Keyword search
Dental Fluorosis (DF)

DF is the damage caused to permanent (secondary) teeth while they are
forming in children's gums while the milk teeth have erupted. There are
different levels of severity of DF depending on the amount of fluoride swallowed
and absorbed, and the age of the child when the fluoride was ingested and
absorbed.  DF is a biomarker and a manifestation of systemic toxicity.

Dental fluorisis (df) is found in milk teeth when the fetus and infant have been exposed to high levels of fluoride via the placenta, in baby formula and in bath water.  This is not as obvious as DF which occurs primarily on incisors.  It is beleived that df occurs on molars and pre-molars but there is is very little information on this phenomenon available in the public domain.


Thus, there are four causes of DF:





Mild DF appears as white chalk marks, as pearly streaks or small pitted areas. In Moderate - Severe DF,
the teeth are stained brown with darker patches where the enamel is missing.  

Additionally, 'fluoride bombs' are defects of the underlying dentine which are weakened by a bio-accumulation of fluoride.  Even though the enamel is seemingly unaffected and robust, the fluoride in the dentine reduces the strength of the teeth so that they can break unexpectedly.  The LINKED video shows moderate dental fluorosis and a 'fluoride bomb' at 24.47 minutes.  The speaker, Dr Stan Litras, is a practicing dentist who is no longer in favour of fluoridation.  He sees one patient a week with severe dental fluorosis.  

Why DF occurs

“From animal studies it has been demonstrated that dental fluorosis is caused by fluoride inhibiting
enzymes in the growing tooth cells [which are] responsible for laying down the enamel (DenBesten,
1999). The last stage in this process involves enzymes called proteases, which chew up the protein remaining between the mineral prisms, which form the enamel. If this protein is not completely removed, it leads to small opaque patches on the enamel. It is well known from biochemical studies that fluoride inhibits enzymes in test tubes, which is the reason why a number of Nobel Prize winners (e.g Dr. James Sumner, the world's leading enzyme chemist in his time) are among those who have expressed their reservations about fluoridating water.

Dental fluorosis is thus an indication that fluoride even at 1 ppm (1 mg fluoride per litre of water) in
water can inhibit enzymes in the body. In a way, it is extremely lucky that fluoride inhibits these
particular enzymes because the effect is visible. Thus we have a visible warning signal that
something is happening. The key question then becomes (or should become): What other enzymes is fluoride inhibiting in the body that we can't see?”

Go to the paper by Stachowska et al for research which demonstrates that fluoride inhibits mitochondrial enzymes which are part of the all-important process of energy production in every cell of our bodies..

It follows that the greater the amount of fluoride there is in the embryonic secondary teeth, the more the

proteases are inhibited meaning that even more unwanted protein remains to interfere with the integrity of
the mineral prisms, i.e the developing enamel. The lack of enamel integrity allows the teeth to be stained
and pitted and prone to attack from bacteria. (Click here to view examples of Dental Fluorosis.) Put simplistically, the more fluoride a baby, toddler and young child ingests or absorbs while the secondary teeth are
developing in the gums, the greater the degree of DF.

The following Fluoride Action Network web page contains a digest of relevant research conclusions: www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/fluorosis/caries.html

Note that many of the teeth are not only stained and pitted but are misshapen and irregularly spaced and chipped. These deformities are likely to be as a result of the over-long residence of the developing secondary
teeth in the gums due to the delay in growth and the delay in the shedding of the primary teeth.  The secondary teeth are also more prone to being chipped because of the reduced enamel integrity.


Next, visitors to this site may now like to watch a short video which is presented by an experienced American dentist.  The fluoridating acid added to the US public water is the same as that added to West Midlands water.

Link: Bill Osmunson video.

The following link discusses the emotional scars caused by dental fluorosis.  Dr Hardy Limeback used to support fluoridation. These days he is one of the most succinct critics of the practice.

Link: Article by Dr Hardy Limeback, BSc., PhD (Biochemistry), DDS

There are very few pieces of research on the phenomenon of fluoride causing a delay in the growth of
primary (deciduous) teeth. Even though many dental researchers wish to investigate this phenomenon,
they are not granted sponsorship from either the Department of Health nor the pharmaceutical industry.  Click here to view the Toothpaste page.  But a recent study published in the Journal of the American Dental Association warns about making up infant formula with fluoridated water: JADA article on baby formula and fluoridated water .  See also an assessment of the fluoride content in baby formula .

However, a free-thinking soul and eminent scientist working in the mid-20th century, Prof. Albert Schatz
and his colleague, Dr Joseph Martin, did some extensive work on dentition between 1956 and 1973
including research into primary teeth growth and decay (caries). Attempts to get these findings published in
‘learned’ journals in the States were ignored. Nonetheless, Schatz did give testimony to the State
of Wisconsin Circuit Court in 1993. Here is an extract:

“Fluoridation merely postpones the appearance of caries. Fluoridated children develop the same
amount of tooth decay as their non-fluoridated counter-parts over their lifetime. The only difference is that caries start developing approximately 1.2 years later.
There is no economic benefit for such actions. Since fluoride does not reduce caries, fluoridated and control children will develop the same amount of tooth decay. Both groups will therefore require the same amount of dental treatment. People in fluoridated areas therefore pay for the same amount of dental treatment plus the added cost of fluoridation.”

Source: Case No. 92 CV 579, State Of Wisconsin, Circuit Court, Fond Du Lac County, Affidavit of Albert Schatz, PhD. in support of motion for summary judgment, Safe Water Foundation v Fond Du Lac County, sections 18-19.


Schatz was one of many scientists who gave testimony as expert witnesses for the Safe Water Foundation.
(All 
affidavits seem to have now been removed from the Internet and only survive as copied files to various
websites
and hard drives.)

A statement made in response to the EC's Call for Information, April 2009, discusses the phenomenon of
the late eruption of milk teeth.  Although the English translation of this SCHER Call for Information is often difficult to understand, the meaning is clear.  Click here to view .  There is also a 1961 research paper which describes delayed eruption of secondary teeth for a period of anything up to 1 year where children were given fluoride for controlled lengths of time ( Feltman, R. and G. Kosel (1961). J. Dental Medicine, vol 16.)  Over a period of fourteen years these researchers fed fluoride tablets to children "through their eighth year of life" and reported that there was: "... a delay in the eruption of the teeth in some cases by as much as a year from the accepted eruption dates.")

In a non-fluoridated area, such as Scotland, the first milk tooth (lower incisor) appears at age 6 months. Primary teeth are ‘all in’ by 2½ years of age. At age 6, the primary teeth start to fall out and are replaced by permanent teeth, the last one appearing at age 12. (Source: SIGN 83 report, Section 11.1, p. 31.)  If fluoride delays the growth of milk teeth
due to its enzyme-inhibiting effects, the above Scottish 'milestones' will not apply.

Bottle-fed babies in the West Midlands are more likely to experience a delay in the growth of milk teeth.  It would be simple to arrange a comparative study of a child's age and the appearance of milk teeth between the West Midlands and Scotland.  However, this type of research is not part of the Department of Health's agenda. The delay caused by fluoride to the eruption of milk teeth is, for Civil Servants in the Dental Division, an 'uncomfortable truth'.  The Department of Health would prefer not to have the truth proven and so the occurrence of the late eruption of teeth caused by fluoride is either ridiculed, denied or ignored.

Therefore, at age 5, when the child has its first dental examination, fluoridated children have less well-developed teeth which have been in the mouth for a shorter period of time when compared to their non-fluoridated peers.  Being younger, the teeth in a neglected child will be less decayed.  Less decay seems to prove that fluoride is a  caries-preventative.  But this is a smoke-screen. 

So the theory that ingested and absorbed fluoride prevents dental decay in                                 young children is likely to be incorrect.


The link below takes you to a video called Rachel's Story which has recently been produced by United Kingdom Councils Against Fluoridation:  Rachel's Story

In summary: The delay in growth of deciduous teeth causes delayed chewing of food,
imperfect swallowing, delayed speech and delayed social development.  In a fluorosed child, the permanent teeth will often be misshapen and irregularly spaced because they have had
to wait longer for the deciduous teeth to be shed.  The majority of West Midlands' children are compulsorily fluoridated, with 34% developing dental fluorosis for the sake of a small number of children whose parents do not have the wherewithal to look after their children's dental hygiene.
 


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fluoridation does not remove inequalities: it creates inequalities because the practice damages permanent teeth permanently.

  (Joy Warren, August 2011)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

References

Campagna L, Tsamtsouris A, Kavadia K. Fluoridated drinking water and maturation of permanent teeth at age 12. J Clin Pediatr Dent.
1995 Spring;19(3):225-8.

Feltman, R. and G. Kosel (1961).  Prenatal and postnatal ingestion of fluorides - Fourteen years of investigation - Final report. J. Dental Medicine, vol. 16, 190-99

Kunzel VW. Cross-sectional comparison of the median eruption time for permanent teeth in children from fluoride poor and optimally fluoridated areas . Stomatol DDR. 1976 May; 5:310-21.

Nadler GL: Earlier dental maturation: fact or fiction? Angle Orthod 1998 Dec;68(6):535-8

Siew, C. et al. (2009).  'Assessing a potential risk factor for enamel fluorosis: a preliminary evaluation of fluoride content in infant formulas.  Journal of the American Dental Association, Vol. 140, No. 10, 1228-1236.

SIGN (2005). Prevention and management of dental decay in the pre-school child. ISBN 1 899893 44 X.  http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign83.pdf

Sutton, PRN (1996). The Greatest Fraud Fluoridation. Chapter 10 deals with the question of delayed onset of caries and tooth eruption.
ISBN 0949491128. http://www.fluoridation.com/sutton.htm

Virtanen JI, Bloigu RS, Larmas MA. Timing of eruption of permanent teeth: standard Finnish patient documents. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1994 Oct;22(5 Pt 1):286-8

Ziegelbecker, R (2009). Comments on the Working Mandata: SCHER - Call for Information. http://www.fluoridealert.org/Ziegelbecker-2009.pdf