asked Her Majesty's Government:
Why the study of fluoride bioavailability conducted in the School of Dental Sciences at the University of Newcastle, which they cited in support of their policy of water fluoridation in the Written Answer by the Lord Warner on 28 June 2004 (WA 6), was reported in two separate publications with different analyses and conclusions; and [HL7403]
Why the study of fluoride bioavailability conducted in the School of Dental Sciences at the University of Newcastle, which they stated in a Written Answer by the Lord Warner on 28 June 2004 (WA 6) as having found “no evidence for any differences” in the bioavailability of naturally and artificially fluoridated water, has not been published in a peer-reviewed journal; and [HL7404]
What is their response to the second publication on the study of fluoride bioavailability conducted in the School of Dental Sciences at the University of Newcastle, which appeared in the Journal of Dental Research in November 2005 without reference to the earlier publication and with the conclusion that “any differences of bioavailability of fluoride between drinking waters were small compared with the large within- and between-subject variation”; and [HL7405]
What is their assessment of the accuracy with which the two publications on the study of fluoride bioavailability conducted in the School of Dental Sciences at the University of Newcastle represent the findings of that study.[HL7406]
The report Bioavailability of fluoride in drinking-water—a human experimental study, Report for the UK Department of Health, June 2004 was published on the website of the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne. In line with normal practice, a more succinct account of the principal results of the study was prepared by the authors as a scientific paper and published in the peer-reviewed Journal of Dental Research in November 2005: Maguire A, Zohouri FV, Mathers JC, Steen IN, Hindmarch PN, Moynihan PJ. Bioavailability of fluoride in drinking water: a human experimental study. J Dent Res. 2005 Nov;84(11):989-93. This paper acknowledged the funding from the Department of Health. These are the only published reports of this study. The Department of Health believes that they are consistent and accurate reports of the study and its findings. We accept the authors’ conclusions stated in the full report that; “There was no statistically significant difference between artificially fluoridated and naturally fluoridated water, or between hard and soft water for Tmax, Cmax, or Area under the Curve for plasma fluoride concentration following water ingestion in healthy young adults. Based on the power of the study to detect differences, some caution is necessary when interpreting the results, but within the limits imposed by the small number of subjects, this study found no evidence for any differences between the absorption of fluoride ingested in artificially fluoridated drinking water, and in drinking water in which the fluoride is present naturally, or between the absorption of fluoride from hard and soft waters, at fluoride concentrations close to 1 part per million”. We also accept the conclusion reached in the paper published in the Journal of Dental research that: “any differences in bioavailability of fluoride between drinking waters in which the fluoride is present naturally or added artificially, or the waters are hard or soft, are small compared with the large within-and between-subject variation in F absorption following ingestion of drinking waters with F concentrations close to 1 part per million”.
asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Warner on 2 February (WA 69), (a) when they will produce guidance on how strategic health authorities should monitor the health of populations receiving fluoridated water; and (b) whether this will take account of actual health outcomes and not simply the proxy measure of intakes of fluoride.[HL7407]
Section 90A(1) (a) of the Water Industry Act 1991, as inserted by Section 58 of the Water Industry Act 2003, requires strategic health authorities (SHAs) with fluoridation schemes to monitor the effects on the health of persons living in their areas. Section 90A(3) requires an SHA to publish a report on their findings within the period of four years from the commencement of this section of the Act. We will be issuing guidance during 2007, which we intend should involve the monitoring of appropriate health indices in relation to water fluoridation.