US legal judgement leaves Dunedin with water fluoridation paradox

To Fluoridate or not to Fluoridate drinking water was the question posed to Dunedin City Councillors today - the answer might be ‘both’.

The quandary and potential legal ramifications of water fluoridation were addressed at a meeting of the city council’s Infrastructure Services Committee during the Public forum.

Speaker Bruce Spittle said two recent reports published overseas both shed doubt on the efficacy of fluoridation on preventing tooth decay, while a US legal judgement could have legal responsibilities for the council.

“That found that drinking water fluoridation at a level of 0.7mg per litre presents an unreasonable risk to health.”

Mr Spittle suggested that that finding meant New Zealand was required, under the Health Act, the council to stop fluoridation, knowing there was a known source of harm.

“However, doing so would would be acting unlawfully, with respect to … the Health Fluoridation of Water Act of 2021. This requires local water authorities that were adding fluoride to water prior to commencement of the act to continue to do so, unless directed not to by the Director General of Health.”

He suggested referring the matter for consideration to the full council.

Committee chair Councillor Jim O’Malley asked for the reports mentioned to councillors.

“You pretty much covered it , at the moment we are legally-obliged to continue fluoridation.”

A second submitter, retired dentist Russel McLean, told the committee he had been “fully indoctrinated” with the dogma around the health benefits of fluoride.

“For many years I practiced that. I proved fluoride and prescribed fluoride tablets - I regret that now.”

His opinion changed when he started researching in order to debunk arguments of those opposing the practice.

Instead, he found there was “little research” that supports fluoridation.

“Fluoride has no role to play in the biochemical pathway. It’s not laid down in the dentine of teeth as they are formed, as we were told. That was just a pious hope.”

Mr McLean added there was also the risk of fluorosis of teeth.

“Fluorosis is very destructive and can be so severe that the teeth are wrecked and can’t be saved. It’s tragic.”

Although not mentioned during the meeting, the waters were further muddied in 2023 when a High Court judgment found the former Director-General of Health Ashley Bloomfield made an error of law in the process for considering July 2022 directions to fluoridate drinking water.

The Director-General directed 14 local authorities to fluoridate 19 drinking water supplies.

The process error was made by not explicitly considering the rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 in making a decision on each direction.

In the judgement Justice Radich found: “The answer to the preliminary legal question in this proceeding is: yes, the Director-General was required to turn his mind to whether the directions given to the 14 local authorities under s 116E of the Health Act were in each case a reasonable limit on the right to refuse medical treatment, he needed to be satisfied that they were and, if satisfied, he needed to say why that was so.”

The Court did not quash the directions, which remain in force.

“A recent High Court judgment kept the 14 directions made in 2022 in place, and directed the Director-General to assess whether each of the directions to fluoridate is a justified limit on the right of persons in those districts to refuse medical treatment,” a spokesperson for the Ministry of Health said told Crux today.

“That right is provided for in section 11 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Director-General is carrying out an assessment for each direction as directed by the Judge. In the meantime, the directions remain in place, as confirmed by recent High Court decisions.  

 “The World Health Organization and other international and national health and scientific experts endorse water fluoridation as an effective public health measure for preventing dental decay. A 2014 report conducted by Royal Society Te Apārangi, jointly with the Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, concluded that there are no adverse health effects of any significance from fluoridation at the level used in New Zealand. In June 2021, the Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor released an evidence update confirming this conclusion.”

Main image: DCC Infrastructure Services Committee members earlier today.