Page 61 - Week 01 - Tuesday, 12 February 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
report stated, there is probably only one conclusion. That is a view that is put from both sides. I think it is important that I quote from paragraph 10.109 of the report:
The one conclusion that both opponents and proponents of fluoridation agreed upon was that dental caries rates, whether in fluoridated or non-fluoridated areas, are much higher amongst low socio-economic groups than amongst more affluent communities. Results of the Tasmanian section of the National Oral Health Survey showed that 70 percent of the caries was present in 30 percent of the population.
The report goes on to say:
However, opposing stances are taken on the implications of this. Proponents argue that it means that water should be fluoridated because this helped protect the teeth of those whose oral hygiene was inadequate. Opponents argued that it was better to leave fluoride out of the water supply but target lower socio-economic groups with better oral health education and school dental services.
The committee also noted that the availability of unfluoridated toothpaste, at comparable prices to fluoridated toothpaste, is especially important for the lower socioeconomic groups if there is to be a realistic choice of toothpaste. The cost also of water purifiers severely restricts the lower socioeconomic groups in having access to unfluoridated water, if that is their choice.
One of the important issues to come out of this inquiry has been the changes in total fluoride intake for many people since 1964. This issue has, of course, been well covered in the report. I would ask that we reflect on some of those sources: Soft drinks, tea, processed foods, vegetables, toothpaste, some medications, and it is even contained in gels which are freely applied by many mothers to teething toddlers. I am quite sure that many are not even aware that fluoride is in such a substance.
In 1964, ready-to-drink fruit juices, which are water based, were almost non-existent. I believe that such drinks increase the fluoride content many times. Just how many people today go down the path of drinking freshly squeezed orange juice? I think it is called convenience food; and for many, unfortunately, convenience food makes up a large portion of their weekly shopping. Also, when fluoridated water is used in the cooking process, as in soups, sauces, pasta - the list goes on - that has changed quite dramatically since 1964.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .