1. Oregon. Oregon Department of Human Services. Family Health. The Burden of Oral Disease in Oregon. Portland: DHS, 2006. Print. This website analyzes data about oral health in Oregon in comparison to the US and the goals of Healthy People 2010. The Burden of Oral Disease in Oregon discusses fluoride as a good source of prevention of dental caries. In addition, this website implies that Oregon has higher rates of dental caries due to the unfluoridated status of the majority of the drinking water. It is therefore recommended that fluoride be added to the water. This website is vital to fluoride education because it shows the common deception about fluoride’s benefits and the links caused by correlation, not causation. Readers should be cautious when gathering data from this website.
2. London. World Health Organization. Fluoride in Drinking-water. By J. Fawell, K. Bailey, J. Chilton, E. Dahi, L. Fewtrell, and Y. Magara. N.p.: n.p., 2006. Print. In 2006 the WHO published an extremely inclusive report on fluoride in the drinking water which researched 28 different countries in regards to skeletal fluorosis. This report is unbiased and solely research based. Because of the nature of this report, it is a good reference to gather information on the true facts about fluoride use and the significant studies that reveal both positive and negative sides of fluoride in water. The definition of fluoride, where it is found, and the exposure of fluoride naturally in the environment are discussed topics. In addition, the human health effects are given and guidelines are provided for the use of fluoride.
3. Levy, Steven M., Barbara Broffitt, Teresa A. Marshall, Julie M. Eichenberger-Gilmore, and John J. Warren. “Associations between Fluorosis of Permanent Incisors and Fluoride Intake from Infant Formula, Other Dietary Sources and Dentifrice during Early Childhood.” Journal of American Dental Association 141.10 (2010): 1190-201. PubMed. Web. 01 Nov. 2012. This article is valuable to this topic because it focuses on the impact of fluorinated beverages in comparison to fluoride ingested through bottles made with fluorinated water and formula. The study looked at infants ages 3-9 months and 16-36 months. It was concluded that the babies in the 16-36 month group had higher rates of fluorosis because of the increased exposure to fluoride-both in beverages and formula. This study supports the assertion that babies who ingest higher rates of fluoride are at higher health risks.
4. “Fluoride Action Network.” Fluoride Action Network. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2012. This is an interactive and informative website that provides testimonials from doctors and individuals, articles, and advocates against fluoride use in water. This website provides arguments against fluoridation of water and supports the argument with well documented, legitimate sources such as the CDC and other Public Health organizations. The most recent discussion of fluoride in the news is displayed and people are allowed to comment on the stories. This site provides ways for people to get involved in fighting against fluoridation of water and allows people to donate or receive information emails and letters.
5. United States of America. Centers for Disease Control Recommendations for Using Fluoride to Prevent and Control Dental Caries in the United States. By Steven M. Adair. N.p.: n.p., 2001. Print. On this website the CDC explains the difference between topical fluoride and ingested fluoride on dental health. In order to fully understand why fluoride should not be added to drinking water it is crucial that people understand the difference between the effectiveness of topical and ingested fluoride. The CDC is a well-respected organization and the information they release is highly regarded and reliable. This source provides the most accurate information available to the public at this time.