Fundraising Update
Since Saturday’s bulletin on state legislation, we were able to raise $2,576 from 34 donors, bringing our current total to $26,083 from 242 donors. We’re incredibly grateful to all who have supported FAN over the years. Together we’ve accomplished a lot. You’ve trusted our vision and strategy this entire time and as a result we’ve pressed ahead with victory after victory. Now, with the 25th anniversary of FAN’s founding approaching, we’re on the brink of ending fluoridation globally. Will we be able to strike the final blow to fluoridation in 2025? I believe so, but only with your help.
As you read about this new study below, I’d like you to know that while the Fluoride Action Network did not fund this research and played no role in collecting or analyzing the data, the authors did ask if FAN could assist with the publishing costs. Since our charitable mission involves education, and because we’re a science-based organization–unlike our opponents–we contributed to this cause, as we have in the past with other groundbreaking research. With your support, we expect to do so again in 2025 with a new in-depth article on the sugar industry’s manipulation of fluoridation science.
NEW DOUBLING CHALLENGE: In an effort to help generate what they called “a Christmas miracle,” a second anonymous “super angel” has offered to double the next $4,500 in donations to help us reach our goal of $140,000 from 700 donors by midnight on December 31st!
MAPLE SYRUP OFFER IS STILL IN EFFECT: Jack Crowther’s fun maple syrup offer is still ongoing! So far 24 supporters have claimed their pint of maple syrup.
- The next 6 people who donate $150 or more from this moment will get a pint of pure Vermont maple syrup.
- And anyone who already donated $150 or more–prior to this offer going live on Thursday–or does so after the first 30 pints have been claimed up until the end of the fundraiser, will be entered into a random drawing for the remaining 10 pints.
How to Make a Tax-Deductible Donation:
You can make your donation online using our new secure fundraising page: https://fluoridealert.networkforgood.com/projects/176427-everyday-giving
Checks can be mailed to:
Fluoride Action Network
PO Box 85
North Sutton, NH 03260
A new study published in the journal Public Health Challenges has found that fluoridation is a major economic drain on society, costing a staggering $556 per person per year. The study, entitled “Community Water Fluoridation a Cost-Benefit-Risk Consideration,” was authored by two dentists, Bill Osmunson, DDS, MPH, and Griffin Cole, DDS.
It’s what I would call a “must read and must share” study because it’s the first ever to include harm from two adverse effects of fluoridation: dental fluorosis and developmental neurotoxicity. For many years, the pro-fluoridation lobby has repeated the talking point that “for every $1 spent on fluoridation, $38 is saved,” and yet the 23 year old study (Griffin et al., 2001) that claim is based on failed to include the well-documented side-effects of the practice, as well other significant costs such as the expensive injection equipment and infrastructure required to fluoridate, or the shortened lifespan of water treatment equipment, the need for additional chemicals such as orthophosphate to reduce the corrosion from fluoridation additives, and emergency response costs incurred during regular spills and overfeeds.
The authors discuss dental fluorosis, saying that “The degree of certainty that ingested fluoride during tooth development causes dental fluorosis is high with strong consensus.” Their analysis includes treatment options and estimated costs for dental fluorosis, but note that “Pain, suffering, time, adverse effects, and treatment failure should be considered but are not included.”
According to two recent studies, the fluorosis rates in the U.S. have continued to climb higher each year. Data from the NHANES 2015-16 survey found that the prevalence of dental fluorosis was 70% in U.S. children according to both (Dong et al., 2021) and (Hung et al., 2023). Dr. Hung’s team also found that in some areas of the U.S.–as measured in the NHANES 2013-14 survey–up to 87.3% of adolescents exhibited some degree of fluorosis.
This new study points out that treatment of fluorosis can last a lifetime, and the EPA “reported a range between $660 and $12,000 per patient (all costs in USA dollars converted to 2021 value). Dental fluorosis may be managed by bleaching, micro-abrasion, resin infiltration, veneering, or full coverage of the tooth such as crowns.”
Dr.’s Osmunson and Cole also note that despite finding a massive economic loss just by looking at two side-effects of the practice, their analysis is just the tip of the iceberg:
“Not all costs are included such as accidental spills and transportation accidents, overfeeds, infrastructure installation and maintenance, costs to avoid fluoridation, land issues, reasonable employee wages, benefits, training, supplies, research promoting and opposing fluoridation, defending against challenges to fluoridation, and costs to treat and compensate for adverse health effects.”
The authors also go into depth in regard to the latest neurotoxicity research, and highlight the National Toxicology Program’s systematic review of fluoride and damage to the developing brain. They conclude that “There is reasonable agreement and consistency that fluoride is a developmental neurotoxin.”
The authors conclude that “Alternatives for the prevention of dental caries should be promoted, and the cessation of fluoridation is indicated.”
This study is another major blow to fluoridation and to one of the primary talking points used by proponents of the practice. The case it makes against fluoridation becomes even more apparent when you factor in recent studies on the efficacy, or lack thereof, of fluoridation. A recent review by the Cochrane Collaboration found less than a 4% reduction in tooth decay from fluoridation.
The 2024 LOTUS study, which included over 6 million adults in England, was the largest, strongest study of fluoridation effectiveness in adults ever done and found virtually no benefit: a lifetime reduction in decay of only 2%. An accompanying economic analysis for the LOTUS study found the meager dental bill savings would be worth only about $1 a year per person; not enough to buy a single cup of coffee. Furthermore, the LOTUS analysis did not consider the capital costs of new fluoridation schemes, let alone the cost of adverse effects like reduced IQ and dental fluorosis.
The LOTUS study was also proceeded by a large 10-year fluoridation study in the northwest of England, called the CATFISH study, which concluded that fluoridation’s effects on tooth decay in children are “very modest” and “much smaller than previous studies have reported” [Goodwin 2022]. The CATFISH study found, at best, marginal dental and economic benefits.
This new cost analysis by Osmunson and Cole should be the final wrecking ball for the house of cards of weak arguments that dental interests have promoted to try to sell fluoridation for decades.
Thank you for your support,
Stuart Cooper
Executive Director