Is New Zealand water fluoridation justified?

Yindi Jiang, Lyndie A. Foster Page, John McMillan, Karl Lyons, Jonathan Broadbent, Kate C. Morgaine

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

Public health programmes extend beyond the clinical context and focus on measures that affect the lives of large subgroups or the population as a whole. An example of this is community water fluoridation (CWF), the altering of fluoride levels in the water supply with the aim of preventing the initiation and slowing the progression of dental caries lesions for the benefit of entire populations. Despite the unfeasibility of randomised controlled trials of CWF, a large volume of evidence is available on the topic. However, CWF remains a polarising and keenly contested issue. CWF is also an intervention where it is difficult to provide everyone affected with a choice. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is an independent body that examines and reports on ethical questions, and they have provided a useful ethical framework for considering CWF via the ‘stewardship’ model. This commentary aims to discuss each of the public health aims and how they can be applied and weighed to reach a justified position about CWF.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)80-86
Number of pages7
JournalNew Zealand Medical Journal
Volume127
Issue number1406
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is New Zealand water fluoridation justified?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this