Milk Fluoridation
Publication Date: 12/07/2009
The Problem:
Tooth decay, also known as dental caries, remains a major public health problem. Fifty-nine percent of persons aged 12 to 19 suffer from tooth decay. CDC: Dental Caries Fact Sheet. Advanced tooth decay can cause significant pain and loss of the teeth, and can be costly to treat. CDC: Oral Health: At a Glance: 2009
The Law:
Milk fluoridation is required or authorized in various countries in Europe and elsewhere. In the US, milk fluoridation is not currently legal because it lacks FDA approval. However, for US jurisdictions without community water fluoridation, fluoridated milk may be a promising alternative source of fluoride.
The Evidence:
In a systematic review, Yeung et al. reviewed two randomized trials evaluating the effectiveness of milk fluoridation programs on reducing dental caries. Yeung A, et al. Fluoridated milk for preventing dental caries. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 3. Art. No.:CD003876. Both trials compared the effects of fluoridated milk with non-fluoridated milk on community dental health. Effectiveness was measured by changes in decayed, missing, or filled teeth. One of the studies found a significant association between fluoridated milk and reduction in tooth decay; the other found a much less substantial association over a longer time period. Based on these findings and the limited number of primary studies, the reviewers concluded that milk fluoridation may be a promising intervention, but that there is currently insufficient evidence to establish its effectiveness as a measure aimed at improving oral health.
The Bottom Line:
In the judgment of a Community Guide expert panel, there is insufficient evidence to establish the effectiveness of milk fluoridation as a public health intervention aimed at reducing tooth decay.
What are Evidence Briefs?
A Public Health Law Research Program “Evidence Brief” summarizes the research assessing the effect of a specific law or policy on public health.
Evidence Briefs are prepared by the staff of the National Program Office. Briefs are based on systematic literature reviews conducted by highly-regarded scholars and published by credible organizations or peer-reviewed journals. Evidence Briefs digest the best available evidence, but readers should bear in mind that even the best evidence may have limitations or deficiencies.
The evidence briefs are organized by topic and intervention. Each law or policy is classified as “effective,” “uncertain” or “harmful,” according to the conclusions of the expert reviewers. These are not independent conclusions of the NPO, nor do they reflect the views of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
About the Links
Each Evidence Brief includes links to the study on which it is based. In many cases, the study is available in the public domain, but access to some may require a subscription.
