To the Editor:
On Nov. 8, the towns of Newcastle and Damariscotta vote on a ballot issue regarding whether to continue the fluoridation of the municipal water supply. This is an important public health issue and as a dentist with many years of experience, I would like to help with some clarification.
For over 60 years, municipalities have been adding a carefully measured amount of fluoride to their water supplies with the direct result of a decrease in tooth decay.
Hundreds of unbiased, peer-reviewed, evidence based on studies confirm this benefit. Why does it work? For children, when fluoride is present during tooth-bud development, it actually integrates throughout the tooth, making the tooth much more resistant to decay.
For adults, when fluoride is ingested it becomes present in the saliva, bathing the teeth with fluoride, also helping to make the teeth more decay resistant. Do topical fluoride treatments work just as well? Actually, while still quite helpful, they do not, since this is working at the surface of the tooth only, not throughout the tooth as it is developing.
In my practice, we see children from these areas as well as those that obtain their water from wells. There is a marked increase in the amount of decay in the well-water children, unless they were lucky enough to supplement with drops or tablets. I have also experienced this same result when I practiced in Arizona in the mid 1980s prior to fluoridation of some surrounding communities.
Sadly, it was very easy to tell which town the children were from, based on their level of decay.
There are some that call fluoride a “toxin,” but this is simply not true. The question is dosage – many common substances we ingest, such as Vitamin A, Vitamin D, salt, iron, chlorine and even water itself each have a toxic dose, but this does not make them toxins. At the recommended safe dose, neither is fluoride.
There is a mountain of “Internet science” blaming fluoride for a laundry list of maladies, but evidence based, unbiased studies have not shown this to be the case.
There are some that are opposed to fluoridated water in that it infringes on their freedom of choice. This might be true, except they can choose not to drink the water, but is it right that they choose to deny others the beneficial effects of less tooth decay, pain and expense? There are many that may not get any other chance for fluoridation beyond this source.
When you get the chance, please think of the children and others that would miss out without this supplement and please be sure and vote to continue good public health for our area.
Kerry L. Ransdell, DMD
Bristol
