We filter our water - are we still getting fluoride?

S

samhain

Guest
I read something last week about how the fluoride in the water has really helped with cavities especially in children's teeth. We have a fridge freezer with the water and ice and the kids are constantly drinking water which is great but now I am worried that I should be supplementing their drinks with fluoride or doing something to ensure that their teeth don't suffer. I don't want to give up the filtered water as it tastes great and the kids look for water by preference rather than flavoured drinks. Anybody else worry about this and what have you done?
 
I researched this some time ago. I use a Brita filter and appearently (according to the Brita website) the filter removes 1% of the flourise only. So the water is still regarded as flouridated.
 
samhain said:
I read something last week about how the fluoride in the water has really helped with cavities especially in children's teeth. We have a fridge freezer with the water and ice and the kids are constantly drinking water which is great but now I am worried that I should be supplementing their drinks with fluoride or doing something to ensure that their teeth don't suffer. I don't want to give up the filtered water as it tastes great and the kids look for water by preference rather than flavoured drinks. Anybody else worry about this and what have you done?
Click to expand...

I think fluoride might be doing more bad than good. Check out these web sites http://www.fluoridealert.org/
http://homepage.eircom.net/~fluoridefree/links.htm
 
Last edited:
I have an additional flouride filter on my water. We get enough flouride through toothpaste.
 
lazylump said:
I think fluoride might be doing more bad than good.
Click to expand...

I'm not an expert at all, but I don't think this is the case at all - it's one of those myths that has developed, similar to the Autism / MMR debacle. I have often heard people who are against flouride in water argue that where flouride is in the water, it gives rise to cases of flouridosis, where the flouride damages your teeth. However, this is due to high concentrations of flouride that naturally occur in the water in certain areas. In Ireland, the levels of flouride in the water, because it is artifically put there, is much lower and DOES NOT damage teeth or any of the rest of the body for that matter, but rather helps keep teeth healthy.
 
ndp said:
I'm not an expert at all, but I don't think this is the case at all - it's one of those myths that has developed, similar to the Autism / MMR debacle. I have often heard people who are against flouride in water argue that where flouride is in the water, it gives rise to cases of flouridosis, where the flouride damages your teeth. However, this is due to high concentrations of flouride that naturally occur in the water in certain areas. In Ireland, the levels of flouride in the water, because it is artifically put there, is much lower and DOES NOT damage teeth or any of the rest of the body for that matter, but rather helps keep teeth healthy.
Click to expand...

I've seen fluoride mentioned several times, in books published by medical professionals, as a possible factor related to my particular medical condition. I filter my drinking water as a result.

Edited to add: Google tells me that a Brita doesn't remove fluoride. Eek.
 
ndp said:
I'm not an expert at all, but I don't think this is the case at all - it's one of those myths that has developed, similar to the Autism / MMR debacle. I have often heard people who are against flouride in water argue that where flouride is in the water, it gives rise to cases of flouridosis, where the flouride damages your teeth. However, this is due to high concentrations of flouride that naturally occur in the water in certain areas. In Ireland, the levels of flouride in the water, because it is artifically put there, is much lower and DOES NOT damage teeth or any of the rest of the body for that matter, but rather helps keep teeth healthy.
Click to expand...

I’m not an expert either but I like to question everything and have looked at both sides of this argument.

Fluoride is a toxin and this is not a myth it just the quantities administered .I don't want to consume something that might or might not damage my health. The US FDA required that all fluoride toothpastes sold in the U.S. carry a poison warning on the label. The warning cautions toothpaste users to: "WARNING: Keep out of reach of children under 6 years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional help or contact a poison control center immediately.

If this is not bad enough you should look at some of the links on my previous post you will see many people are concerned about fluoridation. If it’s supplied in the water as a medicine I would like the choice whether to take it or not. Whether it’s good for my teeth or not I don't care I won't take a chance consuming fluoride even if it means looking like Gabby Hayes.
 
Lazylump maybe I'm being unfair but people who claim to look at 'both sides' are usually just preparing to justify the 'alternative' anti-science side.

It isn't a political debate - there aren't two sides. If data exists to demonstrably prove an effect then there can be only one side. If no data exists there are no 'sides', just pointless guesswork.

As the following link to Ben Goldacre's pretty class Guardian 'Bad Science' piece shows nobody can say for definite either way, which leaves you with anecdote and conjecture.

http://www.badscience.net/2008/02/foreign-substances-in-your-precious-bodily-fluids/
 
There are many people in Ireland in their 50's with dentures, look around you at all those of that agegroup with perfect teeth. I'm glad they put flouride in the water, in fact I don't believe I brushed my teeth as a child. There is no comparison with the teeth of today versus those who were brought up without it.
 
The onus of proof is on the side claiming negative health effects to change generally accepted scientific knowledge.
 
sexitoni said:
Lazylump maybe I'm being unfair but people who claim to look at 'both sides' are usually just preparing to justify the 'alternative' anti-science side.

It isn't a political debate - there aren't two sides. If data exists to demonstrably prove an effect then there can be only one side. If no data exists there are no 'sides', just pointless guesswork.

As the following link to Ben Goldacre's pretty class Guardian 'Bad Science' piece shows nobody can say for definite either way, which leaves you with anecdote and conjecture.

http://www.badscience.net/2008/02/foreign-substances-in-your-precious-bodily-fluids/
Click to expand...

I don’t want to get into a debate about this but I do think this statement is a little unfair when I say I looked at both sides what I mean is I have considered fluoridation and why or why not it should be used. I believe that fluoride may have some minor effect on teeth to reduce decay but some current scientific evidence is that it does not have to be digested to do this and can be applied to the surface of the teeth. I also believe to claim someone is anti science is to try to undermine their opinion.

There is a lot of scientific evidence for and against fluoridation and when looking at all these findings you have to consider who if funding this research, why and who benefits from the published findings before you make a decisions on the results.

Most countries in Western Europe do not add fluoride to their tap water and I don’t know of tooth decay problems in Europe either. I believe we should try keeping our environment as clean as possible and In my opinion I think the scientific evidence against fluoride is too damming to be ignored. It is reported you also can find fluoride in cereals, fruit juices, sodas, wine, beer, fish, Teflon frying pans and even salt. So with all that fluoride I say not to adding more fluoride of my drinking water and believe in filtering it out.
 
Swallowing toothpaste cannot be good for you; I'm sure toothpaste makers don't put warnings on the tubes for fun.
There are a lot of ingredients in everyday food and other products that we ingest that aren't always good for us.
Transfats (hydrogenated fat) and saccharin are two of the most common.
I know that these discussions aren't encouraged on askaboutmoney, but people should at least know what they are putting into their bodies and then make up their own minds. Governments don't always act in our best interests so we can't rely on harmful ingredients being banned or assume that because something isn't banned that it's safe.
Just my two cents worth.
 
Last edited:
I hadn't thought of any of these things when I posted the question so now I have some thinking to do. However, I did have a chat with my dentist on Thursday and she said that I shouldn't worry about the flouride levels, that some would still be getting through the filter and that the only problem she could see was years ago when people added flouride to their own water and added too much which caused far worse problems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top