Current data shows that water fluoridation disproportionately harms low-income and minority communities. In response to this data, a growing number of civil rights advocates have begun calling for a moratorium on fluoridation programs. This includes LULAC (the largest Hispanic civil rights organization), Andrew Young (the former Mayor of Atlanta and Ambassador to the United Nations), and Reverend Bernice King (the daughter of Dr. Martin Luther King). Water fluoridation has, in short, become an issue of environmental justice.
What Is Environmental Justice?
The Delegates to the First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, held in October 1991 in Washington DC, adopted 17 principles of Environmental Justice. These principles continue to embody the true meaning of Environmental Justice (commonly known as EJ). The following appears on an EJ website:
Environmental equity: Poison people equally
Environmental justice: Stop poisoning people, period.
Environmental racism is the disproportionate impact of environmental hazards on people of color. Environmental justice is the movement’s response to environmental racism. “Environmental equity” is not environmental justice. “Environmental equity” is the government’s response to the demands of the environmental justice movement. Government agencies, like the EPA, have been coopting the movement by redefining environmental justice as “fair treatment and meaningful involvement,” something they consistently fail to accomplish, but which also falls far short of the environmental justice vision. The environmental justice movement isn’t seeking to simply redistribute environmental harms, but to abolish them.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “Environmental Justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.” The EPA has set this as a “goal for all communities and persons across this Nation.” Environmental justice will only be achieved
“when everyone enjoys the same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards and equal access to the decision-making process to have a healthy environment in which to live, learn, and work.” (EPA 2011).
Low-Income Communities at Heightened Risk of Fluoride Toxicity
Low-income communities are more susceptible to fluoride’s toxicity for several reasons. Health conditions that render people more vulnerable to fluoride exposure (e.g., kidney disease and diabetes) are more prevalent among low-income populations. Nutrient deficiencies are also more prevalent and voluminous research spanning back to the 1930s clearly shows that populations with nutrient deficiencies are harmed by fluoride exposures otherwise safe for the general population. As but one example, a 1952 study in the Journal of the American Dental Association warned:
“The data from this and other investigations suggest that malnourished infants and children, especially if deficient in calcium intake, may suffer from the effects of water containing fluorine while healthy children would remain unaffected…Thus low levels of fluoride ingestion which are generally considered to be safe for the general population may not be safe for malnourished infants and children. Therefore, the nutritional status must be carefully assessed and guarded in areas with endemic fluorosis. Nutritional studies should be included in any comprehensive program of fluoridation of water with special attention to chronically ailing infants and children.” (Massler & Schour 1952).
Communities of Color Are Being Disproportionately Harmed
In 2005, the Centers for Disease Control published the results of a national survey of dental fluorosis conducted between 1999 and 2002. The survey’s results show that black children suffer significantly higher rates of dental fluorosis than children from other racial groups. Dental fluorosis is a defect of teeth enamel caused by too much fluoride exposure, which can cause disfiguring stains and pitting on the teeth. Not only do black children suffer higher rates of fluorosis, they suffer more severe forms of the condition. The CDC’s national survey found that the rate of the most disfiguring form of fluorosis (i.e., moderate/severe fluorosis) is nearly twice as high in the black community as the white community. Moderate/severe fluorosis can cause widespread brown stains, and can lead to erosion and deterioration of the teeth.
The CDC’s national survey is not the first time that black children have been found to suffer higher rates of dental fluorosis. Indeed, the nation’s first pilot study of water fluoridation in Grand Rapids, Michigan, reported that black children suffered dental fluorosis at twice the rate of which white children. (Russell 1962). Other studies in Texas, New York, Georgia, and Indiana, have reported similar results. (Martinez-Mier 2010; Kumar 1999, 2000; Williams 1990; Butler 1985). In the Indiana study, over 12% of the surveyed black children in fluoridated Indianapolis were found to have “a definite physical defect” of the teeth as a result of fluoride exposure, whereas no such defect was found among the surveyed white children. (Martinez-Mier 2010). Similarly, the Georgia study found that 0ver 16% of the black children in fluoridated Augusta were found to have moderate/severe fluorosis, versus 9% of the white children.
Fluoride Risks Factors in the Black Community
There are several possible explanations for why the black community is being disproportionately impacted by fluoride exposures. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the increased risk could be the result of either “biologic susceptibility or greater fluoride intake.” (CDC 2005). Risk factors for fluoride toxicity in the black community include: high rates of infant formula use; reduced milk consumption due to a high prevalence of lactose intolerance; depressed nutrient intake (including calcium and anti-oxidants) vis-a-vis other racial groups; high levels of lead exposure; and higher rates of health conditions (e.g., kidney disease and diabetes) that render the body more vulnerable to fluoride intake. To learn more about these risk factors, click here.
Civil Rights Leaders Demand Answers
Due to evidence showing that fluoridation disproportionately harms low-income and minority populations, Atlanta Civil Rights leaders recently requested that Georgia legislators repeal the state’s mandatory water fluoridation law. According to Dr. Gerald Durley, a psychologist, pastor, and environmentalist:
“I support the holding of Fluoridegate hearings at the state and national level so we can learn . . . why our government agencies haven’t told the black community openly that fluorides disproportionately harm black Americans.”
According to Atlanta’s former mayor, Andrew Young, who served as Ambassador to the U.N. during the Clinton Administration:
“I am most deeply concerned for poor families who have babies: if they cannot afford unfluoridated water for their babies milk formula, do their babies not count? Of course they do. This is an issue of fairness, civil rights, and compassion. We must find better ways to prevent cavities, such as helping those most at risk for cavities obtain access to the services of a dentist.”
In 2011 the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) passed a resolution opposing fluoridation as “forced mass medication of the public drinking supplies” because it “violates civil rights.” In its resolution, LULAC “demands to know why government agencies entrusted with protecting the public health are more protective of the policy of fluoridation than they are of public health” (LULAC, 2011).
Fluoridation Is Not “Dental Care”
It is well known that tooth decay is concentrated in low-income communities. Although public health officials promote water fluoridation as a means of helping the poor, the sober truth is that the vast majority of urban areas in the United States have been fluoridated for decades and yet this has not prevented the low-income neighborhoods in these areas from suffering what numerous state and local health officials describe as an “oral health crisis.” It is has become obvious, therefore, that the addition of cheap industrial chemicals to the water supply has never been, and will never be, an effective form of “dental care.” Read more.
Race and Poverty issues of exposures to other fluoride chemicals
Hydrofluoric acid is one of ten chemicals mentioned in this report.
“The new research presented in this report finds that residents of chemical facility vulnerability zones are disproportionately Black (African American) or Latino, have higher rates of poverty than the U.S. as a whole, and have lower housing values, incomes, and education levels than the national average. The disproportionate or unequal danger is sharply magnified in the “fenceline” areas nearest the facilities.”
Who’s in Danger? Race, Poverty, and Chemical Disasters. A demographic analysis of chemical disaster vulnerability zones. May 2014. Environmental Justice and Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform.
New Facts on Fluoridation
[NOTE: The first quarter of this article from SATURDAY REVIEW - which is not reproduced below - covers the findings of a 1965 paper from the journal Archives of Internal Medicine, authored by Dr. Donald Taves of the University of Rochester. In the paper, Taves documented high levels of fluoride
Risk Factors for Fluoride Toxicity in the Black Community
There are several risk factors for fluoride toxicity that are occur at elevated rates in the black community. These risk factors include: Reduced nutrient intake; Higher levels of lead exposure; Higher prevalence of health conditions that render the body more vulnerable to fluoride intake; and Higher intakes of fluoride.
Civil Rights Leaders Call for Halt to Water Fluoridation
Because fluoride can disproportionately harm poor citizens and black families, Atlanta civil rights leaders, Andrew Young and Dr. Gerald Durley, have asked Georgia legislators to repeal the state’s mandatory water fluoridation law.
Kidney Patients Are at Increased Risk of Fluoride Poisoning
It is well established that individuals with kidney disease are susceptible to suffering bone damage and other ill effects from low levels of fluoride exposure. Kidney patients are at elevated risk because when kidneys are damaged they are unable to efficiently excrete fluoride from the body. As a result, kidney patients
Unheeded Warnings: Government Health Authorities Ignore Fluoride Risk for Kidney Patients
Despite the well known fact that individuals with kidney disease are at much higher risk of fluoride toxicity than the general population, there has yet to be any attempt in the United States, or any other country that practices mass-scale water fluoridation to determine the prevalence of fluoride-related effects (e.g.,
Fluoridation, Dialysis & Osteomalacia
In the 1960s and 1970s, doctors discovered that patients receiving kidney dialysis were accumulating very high levels of fluoride in their bones and blood, and that this exposure was associated with severe forms of osteomalacia, a bone-softening disease that leads to weak bones and often excruciating bone pain. Based on
LULAC's Resolution Opposing Water Fluoridation
The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the nation's largest Hispanic civil rights organization, has adopted a resolution calling for an end to water fluoridation.
America's Dental Care Crisis
In the United States, low-income communities throughout the country are suffering from what many are calling an "oral health crisis." Fluoridating water supplies is not a solution to this problem, as evident by the fact that oral health crises are occurring in virtually all urban areas -- the vast majority of which have been
Related Miscellaneous Content: