Fw: How fluoridation increases dental inequalities.

[Guest guest]

>X

> " Namaste Publishing " <info

> " Namaste Publishing " <info

><Undisclosed-Recipient:;>

>Fw: How fluoridation increases dental inequalities.

>Wed, 6 Aug 2008 23:19:51 +0100

>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138

>X-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;

>

>

>-

>Wednesday, August 06, 2008 10:24 AM

>Veneering of teeth-Tony Lees

>

>Please circulate as far as possible.

>

>-\

--\

----

>

>

>

>How fluoridation increases dental inequalities.

>

>Dr Tony Lees BDS.

>

>Advisor to UK Councils Against Fluoridation.

>

>

>

>In a letter from the Department of Health to

>chief Executives of SHA's and PCT's in February

>2008 addressed to " Dear Colleague " it's

>statement " How fluoridation offers a realistic

>option of reducing health inequalities " could be

>challenged. It is relatively easy to research

>the damage to teeth by fluoridation and the

>financial cost and suffering to the patient with

>even moderate dental fluorosis lasts for the

>rest of their lives. The York Review estimated

>that 12.5% of people in fluoridated areas would

>develop dental fluorosis that would require

>cosmetic dentistry which means that one in eight

>of the population in a fluoridated area that

>breaks down to 3 or 4 children in every class in all schools.

>

>

>

>One of UK Councils Against Fluoridation’s dental

>advisors Dr Tony Lees has long been veneering

>teeth to hide the damage caused by dental

>fluorosis, with his valuable experience in this

>field of dentistry he says ........

>

>

>

> " No one should veneer teeth until the teeth

>have fully erupted which is not until the person

>reaches 21 years of age. To veneer at age 18 to

>20 leaves a risk that there could be a gap

>between the veneer and the gum which would be

>unsightly. After 19 years of age the patient has

>to pay the full cost of what is considered

>cosmetic dentistry. Free veneers on the NHS are non existent.

>

>

>

>The present day cost of veneers is in the region

>of £400 plus per tooth and their expected

>lifespan is between 5 to 7 years. Enamel is

>formed by ameloblasts in childhood, some die off

>when excess fluoride from fluoridated water,

>toothpaste, drops etc, displace calcium in the enamel.

>

>

>

>Care has to be taken not to breach the

>ameloblast/dentinoblast junction, as this can

>damage the pulp of the tooth, by damaging the

>non-myelinated nerve axons at the enamel dentine

>junction. When the tooth enamel has been pitted

>by fluoride, fluorosis caries has to be

>removed, and the surrounding area made

>caries-free before the tooth can be veneered.

>The veneered tooth must be aligned correctly

>with the other teeth which often includes more removal of enamel. .

>

>

>

>In this process, the dentist has to be careful

>not to expose too much dentine. If dentine is

>damaged the tooth can die causing pain and

>necessitating root canal therapy or extraction.

>This complication has affected myself as a nerve

>died after having most of the enamel removed to

>place a veneer, after much pain the tooth had to be root filled.

>

>

>

>When the veneer needs to be replaced it has to

>be re-drilled and ground off, this removes yet

>another layer of tooth enamel. The exposed

>surface of the remaining enamel needs to be

>prepared to accept the adhesive and the new

>veneer, so the enamel becomes progressively

>thinner. Obviously there is a limit to how many

>times a tooth can be re-veneered then the only

>treatment left would be a full jacket crown. "

>

>

>

>What does this mean for young people who develop

>disfiguring fluorosis? SInce children cannot

>have veneers fitted until they are adult,

>throughout their childhood and teen years they

>will simply have to 'grin and bear it',

>suffering the comments of their playmates and

>rejection during their first teenage romances.

>

>

>

>By the time they are old enough for veneers -

>their early twenties - free treatment is no

>longer available on the NHS, and they will have

>to find the money for treatment in the private

>sector. But around half of those needing this

>treatment will be at University, and already

>building up huge financial debts during their

>study years. The added burden of costly and

>avoidable dental treatment at this time is

>hardly the 'reduction in social inequalities' on

>which the Chief Dental Officer and others

>attempt to sell fluoridation to an unsuspecting public.

>

>

>

>In conclusion, it appears obvious that instead

>of reducing health inequalities water

>fluoridation actually increases them, and this

>is especially the case for socially deprived

>families and individuals. Secretary of State for

>Health, the Rt. Hon. Alan Johnson MP claims that

>fluoridation is " giving poor kids rich kids

>teeth " . In fact it does exactly the opposite

>- it actually condemns 1 in 8 of the population

>to a lifetime of paying for completely avoidable cosmetic dentistry.

>

>

>

>And remember this too - in any mixed ethnic

>population, children of African origin are twice

>as likely tp develop fluorosis as white

>children, and the condition is generally more

>severe, This inevitably implies that some ethnic

>communities might be more severely discriminated

>against by this practice than others. It is not

>absence of fluoride that leads to dental health

>inequalities, but absence of access to dentists

>and to an adequate diet - even in

>long-fluoridated Detroit over 95% of the poor

>black community have bad teeth - fluoride does

>NOT solve the problem, it only makes it worse!

>

>

>

>These unreported consequences of

>indiscriminately exposing entire populations to

>district or regional water fluoridation projects

>would impose an unacceptable new financial

>burden on the poor of this country, many

>of whom cannot afford this expensive treatment.

>This is a splendid example of the 'law of

>unintended consequences', and one that we ignore at our peril.

>

>

>

>

>

>