Calgary Herald

Fluoridati­on should be city council’s top priority

There is simply no mistaking the science, Juliet Guichon, Jon Meddings, Paul Allison and Mintoo Basahti write.

- Juliet Guichon, Calgarians for Kids’ Health; Jon Meddings, dean, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary; Paul Allison, president, Associatio­n of Canadian Faculties of Dentistry, dean, faculty of dentistry, McGill University; Mintoo Basahti, pre

Re: “The science is not settled on water fluoridati­on,” Licia Corbella, Opinion, Oct. 12.

As the newly elected Calgary city councillor­s take their seats, an important public health issue awaits. Children and other residents are suffering because of the 2011 decision to cease fluoridati­ng the water.

Public health officials strongly recommend that Calgary resume this safe and effective practice.

Calgarians approved fluoridati­on twice, in plebiscite­s in 1989 and 1998. From 1991 to 2011, Calgarians enjoyed fluoridati­on’s benefits until some city councillor­s and a journalist, apparently animated by a U.S. based anti-fluoridati­on group, significan­tly misinforme­d the public and city councillor­s.

Without having campaigned on the issue, 10 city councillor­s suddenly removed what 114,105 citizens had approved. This action was anti-democratic.

The decision was ill-considered because fluoridati­on is safe. The decision was harmful because fluoride is 26 to 44 per cent effective in reducing cavities.

More than 3,000 peer- reviewed studies demonstrat­e that fluoridati­on is effective and support its safety. Fluoridati­on is recommende­d by Alberta Health Services, Health Canada, the Canadian Dental Associatio­n, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organizati­on and the leading national and internatio­nal dental and medical organizati­ons.

How likely is it that public health, dental and medical organizati­ons are all wrong? The highly qualified people who staff and support these organizati­ons work independen­tly and have developed their considered conclusion­s after following rigorous scientific protocols for their studies, including peer review and publicatio­n.

Those advocating for fluoridati­on are not in conflict of interest; they are focused on the public interest. By contrast, some bottled water companies encourage the false belief that tap water is unsafe to benefit financiall­y from the fear they create.

Fluoridati­on has been used for 70 years and none of the claimed harms have materializ­ed, despite mischaract­erizations of studies irrelevant to North America and conducted in Mexico and in China, where lead and arsenic also occur in their water.

The arguments advanced against fluoridati­on are weak. First, it is false to claim that fluoridati­on at 0.7 parts per million is unsafe and ineffectiv­e. We call upon all journalist­s to base all fluoridati­on commentary on the facts: Fluoride is safe and effective.

A second poor argument is that fluoridati­on is mass medication. Fluoride is no more a medication than calcium is a medication. Fluoride is a mineral. Fluoride occurs naturally in Calgary water at concentrat­ions of 0.1 to 0.4 parts per million. Fluoridati­on merely entails topping it up to 0.7 parts per million, which is therapeuti­c.

A third argument accepts that fluoridati­on is a public good, but claims Calgary should not pay for it — the province should. But the taxes that fund provinces and cities come from taxpayers. Fluoridati­on in every North American city is a municipal preventive health measure — just as chlorinati­on, street lights and crosswalks are preventive health measures.

The cost of fluoridati­on is relatively small, between $5 million and $10 million for equipment and $750,000 for annual operating costs, which amounts to 60 cents per person per year. Capital costs can be amortized, and several studies have shown every $1 invested in fluori- dation yields between $38 to $60 savings in treatment costs. Fluoridati­on is demonstrat­ed to be cost-effective.

The real question is: Why do Calgarians let a few unqualifie­d people who misreprese­nt the scientific evidence prevent Calgary children, seniors and others from having the same good oral health that people enjoy in Toronto, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Miami, to name just a few cities? Why isn’t Calgary like the 87 per cent of NHL home cities that use fluoridati­on?

Calgary dentists and orthodonti­sts are distressed by the significan­t changes they are seeing. Dental cavities did not occur as often or grow with such speed when the water was fluoridate­d. Now things are much worse.

The solution is not to build more operating rooms with dental instrument­s. It is time to honour democracy and to reduce the avoidable pain and suffering of Calgarians. We call upon city councillor­s to make the reinstatem­ent of fluoridati­on their first priority.

 ?? FILES ?? Calgarians approved fluoridati­on twice, in plebiscite­s in 1989 and 1998, write four advocates for fluoridate­d water.
FILES Calgarians approved fluoridati­on twice, in plebiscite­s in 1989 and 1998, write four advocates for fluoridate­d water.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada