Enter our Snapshots of Summer photography competition
This week, Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, called for fluoride to be added to more areas of England’s water supply, to prevent dental decay. In passing, he acknowledged that, for all the benefits of fluoride, too much can lead to a permanent discolouring of the teeth, called dental fluorosis. But only, he said, when children “ate toothpaste”.
Toothpaste causing bad teeth? It seems illogical, particularly since dentists so fervently urge us to use it. But many parents are unaware of the potential risks of letting children under 7 swallow fluoride toothpaste, especially in fluoridated areas, where they are already receiving a background dose of the chemical.
They might also not know that dental fluorosis appears to be on the rise, according to government-backed research from the University of York. This indicated that, while increasing use of fluoride toothpastes has cut the average number of decayed teeth per child from nine to two in 20 years, 48 per cent of children in areas of fluoridated water, and 15 per cent in nonfluoridated areas, show some traces of fluorosis.
Awareness of fluorosis is low
Even dental teams are unaware of the dangers. Richard Harrison, a clinical dental technician from Barnsley, a fluoridated area, certainly wasn’t aware that his seven-year old daugher might be at risk of fluorosis. But as soon as her second teeth started to come through, he saw they were mottled and brown-stained with white flecks – the classic sign of dental fluorosis. Too much exposure to fluoride while the second teeth are developing beneath the milk teeth makes their enamel porous, something that doesn’t become apparent until the teeth break though. In mild cases, this leads just to a pearly sheen to the teeth. In bad cases there can be staining, chipping and pitting of the tooth.
“She always loved strawberry-flavour toothpaste, so she may have swallowed it,” Harrison says. “Our biggest fear is how other children will respond to the way she looks.” The effects of dental fluorosis are irreversible, although it can be covered up with expensive tooth veneers when children reach their early teens.
The irony is that, while the politicians are rightly concerned about addressing poor dental health in deprived areas through fluoridation schemes, it is families who are most conscientious about their children’s health that may be most affected by fluorosis.
Jane, a dental nurse from the West of England, has two daughters with suspected fluorosis, and is so worried about the potential effect on them that she doesn’t want to be identified. “It’s a massive guilt trip,” she says, deeply upset that she never got her girls to rinse out the toothpaste when they had finished brushing.
Her eldest daughter, 9, has minimal signs of fluorosis, but her youngest, 7, has very mottled front teeth. Jane believes the difference between the two children can be put down to moving to a fluoridated area when the youngest was two-and-a-half – a crucial time for tooth development.
“I religiously brushed their teeth thinking that I was doing the right thing,” says Jane, who also feeds her children organic food to keep them healthy. “But I’m convinced it’s the toothpaste. I don’t think people are aware of how bad it is to swallow it. I didn’t realise – and I’m a dental nurse, for God’s sake.”
Psychological damage
She is also worried about the taunting her child is likely to get at school. Research about to be published by Cardiff University indicates that children with obvious dental fluorosis are more likely to be viewed on first appearance as less pleasant and less intelligent. Fluorosis may not be life-threatening, but there are social and psychological effects which are hard to quantify.
Because of fluoride’s undoubted contribution to reducing tooth decay, British dentists have been united in promoting the mineral, which occurs naturally in some water supplies. At the right dose, it makes enamel more resistant to acid and inhibits bacteria. The British Dental Association says the development of ranges of toothpaste for children in the early 1990s has reduced the likelihood of overdosing on fluoride.
But this week, Ann Keen, a health minister, told Parliament that dental fluorosis “is often caused by very young children swallowing fluoride toothpaste unsupervised”. This seems to put the onus on parents– the problem being that the messages they receive are not always clear. The document Delivering Better Oral Health, issued to all NHS practices in November 2007, recommends what most parents already know: using a pea-sized amount of toothpaste, and using a toothpaste with the right concentration of fluoride for your child’s age group. But nowhere does it suggest that dentists should explain to them any risk associated with ingesting too much fluoride. Of the half dozen families affected by fluorosis contacted by Body& Soul, all felt surprised that their dentists had never mentioned fluorosis to them.
Delivering Better Oral Health recommends that most under6s use a toothpaste with a fluoride concentration of 1,350 to 1,500 parts per million (ppm). This is considerably stronger than the 1,000ppm toothpaste recommended by other NHS health promotion material. Some popular child toothpastes have a fluoride content of 500ppm, others of 1,100ppm.
The document also recommends that children spit out their toothpaste but don’t rinse, leaving some fluoride in the mouth so that it has the full protective effect on teeth. This contradicts the advice of dentists contacted by Body&Soul, who said that they would recommend rinsing to minimise fluorosis risk.
Too much of a good thing
How much do children have to swallow for there to be a risk of fluorosis? The answer may be on a knife edge. As a Medical Research Council working group reported in 2002: “Fluoride has a relatively low ‘therapeutic ratio’ [the ratio between an effective dose and a toxic dose].” There could be a fine line between doing good and doing bad. The reason for the mixed messages may lie in the lack of clear answers from research. The Medical Research Council working group concluded that “there have been too few studies of total fluoride intake and the contribution of various sources to that intake” and “more robust information on the potential harms of fluoride is needed”. This followed the University of York view that found little conclusive evidence on the benefits or safety of fluoridation. Acknowledging this, the Government said in 2002 that it was committed to improving research on fluorosis. But progress is slow.
Six years later, the Department of Health says a report investigating the best ways to assess the extent of fluorosis will be published later this year. Depending on the results of this research, it may commission further research into public perceptions of fluorosis.
Meanwhile, parents such as Richard Harrison and Jane are puzzled about why toothpaste makers don’t have more prominent warnings on their tubes. In America, an advice panel on how to use the toothpaste is accompanied by: “Warning: keep out of reach of children under 6 years. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control Center immediately.”
Parents are also puzzled about why, if there is a risk from swallowing toothpaste, manufacturers make their products taste like sweets. Professor Ivor Chestnutt, honorary consultant in dental public health at the Cardiff University School of Dentistry, agrees. He believes it would be wrong to scare people away from fluoride toothpaste, such are its benefits, but says: “The one thing I would be against is bubble-gum and fruit-flavoured toothpastes, which encourage children to eat them.”
The Oral-B Stages toothpaste range for childrenincludes Fruit Blast and Berry Bubble flavours. The manufacturer Procter & Gamble emphasises that “any overdosing on fluoride would need to be regular and over a prolonged period of time”. A spokesman said: “The use of fruit-flavour toothpaste encourages brushing, which helps promote dental health. It will also increase levels of ingestion, but this is not a concern, as data demonstrates there is no risk to children using pastes with up to 1,500ppm.” Oral-B Stages child toothpaste has 500ppm.
Whether the facts are this clearcut may be debated by families affected by fluorosis. Definitive research providing the answers may be a way off. In the meantime, some good and honest communication between professionals and the public could go a long way.
“I was tormented at school because of my brown teeth”
Lisa Wain from Mansfield was 10 when, after three years of taunting and teasing at school because of her brown teeth, she had veneers put over her front top teeth. She had received a diagnosis of dental fluorosis, having swallowed toothpaste since early childhood, and been initially told by a dentist that she simply had dirty teeth.
Looking back, Lisa, now 23, says her self-confidence started to come back as soon as she got her new white teeth. But, beyond the initial expense, they have caused problems. She pays higher premiums on her dental insurance policy because of the risks of her veneers coming off. “I had to have one replaced a few years ago because it got chipped, and another one fell off.”
Brush safely
Department of Health advice for children under 7:
Brush last thing at night and on one other occasion.
Brushing should be supervised by an adult.
Use a pea-sized amount of toothpaste containing 1,350-1,500ppm fluoride.
Spit out after brushing and do not rinse.
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the collective power of smart thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Flip MinoHD Camcorder
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
42,945
2008
71,450
Car Insurance
Not Specified
MI6
UK-based
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Save up to £1,000 per couple with Elite Vacations at the five-star Constance Lemuria Resort
and do the British Isles this Summer.
Save up to 60% with Oxford Hotels and Inns
Try our inspiring luxury holidays to the Indian Subcontinent and South East Asia.
Great offers available
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
The Nazis were the first to use fluoride, which attacks the hypothalamus in the brain, to contaminate the water supplies in the concentration camps making the holocaust victims helplessly submissive. This is the real reason why they want to use it on us. Do a google search on 'fluoride causes'
Galv, Rotherham, UK
We all have to drink water to live .The Government is proposing more poisoning of our water with this waste product fluoride. What happened to freedom of choice ? Fluoride is registered as a poison in this country. If we wish to buy toothpaste with it in then that is a choice we have but many of us choose not to do so.
It may be of interest to some that fluoride compounds are used in medications such as prozac . Also fluoride is antagonistic to magnesium which is needed for good heart , lung and bone health. There may be to much waste fluoride around so where can it go? Can we justify putting it in our drinking water when it has detrimental effects on our health in more ways than just our teeth? I for one do not want this mass medication.
Georgia, Derbyshire, England
The moment they fluoridate the water will be the moment I charge my osteopath bills to the government. Reason being I'll be forced to lug large bottles of water around on foot, as I don't drive, presumably to their delight, thus acquiring back and neck problems.
No government has any right to force a neurotoxic poison derived from industrial waste on the population 'for their own good'.
Fluoride has been linked to osteoporosis, various other bone diseases, sarcomas, and major thyroid problems due to interference with iodine levels. To introduce it to public drinking water is nothing short of criminal.
Louise, Chichester, UK,
It is totally illogical to fluoridate when children are getting mottled teeth from swallowing toothpaste; those children are already getting a toxic dose.
It is totally illogical to fluoridate while acknowledging (as does the British Fluoridation Society) that babies whose formula is mixed with fluoridated water risk dental fluorosis.
It is totally illogical to claim that 1ppm in water is âoptimalâ to prevent tooth decay when fluoridation gives absolutely no control on any individualâs total fluoride intake; people drink different amounts of water and receive fluoride from many other sources.
It is totally illogical to fluoridate when there is evidence that fluoride adversely affects the digestive system, the immune system, cellular energy production, the thyroid and the brain.
It is totally illogical to risk fatal osteosarcoma for the sake of saving a tooth or two in childhood.
We must say NO to fluoridation.
Elizabeth McDonagh, Doncaster, UK
I was one of probably many seventies kids whose crumbling toothed war baby parents gave them fluoride pills every night even though (I think) London's water had fluoride in it then and I brushed my teeth twice daily.
When my second teeth came through my front four where half brown and what followed was years of feeling incredible self conscious and embarrassed about my appearance. Finally, last year at the age of 33 I got very expensive veneers put on my front teeth. I hinted at my parents that they should pay for the treatment, but they chose to ignore me! No matter, finally I can smile and feel confident.
Emma, London, UK
Simon Cromptonâs article concentrates on the under-reported problem of dental fluorosis. There are several further reasons to keep down fluoride intake.
Half of all the fluoride we ingest accumulates in the skeleton, where, in regions where the water is naturally very high in fluoride, it induces severe bone deformities and crippling arthritis. There is also evidence linking fluoridated water consumption in childhood with bone cancer (osteosarcoma). Other organs of concern include the thyroid and the developing brain.
Proponents of water fluoridation argue that there is no conclusive proof that drinking the treated water harms people. Maybe so: that is a hard thing to prove, particularly since there are many other sources of fluoride. But there is more than enough scientific evidence to set alarm bells ringing. Adding fluoride to public water supplies can mean lifetime exposure of whole populations; clearly, when there are known risks, that is ethically unjustifiable.
Henry , Edinburgh, Scotland
Adding more fluoride to the drinking water when there is already maximum exposure from toothpaste will only increase the incidence of dental fluorosis. Is the British Health Service prepared to treat all the new cases of fluorosis that will result as more fluoride enters the drinking water and food chain? Perhaps private dentists in the UK welcome the extra business of repairing dental fluorosis, but dentists have an ethical obligation to 'do no harm'. If the minister dictates that more fluoride is to be added to the drinking water, it may relieve dentists of their ethical dilemma. And what fluoridation chemical is to be added? If fluorosilicates are the choice, these were not tested in human safety studies. Americans are concerned that because 90% of their cities are being fluoridated with industrial byproducts of the phosphate fertilizer industry, they are also causing additional adverse health effects, such as increased lead uptake in kids, decrease IQ, and maybe even bone cancer.
Hardy Limeback, Toronto, Canada
This reply from dentist John Leeds is typical, they prescribe more and more fluoride without consideration of its side effects. This article clearly laid out how too many children get discolored teeth from too much fluoride, yet Leeds still wants them to get more.
There is no evidence that any UK child is fluoride deficient. However, many are dentist-deficient.
It's time for dentists to start treating all low-income people instead of their drinking water.
Actually, after 60 years of water fluoridation in the U.S. tooth decay is rising along with dental fluorosis rates.
The most heavily fluoridated states have the highest rates of tooth loss.
Fluoridated New York State Counties do not have less tooth decay than non-fluoridated NYS counties and fluoridation has not leveled out decay between the haves and have nots.
See the following chart:
http://www.freewebs.com/fluoridation/chart.htm
nyscof, New York State, USA
I am a dentist who used to work in Birmingham where the water has been fluoridated since 1964. The children's teeth there were much better than those in Yorkshire where I now work.
All water supplies contain fluoride at different levels, but in many places it is insufficient for reducing tooth decay. It can, however, be topped up at the waterworks. Approximately three quarters of the water supplies in the USA are fluoridated and a programme is in place to provide fluoridated water to a further 18 million people in California.
It is about time that children and adults in the North West and Yorkshire had the benefits that those living in places such as Birmingham and Newcastle have had for more than 40 years.
John, Leeds, England