Fluoride can’t hurt anyone

Precautionary Principle: the principle that the introduction of a new product or process whose ultimate effects are disputed...

Precautionary Principle: the principle that the introduction of a new product or process whose ultimate effects are disputed or unknown should be resisted. It has mainly been used to prohibit the importation of genetically modified organisms and food. (Google dictionary)

Readers who keep abreast of news around the province probably heard about three erstwhile Calgary city councilors who last week championed a certain scientific paper that encouraged the city to re-open the debate on fluoridation of the municipality’s drinking water.

In 2001 Calgary council voted to remove fluoride from the city’s drinking water, vindicating the opinions of contrarians, Dr. Phil disciples and followers of the precautionary principle while ignoring filing cabinets full of scientific evidence. On Sept. 14, the city declined in a 9-5 vote to re-open the fluoridation debate. That’s their choice, despite the fact a study this year suggested children in Calgary had developed more tooth problems since 2011. Go figure.

But the application of the precautionary principle to the fluoride debate is misleading if not downright intellectually dishonest. To suggest fluoride should be left out of water until science can determine if it’s safe or not is erroneous reasoning. Science determined about 70 years ago that fluoride was safe.

Around 1900 a dentist in Colorado, Dr. Frederick McKay, was curious about why so many of his youthful patients experienced pitting in their teeth. He investigated the issue in a scientific way and by doing so discovered that drinking water in his area had a naturally occurring high level of fluoride. He also discovered that a smaller level of fluoride actually strengthened and aided teeth, and this discovery was soon backed up by scientists in over a dozen other nations.

Immediately after World War II the American government began to study the effects of fluoride on teeth. By 1950 they had discovered that, through scientific trials, an amount of fluoride equal to one part per million in drinking water reduced children’s cavities by 50 per cent. For working families that don’t have a lot of money to buy toothpaste, brushes and floss, that fluoridation came in pretty handy.

So why has fluoridation gotten such a bad rap lately? Well, it began about 70 years ago. There have been contrarians opposing fluoridation right from the beginning, basic believers in the precautionary principle. This despite the fact multiple scientific studies in different nations proved the same point: fluoride in drinking water tended to reduce cavities in kids’ teeth.

Okay, so question number 2: Why would contrarians oppose fluoridation? Well, the same reason some people oppose vaccinating children and the same reason why university-trained physicians have warned against cell phone use as causing brain cancer. There’s a certain fringe element who feel that anything that is proposed by government, or implemented by government, must be some insidious, evil plan to destroy our lives. Their usual avenue of protest is the statement, “It’s not 100 per cent safe, so let’s forget about it.”

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that many things that improve most lives may in fact have a negative effect on a few people. Chemotherapy and radiation therapy are two good examples. Many patients benefit from them; some patients don’t.

Another example is the recently discredited anti-vaccination movement. These contrarians managed to convince a lot of people that vaccinations actually harm children. There was no scientific evidence to prove that claim, and in fact truckloads of evidence to prove vaccinations help the vast majority. But no vaccine is 100 per cent effective for every person.

I personally couldn’t care less if Calgarians don’t have fluoride in their drinking water; their elected officials made that decision and must justify that. Do I care about a minor bit of fluoride in water that will help kids’ teeth stay healthy and strong?

Not at all.

Stu Salkeld is the editor of The Pipestone Flyer and writes a regular column for the paper.

 

Just Posted

City of Wetaskiwin saves nearly $1M, restructures staff

‘Streamlining’ results in 10 positions eliminated at City of Wetaskiwin

Team Alberta ends Games strongly with 44 medals in week one

Alberta is currently sitting in second place of the medal standings

PHOTOS: Alberta male team takes silver in Winter Games relay speed skating

Alberta was close behind Quebec in the team relay speed skating finals

Alberta was crowned champions in Wheelchair Basketball at Canada Winter Games

Ontario won silver while Quebec took home the bronze medal

Maskwacis RCMP seek three in home invasion case

Maskwacis RCMP investigate home invasion

National Energy Board approves Trans Mountain pipeline again

Next step includes cabinet voting on the controversial expansion

A ‘warm embrace’ for grieving parents at funeral of seven young fire victims

Mourners offered love and support to Kawthar Barho, mother of seven children

Pink Shirt Day a reminder to ‘T.H.I.N.K.’ before posting on social media

‘Be Kind’ message on shirts sold for anti-bullying activities of Wednesday, Feb. 27

Indigenous leaders, politicians say Trans Mountain report flawed

The National Energy Board has endorsed an expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline a second time

WATCH: Pet therapy brings calmness to Winter Games athletes

Canada Winter Games in Red Deer continue on until March 2nd

R. Kelly charged with 10 counts of sexual abuse

R&B star has been accused of sexual misconduct involving women and underage girls for years

Child advocacy centre raising funds through Dream Home Lottery

The child advocacy centre in Red Deer uses its resources to help kids all over Central Alberta

Trudeau tells Canadians to listen to clerk in SNC-Lavalin matter

Privy Council clerk Michael Wernick delivered a blunt assessment at the House of Commons justice

Mueller report looming, new attorney general in hot seat

Robert Mueller is required to produce a confidential report to pursue or decline prosecutions

Most Read