What to know about a proposed bill that aims to eliminate fluoride from Utah’s water supply

Salt Lake City, Utah – The Utah Legislature is considering a new bill that would forbid fluoride from being added to the state’s water supply.

Sections of Utah’s law code would be amended by H.B. 81, often known as the “Fluoride Amendments,” to forbid the addition of fluoride to any “public water system” and to prohibit local governments from passing or implementing ordinances that permit fluoridation.

The measure’s sponsor, State Representative Stephanie Gricius (R-HD50), stated that her bill is about standardizing the distribution technique for Utahns and is not anti-fluoride.

Gricius stated, “This bill is not anti-fluoride in any way.” “It just involves altering the method of delivery. It establishes a standardized delivery system that gives the patient the freedom to decide whether or not to take the medication; some people will find it easier to obtain, while others will need to actively seek it out.

The practice of raising naturally occurring fluoride levels to a level advised to promote tooth development and prevent cavities is known as fluoridation, or the addition of fluoride to public water systems. Fluoridation is a method utilized in the United States to reduce cavities and enhance general oral health, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

0.7 mg of fluoride per liter is the CDC’s recommended amount. This is roughly equivalent to three drops in a 55-gallon barrel of water. The objective is to supplement the naturally occurring fluoride with enough to reach the 0.7 level.

Salt Lake and Davis are the only two counties in Utah that fluoridate their water. The ballot initiative was used for both of these, and Salt Lake County passed it in 2000. Cities all around Utah have added fluoride to their water, but these are the only counties with general fluoridation ordinances.

Gricius’ measure would mandate that the Department of Health and Human Services issue standing prescriptions for fluoride supplements in addition to existing provisions regarding water supply. It, according to Gricius, offers people greater options and access to fluoride.

“There should always be [a] choice when there is harm, when it comes to taking a prescription,” Gricius said. “From the standpoint of preventing dental decay, we are essentially expanding fluoride availability throughout the rest of the state.”

Gricius said she started working on HB 81 after hearing about its potential health impacts, which she claims have been connected to increased fluorosis symptoms and could affect children’s bone growth.

Fluoridation, according to Salt Lake County Health Department communications director Nicholas Rupp, is a cost-effective method of guaranteeing universal access to dental care.
“[Floridation] has been going on for a long time across the nation, but it’s relatively new here in Salt Lake County,” Rupp said. “The advantage of fluoridating community water is that we can accurately regulate the amount through the water infrastructure. and in this manner, fluoride reaches every person of the community, irrespective of their age, financial situation, or ability to receive dental treatment. The fact that fluoride is delivered to everyone via the communal water supply is by far its greatest advantage.

“What community water fluoridation does is add enough fluoride to get the benefits of that fluoridation to reach that recommended level,” Rupp adds, clarifying that fluoride is also naturally present in water. It is comparable to adding iodine to salt or vitamin D to milk.
The only significant event in Salt Lake County’s 25 years of fluoridation occurred in 2019 when a snowfall knocked out power and caused a mechanical malfunction. resulting in the Sandy water supply containing 40 times the amount of fluoride that is advised. causing dysentery and nausea in the people.
“I’ve seen cases of fluorosis, but they’ve come from areas where the fluoride was naturally in the water in higher amounts than we would use in fluoridating water,” said Mark Fullmer, a dentist in Utah County who has been in the field for 38 years. Fullmer said that he has only seen cases of fluorosis through drinking water where fluoride was naturally occurring at higher levels than were safe.

Fullmer joked that not having fluoride in water would be good for his business. However, he said his goal was to prevent that as much as possible. He says fluoridation helps that goal.

“I would hope that legislators and their constituents would look at the good science,” Fullmer stated. “As a dental profession, we would never want to do anything that would harm people’s health … there probably are instances where too much fluoride was added to the water or those type of things. I am not aware of that, but that creates that fear, just the chance that it might happen. Nobody wants that to happen.”

Gricius stressed in a final note that people should be able to choose what they are ingesting, and the role of government is to provide them with that choice, saying, “The bottom line is, when you are putting a substance in the water to medicate people, you are taking away their choice of weighting that risk for themselves. The role of government is to provide safe clean water, not to medicate the public.”

H.B. 81 is set to be debated in the upcoming 2025 General Session of the state legislature beginning on Jan. 21.