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

US

Tyre Nichols death: Ex-police officers found not guilty of murdering motorist in US

Published

on

By

Tyre Nichols death: Ex-police officers found not guilty of murdering motorist in US

Three former police officers in the US have been found not guilty of murder over the death of motorist Tyre Nichols.

Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley and Justin Smith were acquitted by jurors following a nine-day trial at Tennessee state court.

The former Memphis officers were also found not guilty of aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping, official misconduct and official oppression.

Mr Nichols, a father of one, died three days after officers punched, kicked and hit him with a baton in January 2023 as he was just yards from his home.

Former Memphis Police Department officers Demetrius Haley, center, Tadarrius Bean, left, and Justin Smith Jr., right, hug each other after they were acquitted of state charges, including second-degree murder, in the fatal beating of Tyre Nichols after he ran away from a traffic stop. Wednesday, May 7, 2025, in Memphis, Tenn. (Chris Day/Commercial Appeal/USA Today Network via AP, Pool)
Image:
The defendants hugged each other after being acquitted of the charges. Pic: Commercial Appeal/USA Today Network/AP

The 29-year-old’s death and a video of the incident – in which he cried out for his mother – sparked outrage in the US including nationwide protests and led to police reform.

Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who represents Nichols’ family, described the verdicts as a “devastating miscarriage of justice”. In a statement, he added: “The world watched as Tyre Nichols was beaten to death by those sworn to protect and serve.”

Memphis District Attorney Steve Mulroy said he was “surprised that there wasn’t a single guilty verdict on any of the counts” including second-degree murder. He said Mr Nichols’ family “were devastated… I think they were outraged”.

From left Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Justin Smith, three former Memphis officers acquitted of state charges, including second-degree murder, in the fatal beating of Tyre Nichols after he ran away from a traffic stop in 2023. Memphis Police Dept. / via AP file
Image:
Former police officers Tadarrius Bean, Demetrius Haley, Justin Smith were accused of second-degree murder. Pic: Memphis Police Dept/AP


But despite the three defendants being acquitted of state charges during the trial in Memphis, they still face the prospect of years in prison after they were convicted of federal charges of witness tampering last year.

Two other former officers previously pleaded guilty in both state and federal court. Desmond Mills Jr. gave evidence as a prosecution witness, while Emmitt Martin was blamed for the majority of the violence.

Sentencing for all five officers is pending.

Protesters march down the street Friday, Jan. 27, 2023, in Memphis, Tenn., as authorities release police video depicting five Memphis officers beating Tyre Nichols, whose death resulted in murder charges and provoked outrage at the country's latest instance of police brutality. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
Image:
Tyre Nichols’ death sparked street protests in January 2023 in Memphis and across the US. Pic: AP

Video evidence showed Mr Nichols was stopped in his car, yanked from his vehicle, pepper-sprayed and hit with a Taser. He broke free and ran away before the five police officers caught up with him again, and the beating took place.

Prosecutors argued that the officers used excessive, deadly force in trying to handcuff Mr Nichols and were criminally responsible for each others’ actions.

They also said the officers had a duty to intervene and stop the beating and tell medics that Mr Nichols had been hit repeatedly in the head, but they failed to do so.

The trial heard Mr Nichols suffered tears and bleeding in the brain and died from blunt force trauma.

The defence suggested Mr Nichols was on drugs, giving him the strength to fight off five strong officers, and was actively resisting arrest.

In December, the US Justice Department said a 17-month investigation showed the Memphis Police Department uses excessive force and discriminates against Black people.

Continue Reading

US

Federal Reserve warns of impact of Trump tariffs as US interest rates held

Published

on

By

Federal Reserve warns of impact of Trump tariffs as US interest rates held

The US central bank held interest rates as it said Trump tariffs have risked higher inflation and unemployment amid “so much” uncertainty.

The announcement is likely to anger President Donald Trump, who has made the taxes on imports one of his signature policies and had threatened to fire the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell.

On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve, known as the Fed, held rates at 4.25%-4.5%. Unlike the UK, the US interest rate is a range to guide lenders rather than a single percentage.

Money blog: Dynamic pricing coming to UK restaurants

It means borrowing costs have remained unchanged for Americans, something Mr Trump had wanted to reduce.

Interest rates have been raised by the Fed to bring down high inflation in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the supply chain crisis brought about by COVID-19 lockdowns.

Fears of inflation rising higher as tariffs make goods on US shelves costlier, and of job losses from reduced spending, led the Fed to remain cautious.

More on Inflation

The full effect of the tariffs is “highly uncertain”, Mr Powell said on Wednesday evening, as those announced so far have been “significantly larger” than anticipated.

US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell speaks during a news conference. Pic: Reuters
Image:
US Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell speaks during a news conference. Pic: Reuters

A 90-day pause was announced on the suite of taxes Mr Trump imposed on countries across the world, on top of the 10% base tariff, which has remained in place.

A trade war was kicked off between China as the countries escalated tariffs on each other to nearly 150%. Taxes on cars and some metals entering the US are still subject to a 25% tax.

If these tariffs remain, Mr Powell made the strongest statement yet that goods overall would become more expensive.

“If the large increases in tariffs that have been announced are sustained, they’re likely to generate a rise in inflation, a slowdown in economic growth and an increase in unemployment,” he said.

“The effects on inflation could be short-lived, reflecting a one-time shift in the price level. It is also possible that the inflationary effects could instead be more persistent,” he added.

Read more:
Trump announces 100% tariff on non-US movies

Apple reveals impact of Trump’s tariffs

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump’s tariffs: What you need to know

Uncertainty over the economic outlook also caused consumer and business sentiment to fall, “largely reflecting trade policy concerns”, Mr Powell said.

Despite Mr Trump appointing Mr Powell to the Fed chair position during his first term, the president has repeatedly spoken out against Mr Powell.

Markets rallied after Mr Trump ruled out ousting Mr Powell at the end of April.

It comes as the UK central bank, the Bank of England, is poised to cut interest rates on Thursday afternoon. The base rate is anticipated to drop to 4.25% before falling to 3.5% by the end of the year.

Continue Reading

US

UK government in ‘active discussions’ with Washington over US film tariffs as Starmer urged to ‘stand up’ to Trump

Published

on

By

UK government in 'active discussions' with Washington over US film tariffs as Starmer urged to 'stand up' to Trump

The UK government is in “active discussions” with top officials in the White House about Donald Trump’s film tariffs, a minister has said.

Chris Bryant said the US president’s plan to put 100% tariffs on films made outside America is a “fluid situation” that requires a “calm and steady approach”.

Politics live: PM defends winter fuel cut after local elections drubbing

“We are already in active discussions with the top of the US administration on this subject,” he told MPs after an urgent question was raised on the matter in the House of Commons.

“We are working hard to establish what might be proposed, if anything, and to make sure our world beating creative industries are protected.”

He added that he is due to meet UK industry leaders on Thursday.

In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Mr Trump said he had authorised government departments to put a 100% tariff “on any and all movies coming into our country that are produced in foreign lands”.

More on Tariffs

Entertainment industry union BECTU has warned this could seriously damage the industry in the UK.

Shadow culture minister Stuart Andrew asked what impact assessment the government has made and whether there are any contingency plans if an exemption can’t be secured.

Storm Bert: 'There are lots of people who will have lost everything', says Labour MP Chris Bryant
Image:
Chris Bryant is a minister in the culture department

Mr Bryant said he is “not sure precisely what is intended” with the film tariffs as he doesn’t know “what a tariff on a service would look like”.

“Most films these days are an international collaboration of some kind and we want to maintain that,” he said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Film industry tariffs don’t’ make ‘great deal of sense’

He appeared to rule out retaliatory tariffs if Mr Trump follows through with his plan, saying the Labour government of 1947 introduced tariffs on US films because they thought too many were being shown in the cinema and “it didn’t go very well as a strategy”.

“The Americans simply banned exports of US films and we ended up watching Ben-Hur repeatedly in every cinema.

“The successful bit of what we did in 1947 and 1948 was that we invested in the British film production system. And that led to films like Hamlet and Kind Hearts and Coronets. I think that that’s the pattern that we still want to adopt.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Trump is coming for our British film industry’

PM urged to stand up to Trump

However, the Liberal Democrats have urged the government to stand up to Mr Trump, whose film tariffs form part of a wider crackdown on US imports announced earlier this year.

At Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, party leader Ed Davey urged Sir Keir Starmer to work with allies in Europe and in the Commonwealth to “make clear to President Trump that if he picks a fight with James Bond, Bridget Jones and Paddington Bear, he will lose”.

However, the PM said it is “not sensible or pragmatic” to choose between Europe and the US, with Downing Street still seeking to negotiate an “economic deal” with Washington that it hopes could offset some of Mr Trump’s measures.

Mr Trump said the film tariffs were necessary because other countries were “offering all sorts of incentives to draw” filmmakers and film studios away from the United States, calling the issue a “national security threat”.

But insiders have questioned whether it will be effective as the exodus of the film industry from Hollywood is mostly due to economic reasons, with other countries having lower labour costs and more expansive tax incentives.

Much of the 2023 box office smash Barbie was filmed at the Warner Bros Leavesden studios, in Hertfordshire, as was Wonka and 2022 hit The Batman, while the vast majority of James Bond films were shot at Pinewood Studios, in Buckinghamshire.

It was also unclear whether the duties will apply to films on streaming platforms as well as those that are released in cinemas.

Continue Reading

Trending