Department Replies To Attack On Fluoridation

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30739, 1 May 1965, Page 17

Department Replies To Attack On Fluoridation

(From Our Own Reporter) WELLINGTON, April 30. Allegations that recent tests have raised doubts about the wisdom of fluoridating town water supplies are strongly denied by officers of the Health Department.

On the contrary, they say, the department keenly awaits the day when fluoridation is adopted generally in New Zealand.

These replies have been made to a letter sent to the editor of “The Press” by Mr W. A. G. Penlington, president of the Hastings Anti-Fluoridation Society.

“The Department of Health is very happy with the results of fluoridation in Hastings, and eagerly looks forward to the day when fluoridation is adopted as a public health measure throughout the country,” said a spokesman for the Division of Public Health (Mr K. E. Swann) in a written reply received today. “Indeed, it seems the benefits are now so widely appreciated that 60 per cent of all the people on piped water supplies will enjoy the benefits which fluoridation will bring when the decisions of councils accepting fluoridation have been implemented.

“The fact remains, and nothing Mr Penlington can say to the contrary can de-

tract from it, that children in Hastings now have only half the tooth decay they used to have before fluoridation began in 1954,” he said. LETTER TO EDITOR Mr Penlington’s letter, written under the letterhead of the New Zealand Antifluoridation Association (with headquarters in Auckland), is as follows: “Fluoridation tests in Britain and in Hastings, have yielded information regarding the action of fluoride which may have a decisive effect on the present controversy. “Promising results in the children’s early years have led to exaggerated hopes, which have been dispelled by an accelerated rate of toothdecay later, when the protective power of the fluoride has become lessened with exposure to the mouth-acids which corrode the toothenamel.

“This disclosure is only now beginning to ‘break the surface’—and I think your readers would be interested in the information contained in the enclosed cutting (of a previous letter by Mr Penlington published in another newspaper).” Mr Penlington said that before publication of the previous letter, the criticisms were submitted to a number of dental authorities, none of whom attempted to refute them. He mentioned the Committee for Dental Health, the fluoridation committee of the Department of Health, and the Minister of Health (Mr McKay) as being among those to whom the criticisms were submitted. PREVIOUS LETTER The previous letter made the following points: “(1) That the official 1963 statistics show that in Hastings the seven-year-old children have an average of seven decayed teeth, and nine out of every 10 have tooth decay, in spite of the use of fluoridated water ever since birth. “(2) That during their fifth to sixth year, Hastings children have developed just twice as many decayed teeth under fluoridation as they did at that age before fluoridation began (1.42 a child as compared with 0.71).” Mr Swann’s reply deals with these points, as well as those in Mr Penlington’s letter to “The Press.” “In commenting on Mr Penlington’s attack on the efficiency of fluoridation in reducing tooth decay, it is difficult to come to grips with his reasoning, which appears to be based on a complete misunderstanding of the dental studies carried out in Hastings,” Mr Swann writes. “For instance, Mr Penling-

ton comments that Hastings seven-year-old children have an average of seven decayed teeth —but this gloomy statistic is obtained by lumping together the decay rate of deciduous teeth (just at the very age when they are approaching the end of their useful life and are about to be shed) with decayed permanent teeth. DECAY REDUCED “The fact is that fluoridation has led to a reduction in decay in permanent teeth at the age of seven years from 2.75 to 0.95 —a reduction of 65.5 per cent. “A similar case of reporting only part of the published information is the comment that, during their fifth to sixth year, the children in Hastings have developed just twice as many decayed teeth under fluoridation as they did at the age before fluoridation began. In fact, the position is as follows: “In 1954 the number of deciduous teeth affected by decay in five-year-olds was 8.40. In 1963 it was 4.23. In 1954 the number of deciduous teeth of six-year-olds affected was 9.11; and in 1963 it was 5.65.

“In view of the very considerable reduction in the number of deciduous teeth affected by decay in both age groups, calculations based on difference in the increment of carious teeth are quite meaningless. “HALF THE DECAY” “What is meaningful is that these children have about half the decay in their deciduous teeth now as they did before fluoridation began. “Where I can agree with Mr Penlington is when he comments ‘mass statistics matter less than the story of what happens to teeth under new Zealand conditions’ no statistical report, impressive though the figures are that have been reported from Hastings, can hope to show the pain and discomfort which fluoridation has saved by preventing teeth from decaying.

“No statistical report can hope to show how, where decay does occur, the size and complexity of fillings is drastically reduced. Sufficient to say that among the Hastings children surveyed, at least 10,000 teeth have been saved from decay. “Moreover, Mr Penlington omits to mention many of the more startling features of the Hastings survey report, such as there being 10 times as many seven-year-old children completely free of all dental decay in 1963 as there were in 1954 ” Regarding the allegation that various authorities to whom Mr Penlington’s criticisms were submitted did not attempt to refute them, Mr

Swann says: “Mr Penlington is such a prolific writer that, while his views are always carefully scrutinised, it is hardly desirable to carry on a running debate with him on matters of details —and certainly such a course of action would have little public interest.”