Media release
Thousands of rigorous studies – including recent large-scale data from Sweden and Canada (as well as our own famous Dunedin Study) confirm that community water fluoridation improves oral health and has no detrimental effect on IQ.
Making Sense of Fluoride President Daniel Ryan is spreading that message to counter the misinformation of anti-fluoride activist Paul Connett who is currently touring the country.
“Paul’s up to his old tricks of trying to confuse the public with shonky information,” says Mr Ryan. “This time he’s armed with a study carried out in Mexico that’s been criticised for basic flaws; for example, not identifying where the participants got their drinking water and not considering other risk factors. The Mexican study simply cannot be compared to community water fluoridation in New Zealand.”
“What’s more,” says Mr Ryan, “Lead authors of that study have gone on the record supporting fluoridation. This shows Connett’s claims to be nonsense.”
“Paul Connett relies on the lack of expertise of the media and the public to promote an ideological view that denies the evidence. Compare that to the overwhelming scientific consensus that fluoridation is an effective way to improve the dental health of children and adults.”
“We encourage anyone dealing with Paul Connett to be skeptical, question his sources and not to take his claims at face value,” says Mr Ryan. “And above all, be assured that community water fluoridation is safe.”
For more information please contact:
Dr Ken Perrott
Science adviser, MSoF
[email protected]
Daniel Ryan
MSoF President, MSoF
[email protected]
Edit: Corrected link to the Canada study.
Very interesting; do you have a source for the Swedish study. It looks like a thesis.
Here you go Michael. Hope this helps. I’ll ask Ken to update his article with the new link.
https://www.ifau.se/en/Research/Publications/Working-papers/2017/the-effects-of-fluoride-in-the-drinking-water/
The Dunedin study is very average Dan. Unfortunately it didn’t have a control group. Looks like Childsmile is the way forward for New Zealand.
The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study is one of the best in the world. The paper “Community Water Fluoridation and Intelligence: Prospective Study in New Zealand” which Connett keeps attacking is again a high quality paper.
http://msof.nz/2015/08/dr-connett-distorts-the-dunedin-iq-fluoride-study/
The Sweden and Canada studies were a lot larger. Are you going to attack those too? I see Connett ignored those.
“Childsmile is the way forward for New Zealand”
We already use parts of Childsmile in NZ.
Childsmile still uses fluoride in their school fluoride varnish programs (my guess :
“From 2006 to 2013, 500,846 fluoride varnishes have been carried out by Childsmile in nurseries and schools.”
http://www.child-smile.org.uk/parents-and-carers/fluoride-varnishing.aspx
If you are going to use Childsmile Why bother. C.W.F and Childsmile both use fluoride.
The kicker here, is that the Scottish Child smile program costs in 2014 125 Pounds stirling per child per annum.
The British Community Water fluoridation Program costs 35 pence per child per annum in the same period
And we have adopted some of the Childsmile program here in N.Z
So unless your local DHB has unlimited funds Why go with Childsmile
I apologise, I just noticed the link to the Canada study was incorrect. I have updated the article.