May 12, 2017

Archives for December 2011

Do, Levy and Spencer, Association Between Infant Formula Feeding and Dental Fluorosis and Caries in Australian Children

ABSTRACT

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate associations between patterns of infant formula feeding and dental fluorosis and caries in a representative sample of Australian children.

Methods: A population-based study gathered information on fluoride exposure in early childhood. Information on infant formula feeding and fluoridation status was used to group children: three groups in nonfluoridated areas (formula nonuser, user for <6 months, and user for 6+ months) and four groups in fluoridated areas (nonuser, user with nonfluoridated water, user with fluoridated water for <6 months, and user with fluoridated water for 6+ months). Children aged 8-13 years were examined for fluorosis using the Thylstrup and Fejerskov (TF) Index. Primary tooth caries experience recorded at age 8-9 years was extracted from clinical records. Fluorosis cases were defined as having TF 1+ on maxillary incisors. Fluorosis prevalence and primary caries experience were compared across formula user groups in multivariable regression models adjusting for other factors.

Results: Total sample was 588 children. Children in fluoridated areas had higher prevalence of very mild to mild fluorosis, but lower caries experience than those in nonfluoridated areas. Among children in nonfluoridated areas, formula users for 6+ months had significantly higher prevalence of fluorosis compared with nonusers. There was no significant difference in fluorosis prevalence among the formula users in fluoridated areas. Among children in fluoridated areas, formula users with nontap water had higher caries experience.

Conclusion: Infant formula use was associated with higher prevalence of fluorosis in nonfluoridated areas but not in fluoridated areas. Type of water used for reconstituting infant formula in fluoridated areas was associated with caries experience.

Do, Levy and Spencer – Association Between Infant Formula Feeding And Dental Fluorosis And Caries In Australian Children, Journal Of Public Health Dentistry, 2011

Fluoride Free Winnipeg

www.fluoridefreewinnipeg.com

http://www.facebook.com/#!/groups/29097719264/

 

Letter to the editor regarding UTM weighs in on debate on fluoride

Oakville Beaver, Ontario 28-Dec-2011 — Re: Letter to the editor, Monday, Dec. 23, 2011 UTM weighs in on debate on fluoride.

Dr. Sigal, I, too, reside in Halton, and I agree with you that the fluoridation debate is all about the health of the future children of Halton and its communities.

Fluoride has the capacity to injure children, in ways immediate, and in subtle ways that can damage the body over decades.

As you indicate, the public should be able to place its trust in the academic community.

You imply, however, that the whole of the academic community is supportive of fluoridation. That is not the case.

There are many skillful academics who have conducted, and continue to conduct, studies examining the effects of fluoride exposure, and those academics loudly warn of the hazards of fluoridation.

A recognizable body of these other academics would be the 12 selected scientists who were assembled by the National Academy of Sciences to review all of the existing literature on fluoride safety.

After more than three years of painstaking analysis, they produced the 2006 NAS report, Toxicological Risk of Fluoride in Drinking Water.

Their report was very skeptical of the claims that fluoridation is both ‘safe and effective’.

Those academics warned of serious issues with fluoride safety, citing concerns about fluoride’s links to bone and soft tissue cancers, hypothyroidism, Alzheimer-like symptoms, and IQ deficits just to mention the short list.

Their report urged that more research get underway quickly to closely explore all of those apparent risks.

You wrote of “… experts in the field strongly in support of water fluoridation ….”

Let’s examine who qualifies as an ‘expert in the field’ by first identifying the field in question.

The ‘field’ is the examination of possible biological effects if you swallow fluoride.

Whose area of expertise includes that study?  No Faculty of Dentistry has in its curriculum the study of biological effects of ingested fluoride. Many dentists have independently sought that knowledge, and several have become pre-eminent authorities on the effects of fluoride. Those dentists would be ‘experts in this field’.

Getting back to trust in the academic community, we encourage that esteemed body to help unveil one toxicological study that would prove the chemicals being added to your water are, in fact, safe for use.

Many have the impression that water fluoridation is accomplished using a natural product (calcium fluoride). The academic community should help clarify that Halton residents are being ‘protected’ instead by a remarkably toxic industrial waste byproduct called hydrofluorosilicic acid.

In the 60-plus years this chemical has been added to drinking water, no government or health authority on either side of the border has conducted a legitimate toxicological test to prove it safe.

And we risk the use of this chemical to save our children, statistically, six tenths of one cavity in their lifetime. We, who oppose fluoridation, are worried about bodily injuries far worse than a non-critical cavity.

We are not worried about any sudden spike in cavities when fluoridation ends. Many communities that have ended fluoridation report a continued downward trend in cavities, the result of generally better oral hygiene.

When fluoridation ends, so ends the cause of much of the dental fluorosis that places Halton children into dentist chairs for expensive veneers.

Sheldon Thomas, principal, Clear Water Legacy, www.clearwaterlegacy.com

http://www.insidehalton.com/opinion/letters/article/1270703

http://www.insidehalton.com/opinion/letters/article/1269774–utm-weighs-in-on-debate-on-fluoride

Moncton votes to pull fluoride from water supply

COF-COF News Find 300 x 300By: CTV News, Moncton, New Brunswick  21-Dec-2011 – Some dentists in Moncton aren’t smiling after city council voted to pull fluoride from its water supply for five years, while it studies the health effects of fluoridation.

Many dentists believe that fluoride reduces cavities and improves people’s overall dental health, but members of the anti-fluoride movement point to health risks such as dental fluorosis.

Moncton’s decision to stop fluoridating its water mirrors one made by nearby Dieppe, although the town of Riverview voted to continue the practice.

Despite the council’s decision, Moncton Mayor George LeBlanc voted to keep fluoride in the water, saying many respected authorities such as Health Canada convinced him of the health benefits.

“I weighed all of the evidence and in my view the weight should be given to the medical authorities who advise municipalities across the country,” says LeBlanc.

But Oliver Weil of Fluoride Free Moncton has a different take.

“It is only in some municipalities’ water,” says Weil. “Montreal, Vancouver have never put it in their water. Ninety-eight per cent of Europe, over 90 per cent of Quebec and over 90 per cent of B.C. do not fluoridate their water. Fredericton never has, but when it comes up, it is a politically sensitive issue.”

Dr. Anil Joshi is a dentist and a spokesperson for the New Brunswick Dental Society and he supports the fluoridation of municipal water. He says the decision about whether or not to fluoridate often comes down to who lobbies the hardest.

“There is a fairly strong anti-fluoridation movement in some communities and if there is enough of a base of those people lobbying for this kind of approach, then sometimes they have the upper hand and that seems to be the outcome,” he says.

Daniel Bourgeois is one of seven city councillors who voted in favour of removing fluoride from Moncton’s water supply, and he says about 12 of his constituents approached him on the issue.

“I was always playing the devil’s advocate, whether they were for or against,” says Bourgeois. “I would give them the counter-argument and…people who held one opinion would always reply ‘oh, I didn’t know that.'”

Council says it will pull fluoride from its water supply as soon as operationally possible and it will examine what, if any, health effect the change has on residents during the trial period.

http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/moncton-votes-to-pull-fluoride-from-water-supply-1.743831

Brewer’s ‘Daily Dose’ 21-Dec-2011

Moncton votes to pull fluoride from water supply

By: CTV News, Moncton, New Brunswick 21-Dec-2011

Some dentists in Moncton aren’t smiling after city council voted to pull fluoride from its water supply for five years, while it studies the health effects of fluoridation.

Many dentists believe that fluoride reduces cavities and improves people’s overall dental health, but members of the anti-fluoride movement point to health risks such as dental fluorosis.

Moncton’s decision to stop fluoridating its water mirrors one made by nearby Dieppe, although the town of Riverview voted to continue the practice.

Despite the council’s decision, Moncton Mayor George LeBlanc voted to keep fluoride in the water, saying many respected authorities such as Health Canada convinced him of the health benefits.

“I weighed all of the evidence and in my view the weight should be given to the medical authorities who advise municipalities across the country,” says LeBlanc.

But Oliver Weil of Fluoride Free Moncton has a different take.

“It is only in some municipalities’ water,” says Weil. “Montreal, Vancouver have never put it in their water. Ninety-eight per cent of Europe, over 90 per cent of Quebec and over 90 per cent of B.C. do not fluoridate their water. Fredericton never has, but when it comes up, it is a politically sensitive issue.”

Dr. Anil Joshi is a dentist and a spokesperson for the New Brunswick Dental Society and he supports the fluoridation of municipal water. He says the decision about whether or not to fluoridate often comes down to who lobbies the hardest.

“There is a fairly strong anti-fluoridation movement in some communities and if there is enough of a base of those people lobbying for this kind of approach, then sometimes they have the upper hand and that seems to be the outcome,” he says.

Daniel Bourgeois is one of seven city councillors who voted in favour of removing fluoride from Moncton’s water supply, and he says about 12 of his constituents approached him on the issue.

“I was always playing the devil’s advocate, whether they were for or against,” says Bourgeois. “I would give them the counter-argument and…people who held one opinion would always reply ‘oh, I didn’t know that.'”

Council says it will pull fluoride from its water supply as soon as operationally possible and it will examine what, if any, health effect the change has on residents during the trial period.

http://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/moncton-votes-to-pull-fluoride-from-water-supply-1.743831

ODA seeks stay on municipal election charge

By: Bob Vrbanac, Waterloo Chronicle, 21-Dec-2011 Waterloo, Ontario — A lawyer representing the Ontario Dental Association and two dentists accused of contravening the Ontario Municipal Elections Act during last year’s fluoridation referendum have asked the court to stay the proceedings.

Provincial prosecutor Ralph Cotter decided in July to proceed with a charge sworn out by anti-fluoridation activist Robert Fleming against the Ontario Dental Association, the association’s current president Dr. Harry Hoediono and past-president Dr. Ira Kirshen. The charge was sworn out during the heated water fluoridation referendum, narrowly won by the no side and alleged the parties named contravened the act by proposing to incur expenses with respect to a question on the municipal ballot.

The incident stems from a June 17 public debate the two dentists attended in Waterloo where they provided materials printed by the ODA in support of water fluoridation. Fleming claimed the ODA, Hoediono and Kirshen failed to file a notice of registration before campaigning as a candidate for the fluoride question.

When the crown decided to proceed with the charge, Fleming, who represents WaterlooWatch and Canadians Opposed to Fluoridation, said, “This trial is focused on ensuring that participants to the municipal democratic process will adhere to the law when campaigning. Democracy is something most of us hold dear, so most people understand the inappropriateness of allowing a large lobby group to simply do as they please during a municipal election or referendum.”

But defence attorney Murray Stieber argued the charges were “frivolous and vexatious” at Provincial Offences Court last Wednesday and asked justice of the peace Arthur Child to throw out the charges.

Stieber produced an affidavit sworn out by Hoediono, a local dentist, saying he was intimidated during the referendum by anti-fluoridation activists, particularly Fleming.

That campaign of intimidation continued with the charges, he argued.

“(Fleming) sought to muzzle those who speak out in support of water fluoridation, as many do,” said Stieber. “He’s trying to manipulate the political process and what he’s doing is improper.

“The tactics he’s used are aggressive and improper.”

Hoediono’s sworn testimony stated the campaign of intimidation included e-mails and phone calls with racial overtones. He said he also received a death threat.

Stieber argued the intimidation established a pattern of abusive behaviour that continued with Fleming’s allegations in court.

Crown prosecutor Cotter was incredulous about how an organization representing 8,000 Ontario dentists could be intimidated by Fleming, arguing he was a modern David against the resources arrayed against him by the association, Hoediono and Kirshen.

He also dismissed allegations of Fleming being involved in any email campaign of intimidation and threatening phone calls to Hoediono as unfounded conjecture and speculation.

Child will decide on the stay request Feb.6. If the charge is upheld, Cotter is expected to request a trial date be set at that time.

http://www.waterloochronicle.ca/news/oda-seeks-stay-on-municipal-election-charge/

Moncton city council nixes fluoride in water

CBC News, New Brunswick 20-Dec-2011 — Moncton is joining a growing list of Canadian cities that are getting rid of fluoride in their drinking water which is added to reduce tooth decay.

City councillors voted 7 to 4 Monday night to stop the practice of adding fluoride to the city’s tap water.

Coun. Paul Pellerin said that as dental care improves, there are better ways of providing fluoride to people than putting it in the drinking water supply.

“There are many municipalities that have no fluoride in their water and, to my knowledge, there are no major issues,” Pellerin said.

Coun. Steven Boyce agreed.

“If they want fluoride that badly, they can run to the pharmacy and buy a toothpaste that has fluoride in it,” he said.

Coun. Brian Hicks, who also voted to eliminate the chemical, said there are already too many chemicals in our food and the environment.

“How many times do we see recalls of medicines that once were considered safe, and as research testing developed became known as harmful to our bodies and do we really know how all the chemicals and medications we digest interact with one another,” he said.

But those councillors in favour of keeping fluoride said that every health and dental association in North America recommends adding fluoride to the drinking water because it is safe and effective.

Coun. Merrill Henderson said public health officials will be appalled at Moncton’s decision.

“I was approached by a retired medical doctor who asked me if Moncton city council were thinking about joining The Flat Earth Society,” he said.

The city will begin phasing out fluoride immediately.

Controversy over last fall’s referendum on the fluoridation of water in Waterloo, Ontario made its way to court this morning


CTV News Southwestern Ontario (14-Dec-2011, 39 sec.)

Region of Waterloo, Ontario — The controversy over last fall’s referendum on the fluoridation of water in Waterloo made its way to court this morning.  Charges were filed against the Ontario Dental Association and two dentists under the Ontario (Municipal) Elections Act.  It’s alleged they broke the rules by campaigning in favour of fluoride without having registered to do so.  The charges were laid after Waterloo resident Robert Fleming, who opposes the treatment, took the allegations to a crown prosecutor. The crown calls this a David and Goliath case, however the defence says it’s a case of intimidation. The issue will be back to court in February.

 

SEE RELATED ARTICLE: http://cof-cof.ca/2012/10/ontario-dental-association-pleads-guilty-in-case/

SEE RELATED ARTICLE: http://cof-cof.ca/2012/11/oda-continues-to-support-water-fluoridation-re-oda-pleads-guilty-in-case-oct-31-waterloo-chronicle/

SEE RELATED NEWS VIDEO: http://cof-cof.ca/2012/10/ontario-dental-association-pleads-guilty/

SEE RELATED CARTOON: http://cof-cof.ca/cartoon-public-voice-and-dental-association/

 

Fluoride battle outlives referendum

By: Jeff Outhit, Record staff 14-Dec-2011 Waterloo, Ontario — Waterloo’s fluoride debate is more than a year past but a bitter court battle continues as key players square off over a hard-fought referendum.

Politicians stopped fluoridating drinking water after residents voted narrowly against it in 2010. Fluoride had been added as a public health measure to prevent cavities.

Wednesday, lawyers sparred over municipal charges against pro-fluoride dentists Dr. Harry Hoediono, Dr. Ira Kirshen and the Ontario Dental Association.

Crown prosecutor Ralph Cotter is pursuing charges laid in 2010 by antifluoridation activist Robert Fleming. Dentists are accused of violating election financing rules by participating in a fluoride debate before signing on as referendum participants.

The dentists want the charges quashed, arguing they were improperly laid as part of a campaign by Fleming to intimidate them and muzzle them. Cotter defends the charges and likened Fleming to David fighting Goliath.

“The David and Goliath scenario is a little troubling,” defence lawyer Murray Stieber countered. He points to an affidavit from Hoediono in which the dentist says he felt “physically intimidated” by Fleming.

In the affidavit, Hoediono said antifluoridation activists threatened him by voice mail, doctored news videos to undermine him and tried to infect his computer with viruses sent by email. Cotter dismissed allegations against Fleming as unfounded conjecture and speculation.

Justice of the peace Arthur Child expects to rule early next year on quashing the charges or proceeding to trial.

http://www.therecord.com/news/local/article/639594–fluoride-battle-outlives-referendum

The City of Dieppe now wants fluoride to be removed from its drinking water

CBC News, 13-Dec-2011, Dieppe, New Brunswick – The City of Dieppe now wants fluoride to be removed from its drinking water, reversing a previous decision by city council.

Councillors voted five-to-three at a meeting Monday night to ask the City of Moncton to stop adding fluoride to the region’s water supply.

Coun. Dave Maltais said the decision is based on extensive research.

“It’s an issue that you really need to read the documentation. You really need to spend time. Like, I probably spent, I’d say, 20 hours, just reading (documents) and I looked at a few videos. But if you don’t stop and really look at the documentation closely, then you won’t be convinced,” he said.

“On Oct. 24, I had no idea what was fluoridation of water. But I can tell you that since that, with all the reading I did, that I know a lot of it now, and I know all the harm it can do to the human body.”

The Town of Riverview voted in October to keep the cavity-fighting compound in the water.

It’s unclear when Moncton council will meet next to decide on the controversial issue.

A Moncton committee has been reviewing the future of fluoride in the region’s drinking water since June, after a group called for the removal of fluoride from city water.

The city has been holding public meetings and requested recommendations from Riverview and Dieppe, which also tap into Moncton’s water supply.

Those who favour fluoride say it’s done wonders for reducing the number of cavities in children. Those who oppose it say it’s dangerous and an invasion of private rights.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/story/2011/12/13/nb-dieppe-fluoride-water-moncton.html