Drinking Water Safety - World Health Organization Asked To Study Fluoride Risks

Categories

Health

The World Health Organization, after announcing a revision of its drinking water safety guidelines, has been asked to assess the toxic risks of the addition of industrial fluorides to drinking water. Fluoride is thought to protect against dental decay by hardening the outer coating of teeth, but it seems that adverse effects such as dental and skeletal fluorosis are widespread in areas where the mineral is naturally abundant or has been artificially added to the water supply.

VOICE of Irish Concern for the Environment, an environmental campaign group, submitted comments to the WHO asking that the toxic properties of industrial fluorides often added to drinking water be studied and their risks evaluated. Robert Pocock, a spokesman, says that "in Ireland, the government has for forty years added chemical fluorides to drinking water in compliance with the WHO Drinking Water guidelines" adding that these guidelines "have always been invoked to counter consumer concerns." According to a study of the Irish government, says Pocock, this policy "has resulted in (dental) fluorosis among 15 year olds increasing from 4% in 1984 to 36% in 2002 -- a nine-fold increase of an incurable but preventable condition".

Dental fluorosis or "mottling" is an unsightly discoloration of the teeth which indicates fluoride poisoning by overdose. The condition goes hand in hand with skeletal fluorosis - brittle and demineralized bones subject to fractures and deformation.

Babies are especially vulnerable to increased fluoride levels in drinking water and it is now recommended that mothers breast-feed their newborns or prepare baby foods with specially filtered or fluoride-free bottled water to avoid intoxication, as levels of fluoride in fluoridated drinking water exceed the fluoride content in breast milk more than a hundred times.

The Alliance for Natural Health, a pan-European and international alliance of scientists, health care practitioners, natural health care companies and consumers points out that the WHO's own guidelines for fluoridation of drinking water are currently recommending 1.5 mg per liter, a level known to induce fluorosis, which has been observed at fluoride levels in drinking water as low as 0.7 mg/liter.

Any positive effects of fluoridation in preventing dental caries, which incidentally are subject to scientific debate - many of the positive fluoride studies were generated by scientists on the Manhattan Project - must therefore be carefully weighed against the clearly overlapping toxic effects of the substance at the same or even lower doses.

"What is required" says Robert Pocock in the VOICE submission, "is comprehensive, independent and transparent toxicological testing and risk assessment of hexafluorosilicic acid and disodium hexafluorosilicate, the two most used fluoride chemicals in drinking water." These chemicals are toxic industrial waste products and are used primarily for their high solubility and low cost.

Robert Verkerk, Executive Director of the Alliance for Natural Health adds the Alliance is strongly opposed to artificial fluoridation of drinking water supplies. He urges the WHO to revise its existing guidelines and to start promoting strategies other than artificial fluoridation of water supplies for the reduction of dental caries. He also calls for evaluation of the toxicological evidence of the long-term safety of water fluoridation programmes as well as formal medicinal approval of artificial fluorides.

.

Submissions to the World Health Organization:

Here are the actual texts of two submissions to WHO:

Alliance for Natural Health (Download Word file) submission by Dr. Robert Verkerk.

VOICE of Irish Concern for the Environment    
9, Upper Mount St. Dublin 2.
Phone 01-642 5741   
e-mail avoice@iol.ie     
   

30th November 2004

Comment by VOICE of Irish Concern for the Environment on:

Rolling Revision of the WHO guidelines for drinking-water quality

Chemical safety of drinking-water: assessing priorities for risk management.

[References are to GDWQ Draft Chemical Safety of drinking water: assessing priorities for risk management.pdf 446kb].

Does this text respond to an issue of concern?:

Yes, of growing international concern.

Fluorosis which damages the teeth and bones and for which there is no cure (only prevention) affects millions of people around the world both in developing and developed countries.

Increased bio-availability of chemically produced fluorides worldwide has led to a dramatic increase in fluorosis over the past two decades and since drinking water is typically the most significant source of fluoride according to the WHO's Water-related diseases -- Fluorosis, an in-depth risk assessment is now urgently called for.

Some of the increase in fluoride poisoning may be due in part to conflicting advice issued by the WHO in the past. For example, in 1971 the WHO warned of the importance of considering the total daily fluoride intake by the individual; again in 1994, it alerted dental and public health administrators to the total fluoride exposure in the population. Yet those very few governments that have during this period dosed drinking water with artificial fluorides have notably failed to check the resultant fluoride exposure in their populations. In Ireland for example, the government has for forty years added chemical fluorides to drinking water in compliance with the WHO Drinking Water guidelines, indeed they have always been invoked to counter consumer concerns. This policy has resulted in (dental) fluorosis among 15 year olds increasing from 4% in 1984 to 36% in 2002 -- a nine-fold increase of an incurable but preventable condition.

Does this text compete or complement other publications in the area - if so which?

The text is not consistent with the WHO's Water-related diseases - Fluorosis which states that control of drinking-water quality is critical in preventing fluorosis. The same quoted WHO report also states that moderate-level chronic exposure to fluoride chemicals - at or near the current guideline value in addition to the multiple other sources of fluoride in food, water, air and toothpaste - cause fluorosis.

The text also fails to stress two other crucially important factors -- a person's general state of health and the body's ability to dispose of fluoride, both of which critically influence the health manifestations of an individual's fluoride exposure.

Another key contradiction with the same Fluorosis report is the threat of fluoride to newborns which it highlights as follows mothers in affected areas should breastfeed since breast milk is usually low in fluoride.

It is also at variance with a UNICEF Report Fluoride in water: an overview which details some of the most harmful effects of fluorides in drinking water, laying particular stress on the nutritional status of individuals and in particular of children; for example it is noted that a diet poor in nutrients such as calcium or magnesium increases the body's retention of fluoride.

Given that UNICEF aims to advance humanity through giving for every child Health, Education, Equality, Protection it is surprising that the GDWQ guideline value does not echo UNICEF's warnings of the increased vulnerability of children to fluoride.

It also fails to recognize the research evidence on the harmful effects of fluorides in drinking water published by the Irish Dept of Health in "Children's Oral Health in Ireland 2002" A North-South Survey coordinated by the Oral Health Services Research Centre, University College Cork. Ireland. This reveals that where drinking water contains chemical fluorides (fluorosilicic acid) the incidence of fluoride poisoning is more than twice as high as where drinking water does not contain it.

Everyday clinical evidence of Irish dentists supports the survey findings.

Moreover since there is virtually no naturally occurring fluoride in Irish drinking water, it only requires a simple policy decision to reverse this growing health threat.

It is inconsistent with the Report of the Centers for Disease Control in 1999 stating that if fluoride has any benefit to teeth, it is topical (by direct application) and not systemic (by ingestion), therefore it is not necessary to add it to drinking water.

It ignores the weight of evidence in numerous other supporting studies available on http://www.slweb.org/bibliography.html that demonstrate that long-term ingestion of fluoride has many chronic and deleterious effects on humans, especially newborns and children. The text entirely fails to acknowledge the inescapable health policy implications of this evidence.