Vulnerable Populations

Vulnerable populations refers to specific groups and individuals who are more likely to experience detrimental effects from fluoride exposure than others in the general population.

Prenatal Exposure To Fluoride

“I would advise them (pregnant women) to drink bottled water or filtered water…” - Dimitri Christakis, MD, MPH, JAMA Pediatrics Editor in Chief 

Infant Exposure To Fluoride

What You Need to Know:

• The Mother-Offspring Studies: These studies tested the urinary fluoride levels of the pregnant woman and then paired those findings with the cognitive tests of her offspring. The higher the level of fluoride in the urine, the lower the IQ in the offspring. In each of these studies, the IQ of the offspring from women living in fluoridated communities was lower than women living in non-fluoridated communities. See also the 2018 Canadian national survey of urinary fluoride levels in pregnant women.
• New Understandings: Read the five scientific discoveries that finally prompted pro-fluoride dental organizations to publicly recognize the problems with exposing infants to fluoride.
• New Recommendations: See the new recommendations from pro-fluoride organizations and researchers on fluoride exposure during infancy.
• 5 Ways to Protect Your Child: Learn the five most important things you can do to protect a newborn child from fluoride.

Call to Action:

• The Fluoride Action Network is currently working with individuals and organizations throughout the United States to pass legislation on both the state and city level requiring public disclosure of the the risks that fluoridated water poses to infants. In 2012, FAN helped persuade the State of New Hampshire to pass by a landslide vote a bill requiring water departments in the state to notify consumers of the fluorosis risk posed by infant consumption of fluoridated water. To learn more and contribute to FAN’s effort on this project, click here.
• The Moms2B campaign was launched in April 2018 to advise pregnant women to avoid fluoride, particularly fluoridated water, because of the potential for harm to the brain of the fetus.  Read more about the campaign here. Please join us. 

Fluoride Hypersensitivity

Some individuals are hypersensitive to fluoride. According to the Physician’s Desk Reference:

“In hypersensitive individuals, fluorides occasionally cause skin eruptions such as atopic dermatitis, eczema or urticaria. Gastric distress, headache and weakness have also been reported. These hypersensitivity reactions usually disappear promptly after discontinuation of the fluoride.”

Hypersensitive reactions have been reported for both topical fluorides (e.g., toothpaste) and systemic fluorides (e.g., fluoride supplements and fluoridated water).

Hypersensitive Reactions to Systemic Fluorides:

In the 1950s, the renowned allergist George Waldbott discovered that some individuals are hypersensitive to ingested fluoride. In a series of case reports and double-blind studies, Waldbott and other doctors found that relatively small doses of ingested fluoride, including the consumption of fluoridated water, could induce side effects that would quickly reverse after ceasing fluoride exposure. Consistent with Waldbott’s research, the largest ever government-funded clinical trial of fluoride supplements reported that one percent of the children taking the 1 mg fluoride tablets exhibited hypersensitive reactions. Read more

More recently, a Finnish study found that the rate of skin rashes in a city population decreased significantly within months of the city terminating its water fluoridation program. Although the authors were generally skeptical that fluoridated water could cause harm, they noted that: 

“the significant decrease in the number of other skin rashes leaves room for speculation, seeming to favor the view that a small segment of the population may have some kind of intolerance to fluoride. This group of people should be studied further. The most frequently reported symptoms that disappeared from the time of actual to known discontinuation of fluoridation seemed to be itching and dryness of the skin.” SOURCE: Lamberg M, et al. (1997). Symptoms experienced during periods of actual and supposed water fluoridation. Community Dentistry & Oral Epidemiology 25(4):291-5.

Hypersensitive Reactions to Topical Fluorides:

Studies have documented adverse skin reactions from the use of topical fluoride products, including toothpaste. These skin reactions include perioral dermatitis, stomatitis, and urticaria. Although many dermatologists now consider fluoride toothpaste to be a common cause of perioral dermatitis, the dental community has remained conspicuously silent on the issue, and has conducted virtually no research. Read more

The possibility that topical fluorides can provoke inflammtory skin disorders gains is supported by carefully controlled studies on animals. When topical fluoride has been applied to the skin of rabbits or rats, inflammation has been repeatedly noted when the skin is cut or damaged prior to the application. Read more

Low Income

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).

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?

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.”

Workplace Exposure

Fluoride is a common air contaminant in industrial workplaces. As a result, workers in many heavy industries, including the aluminum, fertilizer, iron, oil refining, semi-conductor, and steel industries, can be routinely exposed to high levels of fluoride exposure. Since fluoride is also a common element of fluxes used in welding, welders are commonly exposed to airborne fluorides as well.

Inhaling airborne fluorides is not only a significant risk factor for respiratory disease; it can be a huge daily source fluoride intake. Under current regulations, industries are allowed to have 2.5 mg/m3 of fluoride in the air, which produces “a fluoride intake of 16.8 mg/day for an 8-hour working day.” (NRC, 2006).

With the downsizing of U.S. heavy industries, it is unclear how many workers are currently exposed to airborne fluorides. In the 1970s, however, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) estimated that 350,000 American workers, in 92 occupations, had potential exposure. (Hodge, 1977).

Workplace exposure to fluoride continues to be a pressing concern for occupational health and safety. By examining the sources and levels of exposure, we can develop informed strategies to protect workers and mitigate associated health risks.