Fluoride in water a debated benefit

While doctors support the move for the common good; opponents say it's a matter of personal choice

It's the old question of personal choice versus government involvement.

On one side, people attack the notion of having the government decide to put fluoride in the water supply. On the other side, experts say that same water supply, properly fluoridated can save citizens a bundle of money in dental care.

Fluoride, a chemical compound, has been declared by experts as a helpful element in combating a variety of dental ailments such as tooth decay. Doctors and dentists have pushed for its controlled insertion in America's drinking water.

Still, in an era of bioterrorism threats and government deregulation, a slice of the citizenry is not all that enthusiastic about having anybody put anything in the water, even if it is, as doctors insist, for better health.

"There are financial concerns and homeland concerns," said Dr. Alex Brzezny, a health officer with the Grant County Health District. "The perception is such that if you add fluoride to the system, you can add other chemicals."

That, Brzezny said is an unfounded concern, adding that if anybody wanted to introduce something now, people would be guarding the water supply.

Nowadays, the amount of fluoride varies from town to town. The low levels in Soap Lake and Quincy, around the 0.25 parts per liter mark fluctuate along with the higher rates in Moses Lake, most of which range around the desired levels, which are between 0.8 parts per liter to 1.3 parts per liter.

Other worries regarding fluoride have more to do with the desire of some to keep government away from people's lives.

Dr. Craig Harder, from Moses Lake Family Dentistry said that the argument is one of fluoride application infringing on someone's rights.

"I believe government should stay out of most things," he said.

However, Harder said, the difference between cost and benefit of fluoridating the water is too great to pass up.

Harder said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have estimated that for every dollar spent by the state, $80 are saved in dental treatments.

For Brzezny and other doctors, opposing the application of fluorine is not consistent with the presence of other chemicals in the food supply, which the public does not oppose.

"There's thiamine in cereal, there's vitamin D in milk," he said. "There's iodine in salt. "Some issues are similar when it comes to deciding the common good."

Studies showing carcinogenous growth in rats consuming large intakes of fluoride do not concern area doctors either.

"Sure (fluoride) is a poison," said Dr. Finley Grant, a dentist in Moses Lake. "Salt is a poison too if you eat large quantities of it."

Dr. Grant said that the same way a small bit of salt adds flavor to your food without harming your health, a small bit of fluoride in your water strengthens your teeth and bones without causing major damage.

Too much fluoride can cause, among other things, a disease known as fluorosis, which causes brittle bones and discoloration in the teeth. These, however, are long-term effects.

In a meeting with leaders of Grant County cities and towns last week, Brzezny said that national and county authorities on the subject are aware of these concerns, and still are recommending adding the chemical to the water supply.

"It's not just adding," he corrected, noting that most water sources contain fluoride in varying amounts. "It's optimizing."

Harder said that more affluent areas do not have a great need for fluoride in their water. However, that is not the case in the Basin.

Harder said that areas with lower-income families, there is a high rate of decay, costing these families as much as $2,000 per child to control it.

"In areas like ours," he said, "there is a necessity."