Fluoride in Water
Threads - Fluoride Protection in
Water Consumption, Chemicals of Concern in Water
On
22/5/2003, Warren Davis wrote:
My wife and I
mainly consume bottled water. For my part, I was incapable of consuming
Perth tap water due to an extreme adverse reaction whereby my throat
swelled up causing me considerable pain and discomfort. Hence my
aversion to treated tap water, at least in Perth. I hasten to add that
in my 28 years prior existence in Melbourne I never experienced problems
consuming tap water.
I have since
relocated to Sydney as of December 2002 and married in the following
month. Recently, my wife, aged 26, has been the recipient of her
mother's concerns that the consumption of bottled drinking water (to the
exclusion of tap water) leaves us, but in particular, my wife, exposed
to the lack of fluoride protection, especially at a time when my wife
and I are intending to achieve a pregnancy. The premise of my
mother-in-law is that tooth deterioration and decay can be severe during
pregnancy, from which the concern stems with regards the relative
absence of fluoride as a result of our consumption of bottled
water.
My recollection
from my own parents many years ago was that medical results from decades
long studies in other countries demonstrated that fluoride included in
drinking water has led to various bone deformities in some northern
European countries.
I invite members
from the list to offer disinterested comment and evaluation on the
matter I have raised in relation to the concerns my mother-in-law has
justifiably raised with my wife. References to various scientific data
and findings will be greatly appreciated.
Toby
Fiander replied:
Until
recently, it was generally held that fluoride in drinking water
pervaded the food chain sufficiently that it did not matter if
any individual drank water directly or not. However, control of
water quality in manufacture is much more complete than it used
to be and fluoride is probably excluded in some processes. So,
drinking water becomes a more important source of fluoride.
Some
recent findings about the prevalence of child tooth decay in Sydney
indicate that there is a possibility that drinking bottled water
is having a deleterious effect on dental health in
children. I think it is a long bow to draw to directly
connect the rates of tooth decay, which are on the rise, with
consumption of bottled water, but that inference was made in the study
conclusions, I understand. There was no distinction made between
children drinking bottled water and their pregnant mothers drinking it -
it was pretty audacious making any conclusion, I thought.. There
are no other recent Australian data of which I know.
I
can understand why there might be some tendency to drink bottled water
in Perth, in spite of the poor record of bottled waters
generally. Sydney's water has a unique taste, like every other
water, which is probably unpleasant when you first meet it, but
it has proven to be very safe in epidemiological terms over a long
period of time. Water supply standards have also risen, in spite
of scares in the press, reported presence of various organisms and the
like - generally, testing is more sensitive and there
is a greater awareness of what is in water supplied. The press
tend to leave out the good news.
It
would be possible to continue to drink a non-fluoridated water (like
that in bottles or from a bore) and to take fluoride tablets.
I am the product of my mother's strategy which was very similar to
this, because there was no fluoride in water supply when
I grew up. My pharmacist mother was aware of its importance and
took fluoride tablets, when she wasn't vomiting them up again in the
mornings or too busy to remember to take them anyway. The majority
of my teeth are filled and I am about to lose a tooth to decay.
My sister, who is five years my junior grew up with fluoridated water
and still (at age 44) has few fillings in her teeth - there were none
at all until she was in her 30s. I think, even on the limited
data, that the likely outcome from each
strategy is fairly clear.
However, it is
probably relatively simple for blokes to theorise about it all - we will
never be pregnant. I don't think that starting to drink a
new water at the same time as coping with morning sickness would be a
good strategy.
Also, what
people eat and drink has more than just a logical element to it.
Geoff Pain added:
I drink only
rain water collected at my home (with associated risks). But I
occasionally drink tea and use fluoridated toothpaste, careful not to
swallow.
You might like
to consider evidence of brain damage caused by fluoride to the
developing foetus and weaning mammal.
In 1995 and
1996, two epidemiological studies from China revealed low IQ associated
with fluoride in public drinking water (published in the journal
Fluoride by X S Li and L B Zhao).
I am looking at
the possibility that fluoride might be a factor in thyroid disease
(recent reports in the media that 11% of Australian children have
thyroid problems) and the link between thyroid and depression. I'm also
following the possibility that apparent increase in attention
hyperactivity deficit disorder could be linked to introduction of
fluoride.
In 1998, the
adverse effect of 2 ppm sodium fluoride on rats was published by J A
Varner et al in Brain Research 784, pp284-98. I don't have the full
paper but they observed chromatin clumping, enhanced protein staining,
pyknosis, vacuolation, presence of ghost-like cells and decreased
neuronal density in adult rats exposed to 1 ppm fluoride for 52
weeks.(cited in Fluoride 35(1) 12-21 - see below).
This study found
that fluoride enhanced aluminium-induced neural degeneration in rats and
that the "surprising" result came from the NaF controls.
In 1995 Dr
Phyllis Mullenix published (in Neurotoxicology and Teratology Volume 17
No 2 pp 169-77) fluoride-induced behavioural disruptions and predicted
effects in the hippocampus. There was a distinct diffrence between males
and females in the effects.
In 2002, a study
of brain damage caused by fluoride at doses of 100 ppm was published in
the journal Fluoride Vol 35 No 1, pp 12-21 by Y M Shivarajashankara et
al with excellent photomicrographs of hippocampus, motor cortex,
cerebellum and amygdala which convince me that fluoride should be banned
from public drinking supplies.
It might
interest you to know that the Western Australian government removes
fluoride from some artesian water supplies such as Quindalup.
If your wife
drinks tea, she will of course receive a pleasant tasting dose of
fluoride.
Please let me
know if you get any further scientific response to you important
question.
Toby
Fiander replied:
Where
to start...?
The
drinking water concentrations in major capital cities are generally
<0.8mg/L, which is about the natural concentrations in lots of places
in the world and less than most of the "low fluoride" cases in the
Chinese literature quoted. In his email, Geoff Pain mentions
nothing about the concentrations that are being looked at in the
Chinese studies he quotes.
>
You might like to consider evidence of brain damage caused
> by fluoride to the developing foetus and weaning mammal.
> In 1995 and 1996, two epidemiological studies from China
> revealed low IQ associated with fluoride in public drinking
> water (published in the journal Fluoride by X S Li and L B
Zhao).
The
concentrations looked at in this study are generally above 3mg/L, which
is quite high. There was no check for other influencing
factors, and the only conclusion was, in any case, that further study
is probably necessary. ... hardly surprising given
the size of the samples. Also, as noted above, the children of
the low fluoride area in this study had drinking water which is
comparable to the level of fluoride in Sydney drinking water.
>
I am looking at the possibility that fluoride might be a factor
> in thyroid disease (recent reports in the media that 11% of
> Australian children have thyroid problems) and the link
> between thyroid and depression. I'm also following the
> possibility that apparent increase in attention hyperactivity
> deficit disorder could be linked to introduction of fluoride.
I
am not aware of Australian literature on this. Any effect seems
more likely to be lethargy and goitre than hyperactivity, but I would
like to see some local evidence one way or another.
There
is some suggestion in the same Chinese literature that there might be a
thyroid effect from high fluoride in drinking water (>4mg/L).
Australian
soils are generally deficient in iodine - this is why iodised salt was
introduced to Australia. If Geoff is referring to
the possible aggravation of iodine deficiency by fluoride, then once
again, you need to look at the concentrations involved. A
supplement of both is probably a good idea, so always buy iodised salt
if you have a choice and drink plenty of good capital
city tap water after you have it in moderation on your meal.
>
In 2002, a study of brain damage caused by fluoride at doses
> of 100 ppm was published in the journal Fluoride Vol 35
> No 1, pp 12-21 by Y M Shivarajashankara et al with excellent
> photomicrographs of hippocampus, motor cortex, cerebellum
> and amygdala which convince me that fluoride should be
> banned from public drinking supplies.
Why?
100ppm is about 120 times what is in drinking water in capital cities.
If
you take 120 times the recommended daily dose to Vitamin A, you will
probably die or at least be quite sick, but if you have none
you will die also. It is much the same with a lot of things.
Using
the same logic it would be better to ban potatoes because someone could
poison themselves by having 200kg of them for dinner.
>
In 1995 Dr Phyllis Mullenix published (in Neurotoxicology
> and Teratology Volume 17 No 2 pp 169-77) fluoride-induced
> behavioural disruptions and predicted effects in the
> hippocampus. There was a distinct difference between males
> and females in the effects.
Even
supposing you take Mullenix seriously, Mullinex deliberately induced
fluorosis in her animals, which means probably having drinking
water with a concentration of more than 5mg/L and even she spoke only
the effects of "excessive fluoridation" in the USA
- see comments at the end about standards.
>
In 1998, the adverse effect of 2 ppm sodium fluoride on rats
> was published by J A Varner et al in Brain Research 784,
> pp284-98. I don't have the full paper but they observed
> chromatin clumping, enhanced protein staining, pyknosis,
> vacuolation, presence of ghost-like cells and decreased
> neuronal density in adult rats exposed to 1 ppm fluoride for
> 52 weeks.(cited in Fluoride 35(1) 12-21 - see below).
>
> This study found that fluoride enhanced aluminium-induced
> neural degeneration in rats and that the "surprising" result
> came from the NaF controls.
I
have a copy of the text. Julie Varner is a research assistant at
Lineberry Associates and was at Duke University. Although she had
limited experience, the work is genuine. The principal finding is
that, not surprisingly, more work is needed, not least on
the proprietary rat food product that the laboratory rats were eating,
which has an unknown content of fluoride and is mentioned in the paper.
>
It might interest you to know that the Western Australian
> government removes fluoride from some artesian water
> supplies such as Quindalup.
The
groundwater supply (from the Leederville aquifer) has high iron and
fluoride. The treatment system removes iron as well. An
activated alumina process is used for the fluoride, I think, and
reduces the fluoride content from >5mg/L to about 1mg/L, as near as
anyone could tell me when I inquired.
NHMRC
guidelines for fluoride in drinking water is 1.5mg/L, which is about
the same as in seawater. The US standard is 4mg/L, which is
probably why a lot of the noise about this matter seems to originate
from the US..
Gerald Cairnes
commented:
As a kid in
Scotland during the war I and my brothers had heaps of cavities yet
sweet things were not in plentiful supply. After the introduction of
fluoride in water and toothpaste I have had only reconstructive fillings
etc.
Our kids grew up
on the farm where we drank filtered rain water and received sodium
fluoride tablets and their teeth are excellent except for one tooth my
daughter has that never produced it's own enamel and had to be crowned.
Compared to my generation this is a fantastic result but of course 2
observations don't make statistical significance.
On
6/6/2003, Geoff Pain wrote:
Maybe
you can ask around the conference on the following idea.
It
has recently been reported (saw it on TV) that there is a latitude
effect, so far unexplained, in the prevalence of Multiple Sclerosis in
Australia, where people in Tasmania seem 7 times more at risk than north
Queenslanders.
Fluoride
has been shown to cause demyelination in animals, so I wonder if the
fluoride intake is a possible cause of the observed latitude effect.
A
medico at UWA has just announced that tea drinkers have lower blood
pressure than others and fluoride, abundant in tea, is known to
cause hypotension.
I
wonder if Australians drink more tea as we move South?
Toby Fiander
replied:
The latitude
effect you indicate for MS is real, and fascinating. Australia is one of
the easier places to see it, apparently.
The difference
in fluoridation don't amount to much as you travel south, and if there
was a link with fluoridation, you would expect to see MS in places where
fluoride was naturally more than in any of the Australian capital city
water supplies (which, BTW, is quite a lot of the world). Some of
the data on MS, as I understand it anyway, also predates fluoridation,
which makes
fluoridation an unlikely explanation.
Geoff, as you no
doubt know, your concern about concentrations of fluoride are shared by
NHMRC, because the difference between a therapeutic dose and an overdose
is smaller for fluoride than for most other beneficial quantities found
in water. The NHMRC view either is, or is about to be, that
anything under 1mg/L (was 1.5mg/L) is not only safe but
beneficial. [NHMRC actually think higher concentrations would be
OK, but is conscious of minority concerns, among other things].
As I write the
equivalent standard in the US is still 4mg/L, and at that rate there is
where there is probably a legitimate complaint. at concentrations above
4mg/L, the Chinese work to which you have previously referred shows that
there are nervous systems responses to fluoride in water. But,
this concentration is nothing like any public water supply in
Australia, due to the NHMRC standard and even the control for comparison
(ie. the cases labelled in the Chinese work as "low fluoride")
are at the same sort of level as most capital water supplies in
Australia.
Anyway, I will
put your thoughts to a group of people I regularly meet with about water
supply and see what I get in return... I suspect I know, but I
will put the matter fairly, because there is an explanation for the
effect of latitude on MS and it needs to get found.
Geoff
Pain posted:
For
those interested in recent developments in fluoride toxicology, have a
look at Professor Connett's bibliography on just one area.
FLUORIDE
& BONE: An Annotated
Bibliography
http://www.slweb.org/fluoride-bone.html
