Abstract
Background
Community water fluoridation (CWF) is currently experiencing social resistance in Canada. Petitions have been publicly registered, municipal plebiscites have occurred, and media attention is growing. There is now concern among policy leaders whether the practice is acceptable to Canadians. As a result, this study asks: What are public opinions on CWF?
Methods
Data were collected in April 2008 from 1,005 Canadian adults by means of a national telephone interview survey using random digit dialling and computer-assisted telephone interview technology. Descriptive and bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were undertaken.
Results
Approximately 1 in 2 Canadian adults surveyed knew about CWF. Of these, 80% understood its intended use, approximately 60% believed that it was both safe and effective, and 62% supported the idea of having fluoride added to their local drinking water. Those with greater incomes [OR=1.4; p<0.001] and education [OR=1.6; p<0.001] were more likely to know about CWF. Those with greater incomes [OR=1.3; p<0.03] and those who visited the dentist more frequently [OR=1.8; p<0.002] were more likely to support CWF, and those with children [OR=0.5; p<0.02], those who accessed dental care using public insurance [OR=0.2; p<0.03], and those who avoided fluoride [OR=0.04; p<0.001] were less likely to support CWF.
Conclusion
It appears that Canadians still support CWF. In moving forward, policy leaders will need to attend to two distinct challenges: the influence of anti-fluoride sentiment, and the potential risks created by avoiding fluoride.
Key words: Fluoridation, public opinion, policy
Résumé
Contexte
La fluoration de l’eau dans les collectivités (FEC) fait actuellement face à une résistance sociale au Canada. Des pétitions ont été publiquement enregistrées, des plébiscites municipaux ont eu lieu et l’attention médiatique concernant le sujet augmente. Les dirigeants se préoccupent maintenant de la question pour savoir si la pratique est acceptable pour les Canadiens. Par conséquent, cette étude se penche sur la question suivante: quelles sont les diverses opinions publiques à propos de la FEC?
Méthode
Des données ont été recueillies en avril 2008 auprès de 1 005 adultes canadiens au moyen d’une étude nationale par entrevue téléphonique utilisant la composition de numéros au hasard et une technologie d’entrevues téléphoniques informatisées. Des analyses de régression logistiques descriptives, bidimensionnelles et multidimensionnelles ont été entreprises.
Résultats
Environ 1 adulte canadien interrogé sur 2 avait entendu parler de la FEC. De ce nombre, 80 % comprenaient son utilisation prévue, environ 60 % croyaient qu’elle était à la foi sécuritaire et efficace, et 62 % appuyaient l’idée d’ajouter du fluorure à l’eau potable de leur localité. Les personnes dont le revenu est plus élevé [r.c.=1,4; p<0,001] et dont le niveau de scolarité est plus élevé [r.c.=1,6; p<0,001] étaient plus susceptibles d’avoir entendu parler de la FEC. Les personnes dont le revenu est plus élevé [r.c.=1,3; p<0,03] et celles qui ont consulté un dentiste plus fréquemment [r.c.=1,8; p<0,002] étaient plus susceptibles d’appuyer la FEC, celles ayant des enfants [r.c.=0,5; p<0,02], celles qui ont consulté le dentiste et bénéficiaient de l’assurance publique [r.c.=0,2; p<0,03], et celles qui évitaient le fluorure [r.c.=0,04; p<0,001] étaient moins susceptibles d’appuyer la FEC.
Conclusion
Il semble que les Canadiens appuient encore la FEC. En allant de l’avant, les dirigeants politiques devront relever deux défis distincts: l’influence de l’opinion allant contre la fluoration et les risques éventuels de ne pas ajouter de fluorure à l’eau.
Mots clés: fluoration, opinion publique, politique
References
- 1.Centers for Disease ControlPrevention. Achievements in public health, 1900–1999: Fluoridation of drinking water to prevent dental caries. MMWR Weekly. 1999;48(41):933–40. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Centers for Disease ControlPrevention. Ten Great Public Health Achievements in the 20th Century. 2006. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Office of the Chief Dental Officer. Estimates of community water fluoridation coverage in Canada. 2005. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Canadian Dental Association. CDA Position on Use of Fluorides in Caries Prevention. 2005. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Canadian Association of Public Health Dentistry. Position Statement - Fluoridation of Community Water Systems. 2005. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Clinch C. Petition under the Auditor General Act to Discontinue Water Fluoridation. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Government of Ontario. Regarding application to review existing policies or the need for new policies and/or regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act, 2002 as they relate to inorganic fluorides in drinking water, EBR File Number 07EBR014.R. Ministry of Environment Letter ENV1175IT-2007-120. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Barry M. The Chronical. 2008. Côte St. Luc ‘Better not fluoridate the water,’ fluoride opponent tells mayor. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Klingbeil A, Guttormson K. Calgary Herald. 2008. Politician raises new fear about fluoride - Health region says there’s no reason to reopen debate. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Author Unknown. Moncton’s water fluoridation expected to resume soon. 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kuzmich R. The Welland Tribune. 2008. Keep the fluoride in toothpaste, but out of the region’s water. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Rogers D. Ottawa Citizen. 2008. Group opposes Gatineau’s plan to add fluoride to water. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Mummery W, Duncan M, Kift R. Socio-economic differences in public opinion regarding water fluoridation in Queensland. Austr N Z J Public Health. 2007;31:336–39. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2007.00082.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Campbell D, Holbrook L, Watson P. Fluoridation - what the public know and what they want. Austr N Z J Public Health. 2001;25:346–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.2001.tb00591.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.City of Dryden Municipal By-Election 2008. April 14, 2008. Available online at: https://doi.org/dryden.fileprosite.com/contentengine/launch.asp (Accessed February 18, 2009).
- 16.CKDR Dryden. Plebiscite-Fluoride in Drinking Water. 2006. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Minister of Healththe Minister for the Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario . Minister of the Environment, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians, and Transport Canada. 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Beltrán-Aguilar E, Barker L, Canto M, Dye B, Gooch B, Griffin S, et al. Surveillance for dental caries, dental sealants, tooth retention, edentulism, and enamel fluorosis - United States, 1988–1994 and 1999–2002. MMWR Weekly. 2005;54(3):1–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Plaut T. Analysis of voting behavior on a fluoridation referendum. The Public Opinion Quarterly. 1959;23(2):213–22. doi: 10.1086/266866. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Linn E. An appraisal of sociological research on the public’s attitudes toward fluoridation. J Public Health Dentistry. 1969;29(1):36–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1969.tb01434.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.O’Shea R, Cohen L. The social sciences and dentistry: Public opinion on fluoridation. J Public Health Dentistry. 1969;29(1):57–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1969.tb01438.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Douglas C, Stacey D. Demographic characteristics and social factors related to public opinion on fluoridation. J Public Health Dentistry. 1972;32(2):128–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1972.tb03956.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Heloe L, Birkeland J. The public opinion in Norway on water fluoridation. Commun Dentistry Oral Epidemiol. 1974;2(3):95–97. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1974.tb01664.x-i1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Schwartz E, Hansen E. Public attitudes concerning water fluoridation. Commun Dentistry Oral Epidemiol. 1976;4(5):182–85. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1976.tb00980.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Lindsey D. Public attitudes to fluoridation. Br Dental J. 1979;146(1):2–3. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4804187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Isman R. Public views on fluoridation and other preventive dental practices. Commun Dentistry Oral Epidemiol. 1983;11(4):217–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1983.tb01881.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Rise J, Kraft P. Opinions about water fluoridation in Norwegian adults. Commun Dental Health. 1986;3(4):313–20. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Pollick H. A pre-referendum survey of fluoridation attitudes and intended vote. Commun Dental Health. 1988;5(1):49–62. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Centers for Disease Control. Knowledge of the purpose of community water fluoridation - United States, 1990. MMWR Weekly. 1992;41(49):925–27. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Beal J. Social factors and preventive dentistry. In: Murray J, editor. The Prevention of Dental Disease. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1990. pp. 373–405. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Spencer A, Slade G, Davies M. Water fluoridation in Australia. Commun Dental Health. 1996;13(2):27–37. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Chikte U, Brand A. Attitudes to water fluoridation in South Africa, 1998. South African Dental J. 1999;54(11):537–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Griffin M, Shickle D, Moran N. European citizens’ opinions on water fluoridation. Commun Dentistry Oral Epidemiol. 2008;36(2):95–102. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00373.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]