” says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
“It’s criminal to waste taxpayers’ money on fluoridation, while exposing entire populations unnecessarily to fluoride’s health risks, especially when local and state governments are attempting to balance budgets by cutting essential services,” says Beeber.
More fluoride = more money for dentists?
Despite 60+ years of water fluoridation, Americans are spending more than ever on dental care. “between 1998 and 2008 the increase in the cost of dental services exceeded that of medical care and far exceeded the overall rate of inflation,” according to Slate Magazine. Americans paid 44.2 percent of dental bills themselves compared to 10.3 percent of physician costs, Slate reports. (3)
Dentists pat themselves on the back claiming they are the only profession endorsing something that would put them out of business. But apparently the more fluoride people get, the more money dentists make.
Dentists’ Nominal Net Income for 2000 was $533,000 up from $141,000 in 1982, according to the American Dental Association Survey published in the March 2005 Journal of the American Dental Association. During the same time period, the number of Americans living in fluoridated communities went from 116 million to 172 million. (4)
Analysis of Kumar’s data: http://tinyurl.com/MoneyDownTheDrain
More information about fluoride and tooth decay:
1) “The Association Between Enamel Fluorosis and Dental Caries in U.S. Schoolchildren,” Kumar & Iida Journal of the American Dental Association, July 2009 (Table 1)
2) Fluoride: Journal of the International Society for Fluoride Research
April 1990 (Volume 23, Issue 2, Pages 55-67) “Water Fluoridation & Tooth Decay: Results from the 1986-1987 National Survey of US Schoolchildren,” by John A. Yiamouyiannis, Ph.D.
3) Slata Magazine, “The American Way of Dentistry, The Oral Cost Spiral” by June Thomas (September 29, 2009)
4) Fluoridation Statistics: