California Fluoridation Task Force Takes Anti-fluoride Group to Task Over Alleged Mischaracterization of Canadian Fluoridation Study.

Business Editors & Health Writers

SAN FRANCISCO--(BW HealthWire)--June 4, 2001

Questions Regarding Alleged Use and Abuse of

Internet News Channels Raised

The California Fluoridation Task Force (CFTF) today dismissed as patently false several claims made in a recent anti-fluoridationist news release, arguing they completely misrepresent the findings of an independent Canadian fluoridation study.

CFTF officials say today's announcement calls attention to the deceptive distribution of news releases by some politically motivated groups that neither fact-check, nor adhere to commonly accepted journalistic principles. Many readers confuse such information for actual news, with implications for how public policy is conducted and how citizens approach local ballot initiatives and public hearings.

"Over the Internet, anyone today can gain national distribution of their views and make it sound like news," said Howard Pollick, DDS, a clinical professor with the University of California San Francisco School of Dentistry, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dental Sciences, and co-chairman of the California Fluoridation Task Force.

"Unfortunately, this group in New York flat out misrepresented the findings and conclusions of legitimate, published research, thereby misleading the public and doing a tremendous disservice to the author and to the hundreds of Internet site hosts, who believe they are providing useful content to their web visitors."

CFTF is comprised of representatives of the California Dental Association, California Department of Health Services, the Dental Health Foundation, the California Public Health Association-North, the Southern California Public Health Association and the California Dental Hygienists' Association.

Several other organizations participate with and/or support the work of CFTF, including Delta Dental Plan of California, the California Endowment, the U.S. Public Health Service and several of the state's dental schools.

According to Dr. Pollick and his task force colleagues, the April 24 news release bought and paid for by the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation goes several steps beyond simply stating a personal viewpoint on the merits of community water fluoridation.

The news release was distributed under the headline: "Canadian study: Stop fluoridation in water." Its lead begins: "Big news out of Canada: a new report from the Canadian government claims that fluoridation in water probably does more harm than good."

While the "Canadian Study" represents bona fide research, Dr. Pollick says that the study never suggests fluoridation should be stopped. Nor does it say fluoridation does more harm than good.

"First of all, the study is more than 18 months-old," says Dr. Pollick, "so it's not exactly breaking news as the release would lead one to believe. Secondly, the study's author, Dr. David Locker, repudiates most of what the news release says about his own study."

The actual report, notes Dr. Pollick, was published on November 15, 1999 and is entitled "Benefits and Risks of Water Fluoridation: An update of the 1996 Federal-Provincial Sub-committee Report." Dr. Locker, of the Community Dental Health Research Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, authored the report under contract for the Public Health Branch, Ontario Ministry of Health, First Nations and Inuit Health Branch, Health Canada.

Pollick says he has a written communication from Locker himself, dated May 2, 2001, in which the author of the Canadian study makes quite clear: "My position is not and has not been to stop fluoridation."

A detailed review of the Canadian fluoride study includes the following actual citations and references, which Pollick says strongly contradict many of the claims made in the April 24 news release by the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation:

-- On the overall effectiveness of fluoride to fight dental caries: "...Water
fluoridation does more to enhance the maintenance of salivary levels of
fluoride which are compatible with the inhibition of demineralization and
promotion of remineralization of enamel than other types of fluoride vehicles
(Lewis et al, 1994). It is for this reason that many authorities contend that
water fluoridation continues to be the fluoride technology of choice with
respect to effectiveness, distribution, equity, compliance and costs."

-- With regard to risk of acute toxicity: "Fluoride is a poison in large doses
but toxic levels cannot be achieved by drinking fluoridated water."

-- With regard to risk to bone health: "...the studies conducted to date do not
provide systemic and compelling evidence of an adverse effect on bone."

-- With regard to cancer risk: "The few studies published during the review
period do not challenge earlier research showing that there is no reason to
believe that exposure to fluoridated water increases rates of cancer either of
bone or other body tissues."

-- With regard to immune function: "...a review paper (Challacombe, 1996)
examined studies of fluoride and immune response published prior to 1992 and
found no support for the suggestion that fluoride affects immunity."

-- On child development: "Recent studies emanating from China have claimed that
children exposed to high levels of fluoride have lower IQ's than children
exposed to low levels. The two studies claiming such an effect are deeply
flawed and provide no credible evidence that fluoride obtained from water or
industrial pollution affects the intellectual development of children."

Dr. Pollick says there are larger lessons to be drawn from the attempted deception foisted on the public via this particular news release. "In my view, this demonstrates that it's incumbent upon all of us to question the sources of information we glean from on the Internet. We should think more critically about the agenda of those who sometimes put that information there in the first place," he said.

Fluoridation as a public health measure enjoys widespread acceptance and support by the American Dental Association, the U.S. Surgeon General, the Centers for Disease Control, the World Health Organization and literally hundreds of other public health and science-based organizations.

"My own work with the California Oral Health Needs Assessment demonstrates that there are 50 percent more dental caries among children in California who were lifetime residents in their non-fluoridated communities, compared to children in fluoridated communities, adjusting for demographics, socio-economics and other caries-preventive methods," said Dr. Pollick.

"I've continued to review new research, and wider reviews of all research conducted to date. These just isn't anything I've seen to repudiate the overwhelming consensus of researchers the world over that fluoridation is safe, cost-effective and beneficial."

He added: "The sooner fluoridation reaches the roughly one-third of American communities not yet fluoridated, the sooner we begin to address the silent epidemic of dental disease referred to in Surgeon General David Satcher's recent report on Oral Health in America.