The document summarizes the events surrounding a vote in Deniliquin, Australia to reintroduce water fluoridation. It notes that fluoridation was stopped in 1988 due to a change in local council members. In 2003, it was found that 40% of local elementary school children had experienced tooth decay, higher than neighboring fluoridated towns. Students petitioned to reinstate fluoridation. In 2005, after an information campaign and public vote, fluoridation was reintroduced with 55.8% voting yes.

1. 3조 62번 최성현

2.  Water fluoridation is not mandatory in New
South Wales(NSW), Australia, as the executive
decision rests with local government councils
under the NSW Fluoridation of Public Water
Supplies Act 1957.
 Deniliquin’s water supplies were fluoridated
when the local water treatment plant was first
commissioned in 1986. However, the council
ceased fluoridation in 1988 because of a shift in
the proportion of pro-fluoridation council
members after the mayor’s death.

3.  2003년 가을, 지역 초등학교 학생들 40%가 우
식경험이 있다고 알려졌는데 이러한 높은 우식
경험은 상수도불소화 시행을 중지했기 때문이
라 생각했다. 그 이유는 같은 강물을 공유하는
이웃마을은 계속 상수도불소화를 시행했는데
그 마을은 아이들의 우식경험이 유의할 정도로
낮았기 때문.
-> 그래서 학생회가 의회에 상수도 불소화 재시
행을 요청하게됨.

4.  Deniliquin 의회는 NSW Health Department 대
표와 저명한 anti-fluoridationist를 초청
 A key element of the community information
program was the use of
contemporary, epidemiological evidence to
illustrate Deniliquin’s dental decay crisis.
( 사회경제적 수준이 비슷한 두 근접한 상수도
불소화 마을에서 아이들의 우식경험율 감소)

5.  A local grassroots commettee for carrying out
the various campaign activities was formed
under the leadership of a prominent local
dentist.
 These activities included strategically placing
water fluoridation posters endorsed by the
NSW Health Department around various
public venues, the printing of “How to vote”
cards and distributing them on the day of the
plebicite.

6.  5,280명의 지역민 중 4,539명이 투표에 참여
(86%)
 Do you support the addition of fluoride to
Deniliquin town water supply?
- Yes/2,533명(55.8%), No/1,879명(41.4%)
- Deniliquin Council resolved to reintroduce
water fluoridation by a vote of all but one in
favor of the motion.
- 2005.1월, Deniliquin 지역민들은 다시 불소가
첨가된 상수도를 제공 받을 수 있게됨.

7. 1. Vote “yes” for fluoridation
1) Dental decay crisis in Deniliquin
a) Local children have higher decay rates
b) And higher general anesthetic rates for
extractions of fillings
c) Due to the absence of water fluoridation
d) Treatment needs cannot be met by rural
dentists alone

8. 2) Healthy mouths, healthy lives
a) Poor oral health is associated with poor general
health
b) Dental decay is preventable
c) water fluoridation benefits anyone with natural
teeth
3) Water fluoridation – nature thought of it first
a) water has naturally occurring amounts of
fluoride
b) water fluoridation is safe, effective, efficient,
cost-effective and equitable

9. 4) Water fluoridation – top 10 public health
achievements of the 20th Century
a) impeccable record of safety and
effectiveness as a public health measure
b) Unethical of anti-fluoridationists to impose
their demands on community

10. 2. Vote “NO” for fluoridation
1) water fluoridation is unethical
a) Never implemented in Europe
b) Unscientific propaganda
c) violation of medical ethics
d) Mass medication
2) Water fluoridation is unsafe
a) Associated health hazards
b) Causes skeletal fluorosis and other diseases

11. 3) Water fluoridation is ineffective
a) reductions in dental decay rates not due to
water fluoridation
b) fluoridated toothpastes more appropriate
4) Who gains from fluoridation?
a) vested interests from corporations and
politicians
b) unethical, unsafe, and ineffective

12.  행정가들의 입장이 아닌 공중보건에 의존하여
그동안의 경험에 의거하여 결정
 그 밖의 요인들
- 높은 투표율(86%)
- turnout rates 높을수록 보통 긍정적인 쪽으로
투표하게 되는 경향
- handing out of the “ how to vote cards” by
the local health professionals and school
chilidren on the day of the plebiscite had a
positive effect

13. 1. Diesendorf M. the mystery of declining tooth
decay. Nature. 1986 Jul;322:125-9 외 9편