The case for retaining the current supplementation schedule

Abstract

Following ingestion of dietary fluoride, microquantities of fluoride return to the mouth in saliva, but in quantities large enough to facilitate the maintenance and reparative functions of enamel. Dietary fluoride supplements alone are unlikely to be the cause of the reported increase in fluorosis. Compliance continues to be extremely poor and few children use supplements for more than a year and a half. The amount of background fluoride resulting from dietary fluoride supplements appears to be very small. Considering the almost ubiquitous presence of fluoride dentifrice and the strong possibility of additional unintentional fluoride ingestion from many sources, the present fluorosis data is too amorphous to use as a basis for making reasonable risk/benefit evaluations. Very mild and mild fluorosis is not a serious problem for either the clinician or the patient. By altering the present recommended dosage we may deprive children from receiving a proven effective dose. One cannot make a risk/benefit decision concerning an esthetic problem without involving the patient's perception as well as the caries score. The apparent severity of the milder forms of fluorosis lessens with age and a community fluorosis index should be used only on populations who are older than 15 years.