Connect with us

Published

on

The debate around whether fluoride should be added to tap water is not new.

The practice, which is aimed at reducing tooth decay, has been ongoing for 60 years.

But since fluoride toothpaste became more widely available around the 1970s, more questions have been raised about whether adding it to the drinking supply is still necessary.

And with Donald Trump’s health secretary pick Robert F Kennedy Jr saying he would ban it, the issue has entered public debate yet again.

Despite RFK being well known for his outlandish views on public health, it seems the fluoridation issue isn’t one that can be totally dismissed.

One study in the US has linked fluoride to a lowering of children’s IQs, while another in the UK has questioned its overall effectiveness when added to water.

So what is fluoride, what do experts say – and what’s the story in the UK?

More on Health

What is fluoride and what does it do?

It’s a natural mineral found in rocks, which leaches into soil, rivers and lakes.

It helps dental health by strengthening the tooth enamel, making it more resistant to tooth decay, and also reduces the amount of acid the bacteria on your teeth produce, according to the Oral Health Foundation.

Fluoride is known to be particularly beneficial for children’s teeth, as past studies have suggested ingesting it during the period of tooth development makes the enamel more resistant to later acid attacks and subsequent development of tooth decay.

Dr Kunal Patel, who has been a private and NHS dentist for 15 years, told Sky News the benefit of fluoride is “drilled into” dental students, adding there are “scientifically proven benefits of having fluoride within your oral hygiene regime”.

Fluoride is essentially a passive way of protecting your teeth, he says.

“If you decide not to use fluoride then the technique of brushing your teeth, your flossing and other methods of cleaning have to be that much better,” he adds.

How do we get fluoride?

Almost all water contains some naturally occurring fluoride, but it’s normally not enough to prevent tooth decay.

Some areas do have water supplies where the amount of fluoride is naturally at a high level – a point that will be covered later.

We get trace amounts of fluoride from much of our food and drink, but brewed tea in particular proves a big source because tea plants take up fluoride from soil.

Most toothpastes now contain fluoride to give you extra protection from decay.

When did adding it to the water supply become a thing?

Many oral health experts believe adding fluoride to water – an act known as fluoridation – is the most effective way to widely reduce dental problems, particularly in underprivileged regions.

The practice began in 1945 in Grand Rapids, Michigan, after scientists noticed that people had less tooth decay in areas with naturally higher fluoride levels in the tap water.

It was first added to the water supply in England in 1964, when a pilot scheme was launched in Birmingham.

Over the years it’s been rolled out to about 75% of America’s population, compared to about 10% of England.

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates some 400 million people in 25 countries are getting artificially fluoridated water, while about 50 million have naturally occurring fluoride at the same level as the artificial schemes.

What is the ideal amount of fluoride in water?

The WHO recommends a maximum level of 1.5mg per litre.

In its guidelines, it says the level is aimed at creating a middle ground where tooth decay is minimised, but the risk of dental fluorosis and skeletal fluorosis is too.

Dental fluorosis is a common cosmetic condition caused by ingesting too much fluoride during tooth development, and can leave white flecks, spots or lines on teeth.

Skeletal fluorosis, a much rarer occurrence, is a chronic metabolic bone and joint disease caused by ingesting large amounts of fluoride.

The UK government aims for fluoride levels of 1mg per litre in drinking water, while the level of fluoride is kept at about 0.7mg per litre in the US.

Potential danger to children’s IQs

Fluoridation has been a contentious subject in the US, with more than 100 lawsuits over the years trying to get rid of it without success, according to the American Fluoridation Society, an advocacy group.

And the anti-fluoride group Fluoride Action Network says more than 150 towns and counties across the US have voted to keep fluoride out of public water systems or to stop adding it.

But the movement against it really gained momentum earlier this year when a US government report concluded that fluoride in drinking water at twice the recommended limit was linked with lower IQ in children.

The report, based on an analysis of previously published research, said it reached its conclusion “with moderate confidence”.

It cited a 2019 study, published in the well-respected journal JAMA Pediatrics, which found that IQ levels were slightly lower in three and four-year-old children whose mothers had higher measures of fluoride in their urine when they were pregnant.

A federal judge in California used the report to order the nation’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to strengthen its regulations on fluoridation in September, saying the current levels were posing an unreasonable risk to children.

The judge stressed that he was not concluding with certainty that fluoridated water endangered public health, but rather that it poses a risk.

Questions over fluoride’s effectiveness

In the UK, while the government is reviewing plans to raise fluoride levels for millions and roll it out into more areas of England, a major review has suggested fluoridation may only have a “modest” benefit.

Academics at Manchester, Dundee and Aberdeen universities compared 157 studies looking at the effect of fluoridation on the dental health of communities.

When the government began adding fluoride to tap water, it reduced the number of decayed, missing or filled teeth by two whole teeth on average among children with their baby teeth, researchers said.

However, once fluoride toothpaste became widely available, that number declined.

Now, it is equivalent to a reduction of a “quarter of a tooth” that is decayed, missing or filled, on average.

“Water fluoridation is only having a modest benefit on dental caries, and those benefits may take years to be realised,” said Professor Anne-Marie Glenny, of the University of Manchester, who co-authored the paper.

Could it actually be scrapped in the US?

Mr Kennedy Jr has claimed Mr Trump will push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office, referring to it as “industrial waste” in a statement on X.

He also claimed fluoride was associated with arthritis, bone fractures, bone cancer, neurodevelopmental disorders and thyroid disease.

While there have been studies regarding some of those claims, none of them have been conclusive.

After the comments, Mr Trump told Sky News’ US partner NBC News that while he had not spoken to his health secretary pick about trying to scrap fluoride yet, “it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible”.

The decision on whether or not add fluoride to water is ultimately made by state and local health authorities, so Mr Trump’s government can only advise them to stop it.

‘It’s about risk vs benefit’

Stephen Peckham, professor of health policy at the University of Kent, previously led a study on fluoridation’s potential links to hypothyroidism – an underactive thyroid – and is now part of a research team investigating whether it could be causing IQ issues within the UK’s population.

He tells Sky News he accepts fluoride can be beneficial, but adds it is not a necessity, especially in water.

“We know that ingested fluoride is not an effective way of preventing tooth decay,” he says. “If you want to have fluoride, put it on your toothbrush and clean your teeth with it. It needs to be applied to the tooth and not swallowed.”

He says that while the benefit is limited, the children’s IQ study carried out in the US highlights a need for caution.

“What we do know is that ingesting fluoride does have a neurologic, neurotoxic effect. What’s less certain is at what level of fluoride that begins.

“The judge is saying, well, in that case, shouldn’t we be more careful? And limit in particular pregnant women’s access to fluoridated water or consumption of fluoridated water.

“And your maximum of fluoride depends on how much you drink. So if you drink more, you get more.”

It’s about the “balance of risk and benefit”, he says.

“But if there’s not much benefit, should you have any risk? The answer is no, you shouldn’t.”

‘Stick to the most deprived regions’

Dr Kunal Patel, who owns six private dental clinics in Surrey, including one for children only, says fluoridation was “great in a time where there was less education and less access to fluoride in toothpaste”.

He adds that before the IQ study came out, he would have been happy to see fluoride being added to any area in the UK because he’d have thought “anyone could benefit” without there being any negative effects.

Now, he says, he thinks it’s best to be “selective” and limit fluoridating water “to the areas that are suffering, where it’s more rural or more deprived”.

Read more:
Unhealthy food costing UK more than £260bn a year, report says
Cocoa or green tea can help you destress more than high-fat foods

He gives the North West as an example, saying he recently did a charity event there to promote dental health among young people, and it was “shocking” to see how many of them did not even own a toothbrush.

He says it’s a “good idea” to expand to similar areas of the UK where dental health is low – but thinks it would be an even better idea to provide toothpaste to schools in such areas and increase their education regarding how best to look after their teeth.

“I think education is the way forward more so than fluoridated water.”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson told Sky News: “The number one reason children aged six to 10 end up in hospital is to have their rotting teeth pulled out.

“Water fluoridation at levels permitted in this country is a safe and effective public health measure that reduces tooth decay.

“Prevention is always better than cure, and this government is committed to helping people stay healthy and keeping kids out of hospital.”

Is your water being fluoridated?

About 330,000 people live in areas of England with naturally occurring fluoride in drinking water, while around 5.8 million people get an artificial supply put in theirs.

It means some 10% of people in England live in areas where fluoride is added to the water, mainly in the West Midlands and the North East.

There is no fluoridation in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland.

Here is the full list of areas receiving artificial fluoridation in England, according to the British Fluoridation Society:

  • Cumbria – 120,000
  • Cheshire – 137,000
  • Tyneside – 643,000
  • Northumbria – 101,000
  • County Durham – 85,000
  • Humberside – 136,000
  • Lincolnshire – 250,000
  • Nottinghamshire – 287,000
  • Derbyshire – 43,000
  • Birmingham – 1,000,000
  • Solihull – 200,000
  • Coventry – 300,000
  • Sandwell – 300,000
  • Dudley – 305,000
  • Walsall – 253,000
  • Wolverhampton – 236,000
  • Staffordshire – 497,000
  • Shropshire – 22,000
  • Warwickshire – 431,000
  • Worcestershire – 253,000
  • Bedfordshire – 198,000

And here is the list of areas getting the “optimal” amount of fluoride naturally:

  • Hartlepool, County Durham – 89,000
  • Easington, County Durham – 47,000
  • Uttoxeter, Staffordshire – 13,000
  • Redbridge, London Borough – 180,000

Where else could fluoride be added to water?

The Conservative government introduced proposals to expand fluoridation schemes across the North East “because of the significant and long-standing inequalities in the region” when it comes to dental health.

A public consultation on the plans was launched in June and closed in July. Since Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour government won the election, it has not been clear whether the plans are still being pursued.

These are the areas the government proposed extending the fluoride supply to:

  • Darlington
  • Durham
  • Gateshead
  • Hartlepool
  • Middlesbrough
  • Newcastle
  • Northumberland
  • North Tyneside
  • Redcar and Cleveland
  • South Tyneside
  • Stockton
  • Sunderland

Continue Reading

UK

Ex-officer breaks down after Manchester bomb plotter’s prison assault

Published

on

By

Ex-officer breaks down after Manchester bomb plotter's prison assault

An alleged attack by the Manchester Arena bomb plotter on prison officers at a high-security jail “will stick with” those impacted “for the rest of their lives”, a former officer and colleague of the victims has said.

Hashem Abedi is accused of violently assaulting officers at HMP Frankland in Durham last weekend, using hot cooking oil and an improvised, or homemade, weapon.

He was serving his sentence in a separation unit, known as a “jail within a jail”, after being found guilty of 22 counts of murder for helping his brother Salman Abedi carry out a suicide bombing at an Ariana Grande concert in 2017.

The attack has raised fresh questions about the safety of prison staff.

Inmates inside separation units had access to cooking facilities, which has now been suspended.

Hashem Abedi
Image:
Abedi was moved back to Belmarsh after the alleged attack

‘It will stick with them for life’

Matthew, who only wants to be referred to by his first name, worked with the officers who were hospitalised following the attack.

“I’ve spoken to ex-colleagues who I’m still friends with,” he told Sky News.

“They’ve not discussed the specifics of the incident, but they’ve said it will stick with them for the rest of their lives.”

Matthew broke down as he described the “obscene” and “ludicrous” levels of violence that staff face inside prison.

He’s worked at a number of different jails.

“I’ve been there when you’re mopping your colleagues’ blood… when you’ve seen a serious assault, and you don’t know if they’re gonna be OK, and then 10 minutes later, you’ve got to get back on with your day, you’ve got to carry on running the regime,” he said.

“It is difficult, and it is awful.”

Matthew worked with the officers who were hospitalised following the attack by Hashem Abedi at HMP Frankland
Image:
Matthew worked with the officers who were hospitalised

‘No adequate protection’

There were 10,496 assaults against prison staff in England and Wales in the 12 months to September – a 19% rise on the previous year.

“The reality is there’s no adequate protections for prison staff, and that’s a great frustration,” the general secretary of the Prison Officers’ Association union, Steve Gillan, told Sky News.

Having visited HMP Frankland earlier in the week, and spoken to many of the officers who were involved, Mr Gillan described the mood among colleagues as one of “anger, frustration, and sadness”.

The association, which represents prison officers, is calling for a “reset” – and for staff to be given stab-proof vests and tasers in “certain circumstances”.

Read more:
Prisons now 98.9% full
Fewer criminals to be jailed

General Secretary of the Prison Officers’ Association, Steve Gillan
Image:
Steve Gillan

‘The entire system needs to change’

Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said she shared “the country’s shock and anger” at the attack.

The government has launched a review that will look at how it was able to happen, and will also consider how separation centres are run.

The Prison Service is also conducting a “snap” review into whether protective body armour should be available to frontline staff.

But ex-officer Matthew said “nobody is ever truly safe” in the prison service, with staff facing “impossible challenges every day”.

“The entire system needs to change,” he added. “From the ground up.”

Continue Reading

UK

The British economy has lost out – and questionable meat and cheese ban is a reminder of why

Published

on

By

The British economy has lost out - and questionable meat and cheese ban is a reminder of why

Unwary travellers returning from the EU risk having their sandwiches and local delicacies, such as cheese, confiscated as they enter the UK.

The luggage in which they are carrying their goodies may also be seized and destroyed – and if Border Force catch them trying to smuggle meat or dairy products without a declaration, they could face criminal charges.

The new jeopardy has come about because last weekend, the government quietly “extended” its “ban on personal meat imports to protect farmers from foot and mouth”.

This may or may not be bureaucratic over-reaction.

It’s certainly just another of the barriers EU and UK authorities are busily throwing up between each other and their citizens – at a time when political leaders keep saying the two sides should be drawing together in the face of Donald Trump’s attacks on European trade and security.

Starmer and Macron meeting at Chequers last month. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Keir Starmer’s been embarking on a reset with European leaders. Pic: Reuters

The ban on bringing back “cattle, sheep, goat, and pig meat, as well as dairy products, from EU countries into Great Britain for personal use” is meant “to protect the health of British livestock, the security of farmers, and the UK’s food security.”

There are bitter memories of previous outbreaks of foot and mouth disease in this country, in 1967 and 2001.

In 2001, there were more than 2,000 confirmed cases of infection resulting in six million sheep and cattle being destroyed. Footpaths were closed across the nation and the general election had to be delayed.

In the EU this year, there have been five cases confirmed in Slovakia and four in Hungary. There was a single outbreak in Germany in January, though Defra, the UK agriculture department, says that’s “no longer significant”.

The UK imposed bans on personal meat and dairy imports from those countries, and Austria, earlier this year.

Authorities carry disinfectant liquid near a farm during an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Dunakiliti, Hungary. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Authorities carry disinfectant near a farm in Dunakiliti, Hungary. Pic: Reuters

Better safe than sorry?

None of the cases of infection are in the three most popular countries for UK visitors – Spain, France, and Italy – now joining the ban. Places from which travellers are most likely to bring back a bit of cheese, salami, or chorizo.

Could the government be putting on a show to farmers that it’s on their side at the price of the public’s inconvenience, when its own measures on inheritance tax and failure to match lost EU subsidies are really doing the farming community harm?

Many will say it’s better to be safe than sorry, but the question remains whether the ban is proportionate or even well targeted on likely sources of infection.

Read more: The products you can’t bring into Britain from the EU

Gourmet artisan chorizo sausages on display on a market stall. File pic: iStock
Image:
No more gourmet chorizo brought back from Spain for you. File pic: iStock

A ‘Brexit benefit’? Don’t be fooled

The EU has already introduced emergency measures to contain the disease where it has been found. Several thousand cattle in Hungary and Slovenia have been vaccinated or destroyed.

The UK’s ability to impose the ban is not “a benefit of Brexit”. Member nations including the UK were perfectly able to ban the movement of animals and animal products during the “mad cow disease” outbreak in the 1990s, much to the annoyance of the British government of the day.

Since leaving the EU, England, Scotland and Wales are no longer under EU veterinary regulation.

Northern Ireland still is because of its open border with the Republic. The latest ban does not cover people coming into Northern Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey, or the Isle of Man.

Rather than introducing further red tape of its own, the British government is supposed to be seeking closer “alignment” with the EU on animal and vegetable trade – SPS or “sanitary and phytosanitary” measures, in the jargon.

Various types of cheese. Pic: iStock
Image:
A ban on cheese? That’s anything but cracking. Pic: iStock

UK can’t shake ties to EU

The reasons for this are obvious and potentially make or break for food producers in this country.

The EU is the recipient of 67% of UK agri-food exports, even though this has declined by more than 5% since Brexit.

The introduction of full, cumbersome, SPS checks has been delayed five times but are due to come in this October. The government estimates the cost to the industry will be £330m, food producers say it will be more like £2bn.

With Brexit, the UK became a “third country” to the EU, just like the US or China or any other nation. The UK’s ties to the European bloc, however, are much greater.

Half of the UK’s imports come from the EU and 41% of its exports go there. The US is the UK’s single largest national trading partner, but still only accounts for around 17% of trade, in or out.

The difference in the statistics for travellers are even starker – 77% of trips abroad from the UK, for business, leisure or personal reasons, are to EU countries. That is 66.7 million visits a year, compared to 4.5 million or 5% to the US.

And that was in 2023, before Donald Trump and JD Vance’s hostile words and actions put foreign visitors off.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump: ‘Europe is free-loading’

More bureaucratic botheration

Meanwhile, the UK and the EU are making travel between them more bothersome for their citizens and businesses.

This October, the EU’s much-delayed EES or Entry Exit System is due to come into force. Every foreigner will be required to provide biometric information – including fingerprints and scans – every time they enter or leave the Schengen area.

From October next year, visitors from countries including the UK will have to be authorised in advance by ETIAS, the European Travel and Authorisation System. Applications will cost seven euros and will be valid for three years.

Since the beginning of this month, European visitors to the UK have been subject to similar reciprocal measures. They must apply for an ETA, an Electronic Travel Authorisation. This lasts for two years or until a passport expires and costs £16.

The days of freedom of movement for people, goods, and services between the UK and its neighbours are long gone.

The British economy has lost out and British citizens and businesses suffer from greater bureaucratic botheration.

Nor has immigration into the UK gone down since leaving the EU. The numbers have actually gone up, with people from Commonwealth countries, including India, Pakistan and Nigeria, more than compensating for EU citizens who used to come and go.

Focaccia sandwiches with prosciutto. Pic: iStock
Image:
Editor’s note: Hands off my focaccia sandwiches with prosciutto! Pic: iStock

Will European reset pay off?

The government is talking loudly about the possible benefits of a trade “deal” with Trump’s America.

Meanwhile, minister Nick Thomas Symonds and the civil servant Mike Ellam are engaged in low-profile negotiations with Europe – which could be of far greater economic and social significance.

The public will have to wait to see what progress is being made at least until the first-ever EU-UK summit, due to take place on 19 May this year.

Hard-pressed British food producers and travellers – not to mention young people shut out of educational opportunities in Europe – can only hope that Sir Keir Starmer considers their interests as positively as he does sucking up to the Trump administration.

Continue Reading

UK

Paria Veisi: Police investigating disappearance of woman in South Wales find her body – as man charged with murder

Published

on

By

Paria Veisi: Police investigating disappearance of woman in South Wales find her body - as man charged with murder

Police investigating the disappearance of a woman who was last seen leaving work have found her body – as a man has been charged with murder.

Paria Veisi, 37, was reported missing after leaving work in Cardiff at around 3pm on 12 April.

Her disappearance was described by police as “totally out of character” and prompted a widespread search.

Her Mercedes GLC 200 was later found on Dorchester Avenue in the Penylan area of Cardiff on the evening of Tuesday 15 April.

Her body was discovered at an address in Penylan on Saturday, South Wales Police said.

Read more from Sky News:
Sky News uncovers new evidence on aid workers attack
The Godfather-style gang war gripping two cities

A 41-year-old man from Penylan has been charged with murder, preventing lawful and decent burial of a dead body and assaulting a person occasioning them actual bodily harm.

A 48-year-old woman from London has been charged with preventing a lawful and decent burial of a dead body and conspiring to pervert the course of justice.

They both appeared at Cardiff Magistrates’ Court on Saturday.

“This brings our search for Paria to a sad and tragic end,” said Detective Chief Inspector Matt Powell.

“Paria’s family, all those who knew her, and those in her local community, will be deeply saddened and shocked by these latest developments.

“Family liaison officers are continuing to support Paria’s family.”

Continue Reading

Trending