Supporters of water fluoridation include:

World Health Organisation
Australian Medical Association
Public Health Association of Australia
Queensland Health
American Medical Association
United States Public Health Service
National Academy of Sciences
British Medical Association
Royal College of Physicians
United Kingdom National Health Service
International Association for Dental Research
United Kingdom Medical Research Council
Centres for Disease Control
International Dental Federation

and more than 100 of the world’s leading health and scientific authorities. In fact, no respected or authoritative health authority opposes water fluoridation.

Select the advocate from the list to view their statement.
Professor Ian Frazer
Professor John Pearn
Dr Gino Pecoraro
Dr Zelle Hodge
Dr Jeannette Young
Professor MaryLou Fleming
Dr Robert McCray
Dr Bill O'Reilly
Helen Clifford
Professor Laurence Walsh
Professor Newell W Johnson
Professor John P. Brown
Dr Michael Foley
Anders Blomberg
Professor Ian A Meyers
Associate Professor Jeroen Kroon
Dr L Peter Ryan
Tim Logan
Dr Mike Charles
Dr Geraldine Moses
United States Surgeon-General (2006)
Professor John Harris


Professor Ian Frazer
2006 Australian of the Year
Centre for Immunology & Cancer Research
The University of Queensland

I believe that the evidence overwhelmingly supports the safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation.

Professor John Pearn
RFD MD FRACP
2005 Queensland Senior Australian of the Year
Professor of Paediatrics & Child Health,
and Preceptor of the School of Medicine Faculty of Health Sciences
University of Queensland
(June 2006)

I maintain the strongest advocacy for the introduction of fluoridation into Queensland water supplies. The introduction of optimal fluoridation into domestic water supplies has been a very significant public health advance, over the recent six decades.

Almost all children in the developed world drink water which contains optimal levels of the fluoride ion as a most significant protection of both temporary and permanent teeth. Seventy-five percent of Australian children have the privilege and protection of correctly-adjusted fluoridation levels in their domestic water supplies; but regretfully and shamefully, only five percent of Queensland children are similarly protected. This has implications not only in the increased dental caries rate amongst children during their formative years; but has implications also for lifelong dental health as well.

Fluoridation is a proven, totally safe public health measure. Almost all who understand these benefits are perplexed that Queensland continues to deny its children optimal dental health, by the simple introduction of this safe, "tried and true" method of promoting dental health. I join with all enlightened and informed colleagues, and the majority of the general public who would wish that this benefit is also available to Queensland children.

Dr Gino Pecoraro
MB BS FRANZCOG
Gynaecologist, medical journalist and media spokesman

Fluoride supplementation has been found to be effective in reducing dental decay in many studies, and as a public health measure, has been found to be extremely cost effective.

Dental health is unfortunately not as well resourced as it should be and the simple act of adding fluoride to drinking water would go a long way in helping to improve the dental health of subsequent generations of Queenslanders.

We should not allow fear and misinformation stop us from instituting a major public health reform. I look forward to the day when my children can have the benefit of this safe, tested and proven addition to their drinking water.

Dr Jeannette Young

Professor MaryLou Fleming

Dr Robert McCray

Dr Bill O’Reilly
Australian Dental Association
2006 Federal President

The Australian Dental Association and many dental academics and researchers around Australia have for a considerable time been confounded by occasional opposition to the adjustment of natural fluoride levels in drinking water supplies through the addition of fluoride to optimum decay-fighting levels.

There is universal agreement between all the major public health bodies throughout the world regarding the benefits of water fluoridation. However we still see campaigns that oppose the measure and seek to influence decision-making at the local level, thereby denying communities vital protection against tooth decay.

For example an unpublished thesis by a doctoral student, possibly suggesting a link between fluoridated water and the development of a rare type of bone cancer (osteosarcoma) in adolescent males, has been grasped by anti-fluoridationists as justification for ceasing what has been described as “one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century”.

But in the notes to the thesis, the author acknowledges that there are several limitations to her study and importantly states that the study may not reflect the amount of fluoride consumed by the study subjects. No change in policy or thinking can be based on this study.

At this time, the weight of scientific evidence, as assessed by independent committees of experts, comprehensive systematic reviews, and reviews of findings of individual studies does not support an association between water fluoridated at levels optimal for oral health and the risk for cancer, including osteosarcoma.

We continue to urge that governments adopt water fluoridation as part of their health policy and actively promote its introduction as a public health measure.

Professor Laurence Walsh
BDSc (Hons), PhD, DDSc, FFOP(RCPA), GCEd, FICD, FADI
Professor of Dental Science and Head of School
The University of Queensland School of Dentistry
(June 2006)

Since the early 1930s, the dental and medical professions have been aware of ‘natural laboratories’ in which entire communities have been consuming fluoride-containing water from natural sources for most or all of their lives. Looking at these areas, and the millions of people across Australia and the rest of the world who have been drinking fluoride-enhanced water for the past 50 years, it’s clear that from a health perspective the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of the idea of fluoridation. As a public health measure, it's a “gold standard”.

Professor Newell W Johnson
MDSc, PhD, FDSRCS, FRACDS, FRCPath, FMedSci
Foundation Dean and Head of School
School of Dentistry and Oral Health
Gold Coast Campus
Griffith University
(May 2006)

The fluoridation of public water supplies at the well-researched level appropriate to the climate of the region is a thoroughly proven method of substantially lowering rates of dental decay in the population drinking that water. Whilst I understand some of the reasons surrounding the continuing controversy of this public health measure and respect people's rights to object I am convinced, from the extensive scientific literature and from the many high-level enquiries conducted around the world, of these conclusions.

In Queensland we have a very unequal society, with poor diet and limited access to public dental services resulting in pain, infection and extensive tooth decay in the most vulnerable members. Water fluoridation is the only way to reach – and to help – these citizens.

Professor John P. Brown
BDS, PhD (Queensland) MS (Rochester)
Formerly: School Dental Officer, Queensland Health,
Senior Lecturer in Dentistry for Children, University of Queensland
2006: Professor and Chair, Department of Community Dentistry,
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Texas USA

My early experience as a dentist in western Queensland taught me both the huge need for prevention of tooth decay and the effectiveness of community water fluoridation in a few western towns with optimal water fluoride levels.

I have studied the cost efficiency of water fluoridation for the Texas Department of State Health Services*, and shown that the savings in dental treatment costs are today very substantial. These benefits will accrue to all Queenslanders if water fluoridation is adopted – for children, adults, seniors, the disabled and the homebound. Controlling the costs of dental treatment, and the lost school and work productivity (due to tooth decay) requires this foundational dental preventive measure.

The safety and effectiveness of community water fluoridation continues to be affirmed by established health authorities worldwide. It is time for Queenslanders to organise and act on this successful established health policy, for individual health and public betterment.

http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/dental/pdf/fluoridation.pdf

Dr Michael Foley
BDSc
Immediate past president, Australian Dental Association (Qld branch)
Past president, Queensland Public Sector Dentists Association

As a government dentist, I see the ravages of tooth decay on a daily basis. Tooth decay affects almost everyone, but particularly children, the elderly, people from non-English speaking backgrounds, indigenous people and low income earners. The health, social and financial costs of tooth decay to the community are immense.

Water fluoridation has been shown for more than 60 years to significantly reduce dental caries in a population. Most importantly, water fluoridation is safe, and is recommended by the leading health and scientific authorities in Australia and around the world.

And it doesn’t just help children. Latest research shows that water fluoridation strengthens everyone’s teeth, from the very young to the very old. Water fluoridation is simply the safest, cheapest and most effective way to provide the decay-reducing benefits of fluoride to the greatest number of people, particularly those from the most disadvantaged groups.

Professor Ian A Meyers
Colgate Chair of General Practice Dentistry
The University of Queensland School of Dentistry

The lack of fluoride in the water supply throughout most of Queensland has resulted in a higher incidence of dental caries and tooth wear in comparison with the rest of the Australian population. It is well documented that Queensland children have one of the highest rates of decay of children in all states and territories. However the problem is not just limited to children as many adults also continue to suffer.

The beneficial effects of water fluoridation can be seen not only during development of teeth but prolonged benefits are provided by the ongoing surface effect. Surface strengthening of tooth structure, due to the frequent contact with fluoridated water, increases resistance to acid attack. This provides an enormous benefit to all age groups, especially those who were not exposed to fluoride in earlier years. It is important to remember that water fluoridation not only reduces dental caries in the population, it also assists in the protection of teeth from surface wear and erosion, particularly in the older age group.

While many other factors in an individual's diet and lifestyle may affect their incidence of dental decay and tooth wear, the underlying and ongoing protection provided by water fluoridation must not be underestimated.

The long-term benefits of water fluoridation both from a dental health and an economic perspective are easily demonstrated when comparing fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities. As clearly stated in Australia's National Oral Health Plan, research has continuingly demonstrated that "Water fluoridation is the single most effective public health measure for reducing dental caries across the population". Water fluoridation is essential for Queensland if we wish to ensure our population retain healthy teeth into the future.

The safety and effectiveness of fluoridation of public water supplies has been proven beyond doubt. This public health measure will go a long way to improve the oral health status of everyone in Queensland and in doing so relieve the unpleasant consequences of dental decay.

It benefits everyone, irrespective of age, culture or income and even if you use other fluoride products to protect your teeth, water fluoridation will provide you with additional protection against dental decay. So why wait any longer for its introduction?

Dr L Peter Ryan OAM
BDSc FICD
Australian Dental Association Queensland Branch
Past President

Queensland’s strange lack of water fluoridation, considering that all other states and territories have long since come close to maximum implementation, is almost exclusively the result of political inaction.

Successive state governments have persisted with the erroneous concept that because local authorities supply water they should control the fluoride content. The safety of potable water is obviously the province of the department of health.

The Royal Commissioner Into the Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies (Mr Justice Peter Crisp) stated inter alia:

865. To summarise. The decision, whether or not fluoridation, as a matter of public health designed to protect the dental health of the young, should be put into force in this state, should not be left to local authorities. It is a matter for the decision of Parliament. A referendum as a means of arriving at this decision is not only without constitutional warrant but is highly unsuitable as well. It follows, consistently with the views I have expressed, that to refer the matter to a forum both technically incompetent and constitutionally incapable would constitute an abrogation of Parliament's responsibility.

In direct contradiction to this finding, Queensland governments have consistently held the view that local authorities should be held responsible and have offered incentives in the form of one-off grants for infrastructure costs, which, not surprisingly, have not been availed upon.

The anomalous situation of six different local authorities in south-east Queensland all drawing from a common water supply being required somehow to individually implement and monitor a public health measure such as water fluoridation in that part of the common water supply that flows to their particular area will not be lost on those with a sense of logic.

Hence those persons with a concern for the public health of their community should express those concerns not to their local authority but to their state representatives.

They should press for a new Fluoridation Act, perhaps along the lines of that in Western Australia, so that responsibility is transferred to state government level where it rightly belongs and Queensland can belatedly join all the other states in providing this marvellous natural protection from dental disease to all citizens, rich and poor alike.

Tim Logan
BPharm, FACPPM, FAICD
Branch President
Pharmacy Guild of Australia (Queensland)

The Pharmacy Guild of Australia (Queensland Branch) strongly supports fluoridation of Queensland water supplies. Brisbane pharmacists frequently see children in pain and needing antibiotics or painkillers for abscessed teeth. Prevention is better than cure.

The Pharmacy Guild is aware that there is an enormous body of research that clearly indicates that water fluoridation helps to protect teeth against tooth decay. We also understand that less than 5 percent of Queensland water is fluoridated even though, within the areas in Queensland that already have water fluoridation, it appears to be a popular policy.

Dr Geraldine Moses
BPharm DClinPharm
consultant pharmacist and media personality

The balance of evidence shows that the rate of dental decay is lower in communities with fluoridated rather than non-fluoridated water supply. Scientific and medical experts have agreed on this for decades. The effect tends to be greater among children from lower socioeconomic groups, and this is the part of the community who needs most help.

But we fear things we don’t understand. Because we don’t teach pharmacology at school, ignorance about medicinal substances, including fluoride, pervades our community. In my experience, this is because people don’t have the skills to differentiate between a drug and a poison.

The 16th century physician Paracelsus summed it all up when he said … “the difference between a drug and a poison, is the dose”. Fluoride in the water supply is an effective and safe intervention for preventing tooth decay … not poisonous … because the dose being used is so very small.

Fluoridation is the single most effective public health measure to prevent tooth decay and improve oral health over a lifetime, for both children and adults.

Professor John Harris
Centre for Social Ethics & Policy
University of Manchester
United Kingdom

In considering the ethics of fluoridation one might legitimately reverse the question and ask if fellow citizens are entitled to impose, not only a disadvantage on the community at large, but impose actual deaths and the risk of death on children for the sake of a minor diminution in the range of choices available? We should ask not are we entitled to impose fluoridation on unwilling people but are the unwilling people entitled to impose the risks, damage and costs of failure to fluoridate on the community at large. When we compare the freedoms at stake, the most crucial is surely the one which involves liberation from pain and disease.

Back to top ^

Back to top^