Focus on Fluorides: Update on the use of Fluoride for the Prevention of Dental Caries This article is based on the negative and positive impacts of fluoride uses. Topics discussed include: updates on community water fluoridation, fluoride available in dentifrices, and fluoride varnish, use and recommendations. Fluoride is the first line of defense, along with education, for preventing caries. Fluoride is the only compound recognized by the FDA for the prevention of dental caries (Carey, 2014). Fluoride comes primarily from fluoridated community water, toothpastes, and mouth rinses. The intake of water and processed beverages in the United States provides about 75% of a person’s fluoride intake (Carey, 2014). Community water fluoridation began …show more content…
Elevated fluoride can lead to defects in the enamel ranging from white specks or striations to rough and pitted surfaces. Very mild fluorosis can go without being detected because it is similar in appearance to other conditions. Using antibiotics as a child can cause white spots on the teeth that are similar to fluorosis. Tetracycline causes a dark tooth discoloration as well. Fluorosis is due to fluoride deposited in the tooth as it is maturing, therefore the effects cannot be seen until the tooth erupts (Carey, 2014). Sources of fluoride during these early years can occur from ingestion of infant formula, drinking water that has higher than optimum levels of fluoride, fluoride toothpaste ingestion, or from inappropriately supervised fluoride supplements (Carey, 2014). The ADA and CDC now recommend that fluoridated water be used to prepare infant formula (Carey, 2014). There has been an increase in very mild and mild fluorosis, meaning that children are ingesting more than the optimal amounts of fluoride. It is up to the dental profession to carefully monitor both caries and fluorosis incidence for the next 6-10 years as the effects of the change in drinking water fluoride may reduce the impact of the halo effect more greatly than anticipated (Carey, …show more content…
Products that contain sodium fluoride (NaF) as the active ingredient also need to have sufficient detergent to prevent the fluoride ions from reacting with the silica abrasives forming insoluble fluorosilicates (Carey, 2014). There is a large effort to develop reliable methods of measurement of available fluoride. The difficulty in achieving the analytical methods is related to the large variety of ingredients used in toothpaste products and the different forms of fluoride delivered during tooth brushing (Carey, 2014). There are three categories of fluoride form toothpaste during tooth brushing: free ionic fluoride which has the ability to react with tooth structure, interfere with microbial metabolism, absorb to the oral mucosa, and has anticaries efficacy; profluoride compounds that are delivered or precipitate in the oral cavity during brushing, release ionic fluoride over time, and contribute to anticaries efficacy; and unavailable fluoride compounds that do not release fluoride ions, are either spat out or swallowed, and have no anticaries efficacy (Carey, 2014). Monofluorophosphate is an example of a profluoride compound that is hydrolyzed to release ionic fluoride through salivary enzyme action (Carey, 2014). The total and potentially available fluoride can be
Another issue of controversy is the safety of the chemicals used to fluoridate water. The most commonly used additives are silicofluorides, not the fluoride salts used in dental products (such as sodium fluoride and stannous fluoride). Silicofluorides are one of the by-products from the manufacture of phosphate fertilizers. The toxicity database on silicofluorides is sparse and questions have been raised about the assumption that they completely dissociate in water and, therefore, have toxicity similar to the fluoride salts tested in laboratory studies and used in consumer products (Coplan and Masters 2001). It also has been maintained that, because of individual variations in exposure to fluoride, it is difficult to ensure that the right individual dose to protect against dental caries is provided through large-scale water fluoridation. In addition, a body of information has developed that indicates the major anticaries benefit of fluoride is topical and not systemic (Zero et al. 1992; Rölla and Ekstrand 1996; Featherstone 1999; Limeback 1999a; Clarkson and McLoughlin 2000; CDC 2001; Fejerskov
The NRC reported in 2007 that fluoride was considered an element essential to life. Fluoride plays an important role in the body’s ability to perform metabolic and biochemical reactions that help prevent tooth decay and help bone formation. Essentially the government says that the fluoridation of water is more helpful than harmful for people as it is a good use of tax dollars as it treats upper class and lower class citizens equally in dental prevention.
The prevention of caries is accomplished through the execution of a variety of measures, such as the fluoridation of the drinking water supply as well as the utilization of sealants and topical fluorides (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2625). Despite the ease of preventability of tooth decay, it is one of the most common childhood chronic diseases, with more than half of the nation’s children having detectable caries (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2625). Unfortunately, only 62% of water supplies are fluoridated, and underserved communities with low-income and minority families are usually the ones who are disproportionately affected (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2626). Low-income individuals are generally less likely to seek preventative care, increasing their costs of neglected oral diseases and morbidity factors (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2626). In addition, only one in five children who are covered by Medicaid are authorized for preventative oral healthcare, while restorative care is generally not even a consideration (Mouradian, Wehr, and Crall 2625).
Fluoridation of group drinking water is a main consideration in charge of the decrease in dental caries (tooth rot) . The historical backdrop of water fluoridation is a great case of clinical perception prompting epidemiologic examination and group based general wellbeing intercession. Albeit other fluoride-containing items are accessible, water fluoridation remains the most fair and practical strategy for conveying fluoride to all individuals from most groups, paying little respect to age, instructive achievement, or wage level.
Study indicates strong association in children <8 y/o developing fluorosis in areas with fluoridated water (18)
Higgs explains in her essay that the use of fluoride has been used in water for some time now and that it is used to help prevent tooth decay as stated in her citations. She further explains that when brushing ones teeth and swallows an “x” amount of toothpaste that that one should called poison control, so why would one be able to drink it? About sixty percent of homes contain fluoride-added water and an average person is suppose to drink eight 8-ounce glasses of water each day, while the amount of fluoride in each glass contains more than twice the amount (to be consumed) of fluoride allowed in toothpaste (Higgs par.2), and if one had too much
This is because according to the department of health, Rnzcgp this process is not able to be regulated and the dosage is dependent on the person’s circumstances i.e age which can result in health problems. When too large a dose is absorbed into the system according to the The United Nation news it can cause health issues relating to skeletal and dental fluorosis. The compound is also shown to affect the brain and kidney negatively. Fluoridation is a system by which the town or country is taking responsibility for its people. The proposed action is not to fluoridate teeth by adding fluoride to the entire water supply which will affect every person’s entire body with fluoride, but to instead educate about the benefits of using toothpaste which people already commonly use. People can suffer adverse effects because the government would further their own goal. There is no controversy about the people and side effect because I propose not fluoridating. So the evidence is that there will be 100% no risk to getting the side effects, and yet there is no limitation of restricting tooth hygiene and maintaining tooth health through personal care. The evidence of science is that not using a material eliminates the potential for side effects. Personally I find that instead of treating drinking water we should be treating personal care products such as tooth paste which is more effective action. Therefore there is no risk of affecting the entire population in the hands of just a
However, like many studies, this study has a few limitations. In this study, we got results which were far lower than expected, due to which we analyzed the proportion of the population who received fluoride applications instead of the mean number of fluoride applications. For dental home linkage since there was not enough data to analyze the ward-specific distribution of a mean number of days, we looked at the overall mean number of days for dental home linkage for those six referred patients. Also, for fluoride applications, we looked at the proportion of only fluoride varnishes applied by dentists, physicians, both and institution. We also looked at the proportions of only varnishes by provider type instead of the mean/the median number of varnish since we did not have information about unique providers which could give specific
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recommendation for the optimal fluoride level in drinking water to prevent tooth decay have changed from 0.7 -1.2 milligrams per liter stablished in 1962 to 0.7 milligrams of fluoride per liter of water. This change was the result of a systematic reviews of the scientific evidence related community water fluoridation since it was incorporated in 1945. As a result of community water fluoridation there was an increase in the percentage of children who were caries-free and a significant decreases in the number of teeth or tooth surfaces with caries in both children and adult. The main reason to lower the recommendation was because Americans nowadays have more sources of fluoride than the ones
Are you aware that fluoride that is used to help keep teeth healthy is actually a harmful compound. The number of products that contain fluoride is actually quite high. Many people may not know it is also in our drinking water. The scary thing is fluoride is now classified as a neurotoxin.
The ingredient that takes place in our everyday life is fluoride. It is well known for its happy propaganda of everybody needing good health and what better way to start it then with your teeth and make you think fluoride is good for the health, when the reality of the matter is , it damages your health.
The measured add-on of fluoride to the public water supply to decrease tooth decay is water fluoridation. Depending on where the water is coming from, most water supplies has a naturally happening fluoride concentration, but is generally low and does not help. To help, fluoride is being added into public water at a continuous concentration to reach that naturally occurring limit and no more. There are advantages to fluoride being added to the public water, but there are also controversial disadvantages.
fluoride leads to a reduction in tooth decay more significant than the risk of mild side effects like cosmetic flurosis.10
Fluorine is added in water in certain countries and used in toothpaste so that it can strengthen people’s teeth.
Credibility Statement: As a person who has been brushing his teeth for many years without knowing the effects that fluoride can cause, I decided to do extensive research on the topic to find out what we are really putting in our bodies.