Flouridation - Fragmented facts

Fluoridation has been attributed with decreasing the number of dental caries in children, although the extent of this reduction is uncertain. This reduction in dental caries is the driver for fluoridation, since the cost of fluoridation is low compared with the cost of extra dental work which would otherwise be required.

Fluoridation of a municipal water supply presents an ethical conflict between benefiting the common good and infringing on an individual’s rights. On one side of the argument, fluoridation is viewed as a violation of ethical rights where an individual must use the fluoridated municipal water supply without giving informed consent. The other side of the argument is that fluoridation can be viewed as controlled intervention to replicate the benefits of a naturally fluoridated water supply, which provides the greatest benefit to those least able to help themselves.

The argument is fuelled by the fact that scientists have failed to reach a consensus on fluoridation with respect to both its efficacy and safety. The majority of studies carried out internationally have been of poor quality and as such no conclusion can be made confirming the affect of fluoridation on closing the socio-economic or ethnic dental health inequality gap, the level of risk of dental fluorosis posed by adding fluoride into the water supply, and the safety of water fluoridation and its long-term health impacts.