Why Fluoride is Bad for You
By: David C. Kennedy, DDS of San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 231-1624
Letter sent to: The Board of Supervisors of Santa Cruz County
RE: Drinking Water Fluoridation
March 1, 1998
I am David Kennedy, DDS. I am a preventive dentist. I have
practiced dentistry in San Diego for more than 20 years. My father and
grandfather before me were also dentists.
I served on the board of the San Diego Better Business Bureau
for over 10 years, and have been a member of the Centre City Optimist Club
for 20 years as well.
I have been a member of the San Diego County Dental Society
for over 20 years, and for three years elected to the Board of Directors.
I have participated on numerous committees including. Senior Care, Speakers
Bureau, Political Action Committee, and the Council on Dental Care.
In 1974 Eddy Oriole and I planned and built the Chicano Children's
Dental Health Clinic at 1809 National Avenue. I care about children's dental
I am immediate Past President of International Academy of Oral
Medicine and Toxicology, the author of a book on preventive dental health
entitled How to Save Your Teeth, and a nationally and internationally recognized
lecturer on toxicology and restorative dentistry.
I am intensely interested in the welfare of my patients and
the community at large.
Although I am a member of the San Diego County Dental Society
(SDCDS), The California Dental Association (CDA) and the American Dental
Association (ADA), I must begin my statement by expressing my opposition
to these organization's stances concerning the safety of fluoride and further
clarify what an endorsement by any of these organizations represents.
1) CDA and ADA perform no research of their own.
2) These trade associations have successfully argued in court
that they assume no legal liability for any harm that may result from their
3) Dental organizations are not responsible for studying adverse
systemic effects of water fluoridation. These issues are appropriately
studied by medical researchers, epidemiologists and toxicologists.
4) CDA and ADA have never provided their members any large
scale blinded studies which prove that fluoridation reduces tooth decay.
An expert for the ADA testified in court that she was not aware of any
blinded animal or broad based blinded human epidemiological studies that
has ever found a reduction in tooth decay from drinking water with one
part per million fluoride.
5) CDA and ADA have never polled their membership for their
knowledge or opinion of water fluoridation.
The two following examples clearly illustrate the depth and
reliability of dentist's understanding of this controversial issue.
A) Despite the local dental society's recommendation of water
fluoridation, my conversation with the President of the San Diego Dental
Society, Dr. Joel Berick, revealed that he was completely unaware of even
the existence of numerous studies linking water fluoridation to hip fracture.
B) An elderly dentist from Chula Vista took umbrage with my
position opposing water fluoridation. He claimed that, over the last 50
years in his practice, he had personally witnessed the tremendous benefit
of water fluoridation in Chula Vista. When I pointed out that Chula Vista
was a nonfluoridated community, he appeared disoriented and mumbled, "It
had to be the fluoride. Tooth decay is not nearly as prevalent as when
I began to practice 50 years ago."
The above summary is not intended to criticize the dental society,
but rather to place the dental trade organizations endorsements in their
Increasing the fluoride intake of a patient without regard
to established risk factors such as age, kidney function, weight,
physical condition, water consumption, total fluoride intake,
and mitigating dietary
calcium is medical negligence. Although the courts have ruled
that the state has the power to do so under police powers,
mandating fluoridation for 25 Million Californians or the entire city of
View is no less
The first visible sign of this negligence will be a doubling in dental fluorosis.
The cells that produce the collagen matrix, which forms enamel, are poisoned
to the point that they can no longer produce opalescent pearl-like enamel. Fluorotic
enamel is irregular in texture, porous, chalky white to brown in color, and brittle.
In severe cases, the enamel forms incompletely and corners easily break off the
All of the organizations promoting water fluoridation agree that dental
fluorosis, which is the first visible sign of systemic poisoning, increases with
The Legislative Office of Budget Management acknowledges that
drinking water fluoridation would increase disfiguring dental fluorosis, but
of this disease is not covered for children on welfare, calculated that there
would be no additional cost to the state. Clearly they are not considering the
enormous legal liability for physical and psychological damage which accompany
this disfiguring disease.
The fact that the state will not spend money to correct this defect does not
alter the basic truth that fluorosis will have to be treated if the child is
to be happy in our image conscious society.
Let's be clear about what children will be adversely affected. Bottle fed babies
are most likely to develop dental fluorosis. Mothers milk has virtually no fluoride
present. Those children who are deficient in intake of protein, calcium, magnesium,
phosphorous, and Vitamin C are especially vulnerable to fluoride poisoning. The
accumulation of fluoride is greatly increased if the person has impaired kidney
function. In short, the weakest members of our society, the undernourished, the
underfed and the very children that fluoridation was to allegedly benefit. In
poorer communities as much as 80% of the children have fluorosis.
The correction of this permanent disfigurement involves crowns, laminates, bonding,
and bleaching. The physical, psychological, emotional, and financial costs of
the repeated trauma necessary to correct this condition far exceeds any projected
benefit that fluoridation can possibly produce. This is truly a case where the
treatment is worse than the problem.
The incidence of dental fluorosis has steadily increased since the introduction
of fluoride to the drinking water in 1945. Since the introduction of fluoride
containing toothpaste the amount of fluorosis has dramatically risen. Fluoride
tablets which deliver in prescription form the amount of fluoride alleged to
be beneficial for tooth decay, reduction cause dental fluorosis in 64% of the
children (Pebbles 1974). These same tablets if swallowed provide no protection
against decay. If they are chewed and dissolved in the mouth, they do appear
to reduce decay. The effect is topical.
Fluoride has been tested on humans for the purpose of treating osteoporosis.
The theory was that fluoride would strengthen bones. What the researchers found
was that it did increase bone mass; however, the bone was much more brittle --
leading to a dramatic increase in hip fracture. Numerous studies have
long term consumption of fluoridated water to increased risk of hip fracture.
This is not a small matter, it is about life and death. The surgical cost of
repairing a hip fracture is $35,000. 25% of the victims die in the first 30 days.
Only 11% of the victims ever return to independent living. 100% of the victims
are debilitated and few, if any, of the elderly ever regain their former ability
to walk normally. The research clearly shows that water Fluoridation increases
the number of people who will suffer this devastating injury.
Nine of thirteen studies show a correlation between hip fracture and fluoridation,
including four published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in
the last five years. In matters as serious as the health of our nation, no risk
is acceptable if it is avoidable.
Research has shown in numerous studies that fluoride is a mutagen (genetic damage),
a carcinogen (cancer causing), and cancer promoting in laboratory cell studies,
animals, and humans. In 1990 the Congress-ordered National Toxicological Program
(NTP) found bone cancers in male rats.
The test animals, in the words of the board certified pathologists, "were
awash with disease." The high dose animals had kidney failure and cancers
of their lips, cheeks, throats, livers, and bones. The highest rates of cancer
were found in the highest dose animals. The lucky rats and mice that drank the
distilled fluoride free water had no significant disease. When the actual data
indicated a causal relationship between fluoride and bone cancer the NTP down-graded
the results to "equivocal."
Dr. William Marcus, former senior science advisor at the office of drinking
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), concluded that the NTP studies proved
fluoride was a carcinogen
. In July 1997 the National Federation of Federal
Employees. the Union representing all of the scientists, toxicologists and statisticians
at EPA headquarters, also stated that "Our members review of the body of
evidence over the last eleven years, including animal and human epidemiological
studies, indicate a causal link between fluoride/fluoridation and cancer, genetic
damage, neurological impairment, and bone pathology. Of particular concern are
recent epidemiological studies linking fluoride exposure to lower 1.0. in children.
Political protection for fluoride is not new. The Spin Doctors of fluoridation
routinely minimize the peer-reviewed documented scientific research by setting
up biased review committees, which then publish their own opinion claiming that
fluoridation is safe, without regard to the original findings. The US Public
Health Service has been accused of scientific fraud by the National Federation
of Federal Employees over the cover-up of the cancer/fluoride link.
After the NJ Department of Health documented a dramatic increase in bone cancers
in young men who resided in their fluoridated cities, New Jersey Assemblyman
John V. Kelly asked the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the evidence they
relied upon in approving prescription fluoride drops and tablets.
The FDA responded that no application for approval, or studies of safety or effectiveness,
had ever been submitted and that they were not in possession of any such evidence.
Ask yourself for another example of a prescription drug on the United States
market (30 plus years) for which no FDA Application has ever been submitted.
When pressured as to why he did not remove the drops and tablets from the market
Frank R. Fazzari, Chief of Prescription Drug Compliance reportedly expressed
concern for his position and recommended Assemblyman Kelly sue him in order to
have a Federal Judge make him comply with congressional law.
The new Food and Drug required warning should provide some clarification as to
the safety of fluoride. The FDA now requires all toothpaste containing
to have the following warning attached, "WARNING: Keep out of reach of children
under 6 years of age. In case of accidental ingestion, seek professional assistance
or contact a Poison Control Center immediately."
The amount to be used in
brushing is a pea sized amount or about 1 milligram. One liter of water in a
fluoridated community will contain one milligram.
Tooth Decay Costs Savings
All of the recent large scale studies have found no relationship to tooth
and water fluoride levels.
Earlier studies that are often cited by fluoridation
promoters are transparently flawed. The examiners were not standardized or blinded.
There are no randomized controlled blinded studies of animals or humans that
have ever found a reduction in decay from ingesting fluoride. On the contrary,
all of the recent large-scale studies have failed to show any significant reduction.
Studies of fluoride have confirmed that the effect it has on tooth decay reduction
is not systemic. The effect is not produced by swallowing the toxic substance,
but is in fact a topical effect upon the bacteria that live in the mouth and
cause tooth decay. It poisons them. The design of the experiment leaves little
doubt -as to the results. Cavity-prone rats were given fluoride in two ways.
One group got fluoride in the mouth from a time release tablet bonded to the
outer surface of the tooth. The other group got the same amount administered
in a slow pump under the skin. The oral dose of fluoride produced some reduction
in decay over controls, but the systemic exposure did not reduce tooth decay
at all. However, the poisonous nature of fluoride does not change when ingested.
Animals fed sugar-water and fluoride fare no better in terms of tooth decay than
animals fed sugar-water alone. Human tooth decay is linked to diet, sugar
intake, tooth brushing technique, hours of sunlight, parental education, and
These variables must be considered in order to produce accurate results.
In the largest study of tooth decay in America, there was no significant difference
in the decay rates of 39,000 fluoridated, partially fluoridated, and non fluoridated
children, ages 5 to 17, surveyed in that 84 city study. The decayed missing or
filled rate in non-fluoridated Los Angeles was not significantly different than
fluoridated San Francisco. In fact, the lowest decay rate was found in non-fluoridated
Comparing the State of California 1994 non-weighted dental costs for the 14 largest
counties reveals that counties 90% fluoridated spent on average $121.93 per eligible
recipient for treatment of tooth decay, and counties with less than 10% fluoridation
spent only $118.33 per eligible recipient.
Weighted 1995 California per Eligible Welfare Recipient Dental Costs
CA Counties 90 -100 % Fluoridated $125.27
CA Counties 0.5- 10% Fluoridated $107.26
With less than 17% of the state fluoridated, California children have fewer cavities
than the nation as a whole. Where is the alleged proof of safety and effectiveness?
Why are the costs of dental care higher in fluoridated areas?
This public health fraud will result only in increased misery-- kidney disease,
hip fractures, cancers and even death to its many unfortunate victims. Not only
will fluoridation not reduce the dental care costs, it will exponentially increase
the fluorotic damage to underprivileged children.
David C. Kennedy, D.D.S.
Be sure to check out our Pure
Water King 5600 Fluoride Water Filter
for your entire house.
Read Which Countries Reject Water Fluoridation -
Statements from European and other Health, Water, & Environment Authorities on Water Fluoridation
Check out Videos about the dangers of Fluoride - Click Here
 Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride, National Research Council, pg 37,
 D. Christopher Clark. DDS, MPH Appropriate use of fluorides for children:
guidelines from the Canadian Workshop on the Evaluation of Current Recommendations
Concerning Fluorides. J. Canadian Medical Association Vol. 149 #12 (1993)
 J.M. ten Cate & J. D.B. Featherstone Mechanistic Aspects of the Interactions
Between Fluoride and Dental Enamel Critical Reviews in Oral Biology and Medicine
 J. D. Featherstone. The Mechanism of Dental Decay Nutrition Today May 1987
 Riggs BL, Hodson SF, O'fallon WM, et al. Effect of fluoride treatment on
the fracture rate in post menopausal women with osteoporosis. NEJM 1990: 322:802-809
 References for Fact #6
 Marcus Memo May 1 1990
 Letter dated July 2, 1997 to Citizens for Safe Drinking Water
1) Jacobsen SJ, Goldberg J, Miles TP. Brody JA, et al. Regional variation in
the incidence of
hip fractures: U.S. white women aged 65 years and older. JAMA Vol. 264, pp.
2) Cooper C, Wickham CAC, Barker DJR, and Jacobsen SJ. Water fluoridation and
fracture (letter]. JAMA Vol. 266. pp. 513-514, 1991
3) Danielson C, Lyon IL, Egger M, and Goodenough GK. Hip fractures and fluoridation
in Utah's elderly population. JAMA Vol. 268, pp. 746-748 (1992)
4) journal of the American Medical Association Vol. 273, pp. 775-776 (1995)
5) Jacobsen SJ, Goldberg J, Cooper C, and Lockwood SA. The association between
water fluoridation and hip fracture among white women and men aged 65 years
and older: A national ecologic study. Ann Epidemiol 1992: 2:617-226
6) Sowers MFR. Clark MK, Jannausch ML and Wallce RB. A prospective study of
bone mineral content and fracture in communities with differential fluoride
exposure. Am J Epidemiol 1991:133:649-60
7) Keller C. Fluorides in Drinking Water. Paper presented at the Workshop on
Drinking Water Fluoride influence on Hip Fractures and Bone Health. April 10,
1991 1, Bethesda, Md.
8) May, DS and Wilson MG. Hip fractures in relation to water fluoridation:
an ecologic analysis. Presented at the Workshop on Drinking Water Fluoride
Influence on Hip Fractures and Bone Health. April 10, 1991, Bethesda, Md.