FAN Bulletin 816
June 22, 2007
Dear All,
Below, we have reproduced a report (forwarded to us by NYSCOF@aol.com) of the kind that is often used by promoters to say “the kids’ teeth in this town are deplorable, we need fluoridation.” However, this report is NOT from a non-fluoridated town, it is from Grand Rapids, Michigan where the fluoridation experiment began in 1945. So despite all the hoopla (a new statue has been placed in town to celebrate this event and we all remember the 60 year celebration organized in Chicago two years ago by the CDC and ADA, partly at taxpayers’ expense, to celebrate this 60 year program) the very place where it all began is still having a problem with children’s teeth.
Here are two excerpts from this story:
1) “While pediatric dentist Amy DeYoung treats many pint-sized patients with decay issues through referrals from local family dental practices, she said she is seeing younger children with bigger problems.
‘We see children under the age of 2 with active decay,’ DeYoung said. “Rather than just a few cavities, we’re seeing a lot of cavities. It’s not unusual to see a child with 8 to 10 cavities…’”
2) Trish Eggers Roels, dental director for Cherry Street Health Services reports the 15 dentists who work for her program see about 1,000 patients of all ages each week at locations throughout the city, and about 400 more call weekly and cannot get an appointment. The cost for treatment depends on family income.
Roels attributed the increase in tooth decay in small children to poor dental hygiene and beverage choices.
“The young kids in the schools aren’t drinking tap water, they’re drinking bottled water,” Roels said, adding, “If you sip pop all day, you open yourself up to tooth decay.”
So once again, and this time from the very birthplace of artificial fluoridation, we are seeing that the tooth decay is not caused by a lack of fluoride (Mother nature did not screw up when she put fluoride into mothers milk at the miserly level of 0.004 ppm) but by poor diet, poor habits and the cost of dental treatment.
We should also remember that in the case of the second town fluoridated (Newburgh, NY) the children’s teeth there are now slightly worse than those in the original control city, Kingston, NY, which has remained unfluoridated.
Meanwhile, since the 1980s, more and more researchers have been reporting little difference in tooth decay is being found between children who have lived all their lives in fluoridated compared to non-fluoridated communities (Leverett, 1982; Diesendorf, 1986; Brunelle and Carlos, 1990; Spencer et al., 1996; Locker, 1999; Armfield and Spencer, 2004; Prizzo et al., 2007) What has happened?
Promoters claim that the reason you can find little difference in tooth decay rates between children who have lived all their lives in fluoridated and non-fluoridated cities is because of the “halo effect” - the kids in non-fluoridated communities are getting fluoride from processed foods and beverages made in fluoridated communities. However, such an explanation breaks down when applied to Europe where practically no countries are fluoridated (Spain 10%; UK 10%, Ireland 73%) - and thus there is little benefit from transnational shipments of foods and beverages produced in fluoridated areas. Certainly, the availability of fluoridated toothpaste is universal and maybe it is the availability of this TOPICAL application of fluoride is bringing some benefits. That makes some sense when one remembers that the CDC has conceded (CDC, 1999, 2001) that fluoride’s predominant benefit is topical not systemic.
But what about these early experiments in Grand Rapids, Newburgh and elsewhere. The early researchers reported declines in tooth decay of 60 to 65%. What happened? Whole books have been written about the poor methodology of these “trials.” Grand Rapids dropped its control city of Muscegon a mere six years into the experiment. At least one early trial (Hastings, Napier, NZ) appears to have been rigged. Dr. John Colquhoun documented that the experimenters after dropping the control city of Napier after two years, “manufactured” a decline in tooth decay in Hastings by changing the methodology used to assess it. Whether this was an honest mistake or not, those who wrote the report did NOT indicate to readers that the methodology had been changed.
There is one other suspicion about how these early declines were achieved. It has been suggested that commensurate with the addition of fluoride to the water, extra dental services have been applied in the fluoridated community to help “sweeten the result.” I am anxious to hear from anyone who has some documentation where this may have occurred. Meanwhile, on my recent trip to the UK, John Graham of the National Pure Water Association shared with me some interesting statistics from the UK.
In 1997, the the city of Wolverhampton went from 32% to 100% fluoridated. Promoters of fluoridation claim an improvement in dental caries due to this measure. However, official statistics from the Dental Practice Board show that in the period 1997 to 2002, preventive measures carried out on children under 18 by Wolverhampton dentists nearly doubled, from 2400 to 3600 and the cost of dental care on children under 18 more than doubled, rising from 100,000 pounds to 220,000 pounds.
It is stating the obvious to say once again that with the scientific evidence of ingesting fluoride so extremely weak, no health official can justify this practice if it causes any risks AT ALL. With the risks now documented and summarized in the NRC (2006) review, continuing with fluoridation - with little or no scientifically demonstrable benefit - is preposterous. More so, when one remembers that this a practice being forced on people who don’t want it, by those with little real understanding or familiarity with the literature. When will this farce end?
Paul Connett
————————–
Protecting kids’ teeth includes trips to the dentist
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
By Jennifer Ackerman-Haywood
The Grand Rapids Press
The pain fades over time, but the memory of the pitiful humiliation of drooling onto a paper bib with a bright light shining in your face lasts a lifetime.
Who can forget the uncomfortable sight of a tray of pointy, tooth-picking instruments and bracing for the familiar discomfort that accompanies the whir of THE DRILL?
Many adult fears of the dental chair take root in childhood, leading some parents to drag their feet a bit when it comes to introducing their children to the dentist.
However, a recent study released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention may be a good reason to take junior in for that checkup. The study found tooth decay in primary, or baby teeth, is on the rise among kids ages 2 to 5.
The percentage of children with at least one cavity in a baby tooth increased to 28 percent between 1999 and 2004, up from 24 percent in 1988 to 1994.
While pediatric [Grand Rapids]
“We see children under the age of 2 with active decay,” DeYoung said. “Rather than just a few cavities, we’re seeing a lot of cavities. It’s not unusual to see a child with 8 to 10 cavities.”
And DeYoung’s patients appear to be the lucky ones, with many local children going without regular dental care.
Trish Eggers Roels, dental director for Cherry Street Health Services [in Grand Rapids
Roels attributed the increase in tooth decay in small children to poor dental hygiene and beverage choices.
“The young kids in the schools aren’t drinking tap water, they’re drinking bottled water,” Roels said, adding, “If you sip pop all day, you open yourself up to tooth decay.”
Genetics factors in, too, added DeYoung, urging parents with a history of dental issues to make sure they get their kids in early so problems can be detected early.
Prevention is key, and getting your kids to the dentist doesn’t have to be traumatic. It can be fun.
Just ask Rhonda Fabbro’s kids. They ask to go to the dentist.
It seems Carlos Fabbro, 6, and his 4-year-old sister, Isabella, of [fluoridated
Their mother doesn’t let them drink pop or load up on sweets, but Isabella has been prone to cavities despite her mother’s best efforts.
“They want to go, and they have a good time,” says mom, who concedes she never imagined dental visits going this smoothly. “It’s like the Disneyland of dentistry.”
A place to play
She’s talking about DeYoung’s Grand Rapids office, where a log cabin gives kids a place to play in the waiting room and a frequently changing themed decor makes return trips exciting for kids. In May, patients walked the red carpet to the exam area decked out with a Hollywood movie premiere theme that included a giant, tuxedo-clad stuffed bear.
When it’s time for their appointment, the kids have the option of entering through a kid-size door to get to the exam chairs that are strategically located next to a large play area packed with toys.
And DeYoung doesn’t even dress like a regular dentist. Instead, she dons bright pink dental scrubs and Hello Kitty sneakers.
“Everything here is geared for children,” DeYoung explained. “I try to always have something new for them to see.”
Kids feel in control
DeYoung’s fun approach to dentistry seems to be a haven for parents looking to help their children develop healthy dental habits.
At first, Alisha Pitts, 32, of East Grand Rapids, was a little unsure about letting her children — Regan, 6, and Colin, 2 — go in for a dental exam alone, a rule at DeYoung’s office.
Parents are welcome on the first visit, but after that, the kids go solo while Mom and Dad stay in the waiting room.
“It allows the child to feel like they’re in control,” said Pitts, who has since warmed up to the idea. “They come out happy.”
Pitts said her children have been fortunate to avoid cavities so far and is very pleased they have had a positive dental experience.
Four-letter words such as “hurt” and “shot” are not spoken by DeYoung, or her brightly clad staffers who happily dispense sunglasses to children who are bothered by the overhead light. At the end of their visit, children are rewarded with a fun dental bag including cartoon-character toothbrushes, hour-glass brushing timers and dinosaur flossers.
Pitts doesn’t buy pop for her kids, but she said she knows that’s not the only reason her children don’t get cavities.
“Part of that is genetic,” she said.
For best results, don’t forget to brush.
Help your children avoid tooth decay
Limit juice and other sugary drinks. If your toddler nurses a sippy cup of juice all day he is bathing his choppers in cavity-breeding sugar. A healthier alternative is to let your child drink juice with a meal and brush afterward. If junior likes to carry around a cup, fill it with water and let him drink at will. Water’s healthier, and tap water containing fluoride is the kids because it aids tooth development.
Limit snacks between meals and brush after every meal when possible. Decay sets in when foods rich in sugar and carbs linger on the teeth. At the very least, dentists recommend brushing children’s teeth before naps and at bedtime.
Reward kids with cool tooth brushes on special occasions. They make for relatively cheap stocking stuffers and gifts for a job well done. Throw in a TV- or movie-themed tube of toothpaste, and the kids will love it.
Brush your child’s teeth first, then let her hold the toothbrush and do it by herself. This way you can make sure the teeth are actually getting cleaned and encourage independence at the same time.
Brush for two minutes. Use a timer, or have your child brush through a favorite song playing on the CD player.
Introduce your children to the flossing routine as soon as there’s contact between the teeth. Help them floss a couple of times a week to get them used to it.
Take your child to the dentist for the first time by his first birthday. The American Academy of Pediatric dentistry recommends that children get checked early, but most children will not need their teeth cleaned until about age 3.
Send e-mail to the author: jackerman@grpress.com
E-mail the editor: pulse@grpress.com
Posted by Editor
in FAN
0 comments
