Fluoride Action Network

JADA study proves fluoridation is money down the drain

Source: PRNewswire-USNewswire | Contact: Paul Beeber, Esq 516-433-8882, nyscof@aol.com
Posted on September 29th, 2009

NEW YORK, Sept. 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Children’s cavity rates are similar whether water is fluoridated or not, according to data published in the July 2009 Journal of the American Dental Association by dentist J.V. Kumar of the NY State Health Department(1), reports NYSCOF.

In 2008, New York City spent approximately $24 million on water fluoridation ($5 million on fluoride chemicals)(1a). In 2010, NYC’s fluoride chemicals will cost $9 million(1b).

Fluoride in water at “optimal” levels (0.7 – 1.2 mg/L) is supposed to reduce tooth decay without creating excessive fluorosis (fluoride-discolored and/or damaged teeth). Yet cavities are rampant in NY’s fluoridated populations(1c).

Attempting to prove that fluorosed teeth have fewer cavities, Kumar uses 1986-1987 National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) data which, upon analysis, shows that 7- to 17-year-olds have similar cavity rates in their permanent teeth whether their water supply is fluoridated or not (Table 1).

In 1990, using the same NIDR data, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis published equally surprising results in a peer-reviewed journal. He concluded, “No statistically significant differences were found in the decay rates of permanent teeth or the percentages of decay-free children in the F [fluoridated], NF [non-fluoridated], and PF [partially fluoridated] areas.”(2).

Kumar divided children into four groups based on their community’s water fluoride levels:

• Less than 0.3 mg/L where 55.5% had cavities

• From 0.3 to 0.7 mg/L where 54.6% had cavities

• Optimal 0.7 to 1.2 mg/L where 54.4% had cavities

• Over 1.2 mg/L where 56.4% had cavities

“Dr. Kumar’s published data exposes more evidence that fluoridation doesn’t reduce tooth decay,” says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation.

“It’s criminal to waste taxpayers’ money on fluoridation, while exposing entire populations unnecessarily to fluoride’s health risks, especially when local and state governments are attempting to balance budgets by cutting essential services,” says Beeber.

Analysis of Kumar’s data: http://tinyurl.com/MoneyDownTheDrain

More information about fluoride and tooth decay:


1) Iida H, Kumar JV. 2009. The association between enamel fluorosis and dental caries in U.S. schoolchildren. Journal of the American Dental Association 140(7):855-62. Table 1. July.

1a) http://www.scribd.com/doc/18235930/NYC-Fluoridation-Costs-2008-Feb-2-2009-Letter-Page-1

1b) http://www.council.nyc.gov/html/budget/PDFs/fy_10_exec_budget_dept_enviro_protection.pdf

1c) http://www.freewebs.com/fluoridation/fluoridationfailsnewyork.htm

2) Yiamouyiannis JA. 1990. Water fluoridation and tooth decay: results from the 1986-1987 National Survey of US Schoolchildren. Fluoride 23(2):55-67. April.