In the last few years, the arguments about fluoridating drinking water have flared up again. This battle has become most contentious in Juneau, Alaska and Calgary, Alberta. Jennifer Meyer, a mother of three, has lived in Juneau since 2015. She’s currently researching the effect of the city’s choice to stop fluoridating its water supply in 2007. Her findings have highlighted alarming statistics regarding tooth decay among children in both Juneau and Calgary, where fluoride was removed from the water supply in 2011.
Meyer started to worry for the dental health of her community after noticing the changes that the recent anti-fluoridation policies had made on her children and their friends. To get a clearer picture of this problem, she worked with dental hygienists to perform oral inspections of second-grade students across the district in Juneau. As her research unfolded, she made some unexpected discoveries. These results motivated her to lead efforts to reinstate fluoride in the drinking water. As Calgary researcher Lindsay McLaren noted, communities that remove fluoride don’t see just positive impacts. She’s joined forces with others to push for its return.
Rising Rates of Tooth Decay
The numbers around childhood cavities in each city tell a pretty sad story. In Edmonton, 55% of the 3,500 children surveyed had at least one sign of tooth decay. The story was much the same in Calgary, where an astounding 65% of children were suffering. These new studies highlight the damaging health impacts of discontinuing fluoridation from community water supplies.
Dr. Warren Loeppky is a children’s dentist in Calgary, Alberta. In Wake County, NC, public health dentist Dr. He noticed that the severity and aggressiveness of these cases have increased. This worrisome trend is causing alarm among oral health advocates. During those same years, the average number of dental procedures required for young children suffering from tooth decay skyrocketed. It increased the average number of treatments per child from 1.5 in 2003 to 2.5 treatments per child by 2012.
“Compared to Edmonton kids, Calgary kids were now considerably worse as far as dental health goes.” – Lindsay McLaren
Given this sharp rise in dental problems, Meyer contends that the new prevalence data is frightening. He thinks stopping fluoridation citing flimsy or mischaracterized evidence isn’t a precaution—it’s just negligence. She contends that policy makers need to look beyond the immediate short-term costs and benefits associated with making public health interventions such as fluoridation available.
The Case for Reinstating Fluoride
Meyer’s advocacy is indeed picking up momentum. She has been working with advocacy groups such as the one formed by Stuart’s counterpart in Calgary, Juliet Guichon, who have worked to restore fluoride to the city’s water supply. Guichon’s group has built remarkable public support. Local voting patterns leave no doubt that communities want fluoride returned to their drinking water.
“More people voted to reinstate fluoride than voted for the mayor. So that’s a success.” – Jennifer Meyer
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), almost 63% of Americans were served fluoridated water as of 2022. No doubt, this demonstrates that many communities continue to see it as an essential public health protective policy. That battle goes on, with Utah becoming the first state to ban fluoridation outright in March of 2023.
Further, Meyer tells us, denying fluoride in public water systems is like a hidden healthcare tax on communities. This decision is ultimately detrimental to children’s health outcomes. She advocates for rigorous, unbiased investigatory processes to guide public health decisions. Political agendas and persistent misconceptions regarding fluoride’s safety and efficacy should not drive these decisions.
Controversy Surrounding Fluoridation
Water fluoridation exemplifies a controversial public policy issue, with opposition arising since its inception in the mid-20th century. A 2022 review surfaced significant concerns about the possible side effects of fluoride. One of its major findings was that water with over 1.5 mg of fluoride per liter was linked to reduced IQ in children. This result has stoked the flames of decades-long oppositional debates regarding the safety and appropriateness of fluoridating our drinking water.
Bruce Yaholnitsky, a public health advocate with the American Public Health Association, reflected on the importance of having strong scientific evidence when determining public health policy. He stressed the point that even if some of these conclusions would appear to be common sense, what’s important is having honest, rigorous research to support those conclusions.
“This is just obvious to us. But you need to have proper science to prove, in some cases, the obvious.” – Bruce Yaholnitsky
As communities continue to navigate the complex terrain of public health policy and dental care strategies, the conversations initiated by Meyer and her counterparts are essential. We are grateful for their important work to demonstrate the huge effect that fluoridation policy can have on children’s health. It emphasizes the importance of making data-driven decisions at the local and state level.
