with fluoridated water while a majority of picture in NZ. adults was not receiving an adequate fluoride level required for caries prevention. Erdal & Amidst the Health risk assessment approach consisting of The RME and CTE in fluoridated areas were Uncertainties in this Buchanan reports of hazard identification, dose-response 0.20 and 0.11 mg/kg/day, respectively, for analysis which ranged 2005 increasing assessment, exposure assessment and risk infants while the from medium to high level prevalence of characterisation was used. Both the average RME and CTE estimates for children were have affected the findings dental fluorosis (central tendency exposure - CTE) and high-end 0.23 and 0.06 mg/kg/day, respectively. In to a greater extent. in the US the (reasonable maximum exposure - RME) non-fluoridated areas, the RME and CTE authors used a exposures were calculated. estimates were 0.11 and 0.08 mg/kg/day for mathematical infants and 0.21 and 0.06 mg/kg/day for model to assess children. mean daily fluoride intake Although the CRE estimates were within the from all possible optimal range the RME estimates were sources greater than the UL. This might have including prompted authors to caution that some drinking water, children could be at increased risk for beverages, food, fluorosis. soil, infant formula, F supplements and toothpaste in infants (<1 year old) and year old children living in hypothetical fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. Fojo et al. Fluoride Fluoride content was analysed using a The total number of samples selected was Only the beverages were 2013 concentration in potentiometric method which was optimised and 183. Fluoride concentration in the considered as the source beverages validated. descending order was from extract-based of fluoride exposure in this including soft soft drinks, juice drinks, juice and teas to analysis. drinks, juices carbonated soft drinks. and teas marketed in All analysed samples had fluoride Portugal was concentrations that were lower than the AI
with fluoridated water while a majority of adults was not receiving an adequate fluoride level required for caries prevention. picture in NZ. Erdal & Buchanan 2005 Amidst the reports of increasing prevalence of dental fluorosis in the US the authors used a mathematical model to assess mean daily fluoride intake from all possible sources including drinking water, beverages, food, soil, infant formula, F supplements and toothpaste in infants (<1 year old) and year old children living in hypothetical fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. Health risk assessment approach consisting of hazard identification, dose-response assessment, exposure assessment and risk characterisation was used. Both the average (central tendency exposure - CTE) and high-end (reasonable maximum exposure - RME) exposures were calculated. The RME and CTE in fluoridated areas were 0.20 and 0.11 mg/kg/day, respectively, for infants while the RME and CTE estimates for children were 0.23 and 0.06 mg/kg/day, respectively. In non-fluoridated areas, the RME and CTE estimates were 0.11 and 0.08 mg/kg/day for infants and 0.21 and 0.06 mg/kg/day for children. Although the CRE estimates were within the optimal range the RME estimates were greater than the UL. This might have prompted authors to caution that some children could be at increased risk for fluorosis. Uncertainties in this analysis which ranged from medium to high level have affected the findings to a greater extent. Fojo et al. 2013 Fluoride concentration in beverages including soft drinks, juices and teas marketed in Portugal was Fluoride content was analysed using a potentiometric method which was optimised and validated. The total number of samples selected was 183. Fluoride concentration in the descending order was from extract-based soft drinks, juice drinks, juice and teas to carbonated soft drinks. All analysed samples had fluoride concentrations that were lower than the AI Only the beverages were considered as the source of fluoride exposure in this analysis.