Key Takeaways
Table of Contents
-
A fluoride ban could result in 25 million more decayed teeth among children and teens
-
That’s a decayed tooth for 1 of every 3 kids
-
Costs for dental care could exceed $19 billion over 10 years
MONDAY, June 2, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Removing fluoride from the U.S. water supply could result in more than 25 million more decayed teeth in children and teenagers within five years, a new study warns.
That’s the equivalent of a decayed tooth for 1 of every 3 kids in America, according to researchers from Mass General Brigham.
“Fluoride replaces weaker ions within tooth enamel, making it stronger and less susceptible to tooth decay caused by bacteria,” said senior researcher Dr. Lisa Simonan internist and dentist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.
“Our study offers a window into what would happen in the United States if water fluoridation ceased,” Simon added in a news release.
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in April that he intends to halt federal recommendations that fluoride be added to public drinking water supplies.
Lawmakers in two states, Utah and Florida, banned the fluoridation of drinking water earlier this year.
Kennedy called fluoride “industrial waste” while campaigning last fall and claimed that it can cause a wide variety of health problems, including cancer, according to CNN. Fluoride opponents also are concerned about the effects of the mineral on children’s brain development.
But the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has hailed community water fluoridation as one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th century.
The CDC also notes that fluoridation “is recommended by nearly all public health, medical and dental organizations including the American Dental Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, US Public Health Service, and World Health Organization.”
At least one major municipal water supplier – Calgary, in Alberta, Canada – has backtracked following a fluoride ban, researchers said. Calgary removed fluoride from drinking water in 2011, only to reintroduce the mineral this March in response to a surge in children’s cavities.
For the new study, researchers analyzed detailed oral health and water fluoridation data for nearly 8,500 children participating in a nationwide, federally funded health survey from 2013 to 2016.
Based on this data, researchers developed a simulation model to see how banning fluoride from drinking water would impact American kids’ oral health.
Eliminating fluoride increased the total number of decayed teeth by 7.5 percentage points, equal to more than 25 million more teeth with decay within five years of such a ban, researchers reported May 30 in JAMA Health Forum.
The extra dental care would cost $9.8 billion over five years and increase to $19.4 billion after 10 years, researchers noted.
“Most of the increased cost could be attributed to publicly insured children, meaning it would be a direct public health cost,” Simon said.
The research team did note that a fluoride ban would decrease, by 200,000, cases of fluorosis, a discoloring of tooth enamel that can occur with excessive fluoride intake.
The study did not look at potential cognitive effects of a fluoride ban, noting that the CDC, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Toxicology Program all show fluoride to be safe for kids’ brains when provided at recommended safe levels.
The survey data used in the study found that 1.5% of U.S. children are exposed to excessive levels of fluoride, while 40% are exposed to recommended levels and 46% to less-than-optimal levels.
“We know fluoride works,” Simon said. “We’re able to show just how much it works for most communities and how much people stand to lose if we get rid of it.”
The head of the American Dental Association said there is not a good substitute.
“There is no better replacement for the time-tested, doctor trusted use of fluoride in community water programs,” Dr. Brett Kessler said in a statement, according to CNN.
“No amount of political rhetoric or misinformation will change that good oral health depends on proper nutrition, oral hygiene and optimally fluoridated water, or fluoride supplements if community water programs lack fluoride,” Kessler added.
More information
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more on fluoridation.
SOURCES: Mass General Brigham, news release, May 30, 2025; JAMA Health ForumMay 30, 2025; CNNMay 30, 2025
What This Means For You
Concerned parents should talk to their lawmakers about any potential fluoride bans in their state or community.
The Fluoride Fallout: A Q&A with Dr. Anya Sharma on the Future of Oral Health
Keywords: fluoride, water fluoridation, tooth decay, dental health, children’s health, oral hygiene, preventative dentistry, public health, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Time.news: Dr. Sharma, thank you for joining us today. This new study from Mass General Brigham paints a concerning picture – a potential fluoride ban leading to 25 million more decayed teeth in children adn teens. Can you put this into viewpoint for our readers?
Dr. Anya Sharma: It’s a pleasure to be here. Absolutely. The projected increase is staggering. Think about it – that’s essentially one in three children experiencing tooth decay who wouldn’t have if water fluoridation remained in place. This isn’t just about aesthetics; it’s about pain, infection, missed school days, and long-term health complications.
Time.news: The study also highlights a potential $19 billion surge in dental care costs over ten years. Is this a realistic projection? Where would these costs be felt most acutely?
Dr.Sharma: Unfortunately,I believe it is indeed. The researchers’ model considers comprehensive oral health and water fluoridation data for nearly 8,500 children, providing a solid basis for their projections. And as the study points out, a considerable portion of these increased costs fall on publicly insured children. This creates a much bigger public health economic impact.
Time.news: We are seeing some high-profile figures and even some states taking steps to ban or remove fluoride from water supplies. What’s fueling this movement, and how valid are the concerns being raised?
Dr. Sharma: The primary driver seems to be a resurgence of long-debunked claims about fluoride being harmful. We’ve seen Robert F. Kennedy Jr. label fluoride as “industrial waste,” and some anti-fluoride groups raise concerns about cognitive advancement.These concerns are not consistent with decades of research and the consensus of the CDC, the American Dental Association, and numerous other respected health organizations. The CDC actually recognizes community water fluoridation has one of the biggest achievements in public health of the 20th Century. While excessive fluoride intake can cause fluorosis, a cosmetic issue, the levels used in water fluoridation are carefully monitored and considered safe.
Time.news: Calgary, Canada, removed fluoride in 2011, then reintroduced it this year. Does this scenario provide real-world validation of the study’s findings?
Dr. Sharma: Calgary’s experience is a valuable case study. After removing fluoride, they saw a noticeable increase in children’s cavities, prompting them to reverse the decision.This real-world evidence strengthens the argument that water fluoridation is a critical public health measure.
Time.news: The study acknowledges that 1.5% of U.S. children are exposed to excessive levels of fluoride, leading to fluorosis. How can parents ensure the right balance of fluoride for their children?
Dr. Sharma: It’s crucial for parents to be informed but also to be calm. Discuss fluoride intake with your dentist and pediatrician. Most children benefit greatly from fluoridated water, but your doctor can assess individual needs and potential risks. If you live in an area without fluoridated water, your dentist might recommend fluoride supplements or treatments.
Time.news: What other preventative measures can parents take to help protect their children’s dental health?
Dr. Sharma: Establishing good oral hygiene habits early is crucial. This includes: brushing twice daily with fluoride toothpaste, flossing regularly, limiting sugary drinks and snacks, and scheduling regular dental check-ups. Professional cleanings and fluoride treatments by a dentist are also important for removing plaque and strengthening enamel.
Time.news: Dr. Kessler from the American Dental Association emphasizes that there is “no better replacement” for fluoride in community water programs. Are there any viable alternatives if fluoridation is banned in a particular area?
Dr. Sharma: Dr. Kessler is correct. Community water fluoridation is the most cost-effective and equitable means of delivering fluoride to a population. While fluoride toothpaste and varnish are beneficial, they require individual compliance, which isn’t always consistent. The key is accessibility.
Time.news: What advice would you offer to our readers who are concerned about potential fluoride bans in their communities?
dr.Sharma: Stay informed.Read reliable, evidence-based details from sources like the CDC, the American Dental Association, and reputable medical journals. Contact your local and state representatives to express your support for water fluoridation.Emphasize that this is a public health issue, grounded in decades of scientific evidence. Your voice can make a difference.
Time.news: Dr. Sharma, thank you for shedding light on this crucial issue. your insights are invaluable.
Dr. sharma: My pleasure.Thank you for bringing this to the forefront.
