Site Map | Contact Us

latest news and info

(07/09/08) A responce to the Chief Dental Officer's 'Dear Colleague' letter of guidance has been posted in Reports.
Read more.


(23/06/08) Isle of Man has announced on 12th June that it will not be fluoridating its water supply
Read more.


(29/04/08) Response to Council on Bioethics report (Public health: ethical issues - November 2007)
Read more.


(09/02/08) Secretary of State calls for more fluoridation.
Read more.


(16/08/07) After a few technical problems this week, we're now back online.


(29/12/06) The Reports and Archive sections have been updated with further documents and links


(07/12/06) The official All Party Parliamentary Group Against Fluoridation website is online. Visit us at appgaf.org.uk.


(07/12/06) Confused about the issues surrounding water fluoridation? Check our FAQ's section for the answers


(07/12/06) If you are a Group or organisation related to fluoridation and want to be added to our Links on this site, please Contact Us

Professor Trevor Sheldon's open letter

Department of Health Studies
Innovation Centre
York Science Park
University Road
York YO10 5DG

3/1/2001

In my capacity of chair of the Advisory Group for the systematic review on the effects of water fluoridation recently conducted by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination the University of York and as its founding director, I am concerned that the results of this review have been widely misrepresented. The review was exceptional in this field in that it was conducted by an independent group to the highest international scientific standards and a summary has been published in the British Medical Journal. It is particularly worrying then that statements which mislead the public about the review's findings have been made in press releases and briefings by the British Dental Association, British Medical Association, the National Alliance for Equity in Dental Health and the British Fluoridation Society. I should like to correct some of these errors:

1. Whilst there is evidence that water fluoridation is effective at reducing caries, the quality of the studies was generally moderate and the size of the estimated benefit, only of the order of 15%, is far from "massive".

2. The review found water fluoridation to be significantly associated with high levels of dental fluorosis which was not characterised as "just a cosmetic issue".

3. The review did not show water fluoridation to be safe. The quality of the research was too poor to establish with confidence whether or not there are potentially important adverse effects in addition to the high levels of fluorosis. The report recommended that more research was needed.

4. There was little evidence to show that water fluoridation has reduced social inequalities in dental health.

5. The review could come to no conclusion as to the cost-effectiveness of water fluoridation or whether there are different effects between natural or artificial fluoridation.

6. Probably because of the rigour with which this review was conducted, these findings are more cautious and less conclusive than in most previous reviews.

7. The review team was surprised that in spite of the large number of studies carried out over several decades there is a dearth of reliable evidence with which to inform policy. Until high quality studies are undertaken providing more definitive evidence, there will continue to be legitimate scientific controversy over the likely effects and costs of water fluoridation.

SIGNED,
Professor Trevor Sheldon MSc MSc DSc FMedSci

All Party Parliamentary Group Against Fluoridation website, copyright © 2006-2008
appgaf.org.uk | Contact Us | Validates the XHTML of this page | Validates the CSS of this page