Even today, 40 of the country's 67 local authorities refuse to add the decay-preventing mineral to their public drinking supply, leaving 1.4 million New Zealanders, in particular the young, vulnerable to an increased risk of pain and tooth loss.
As Dr Coleman said: "New Zealand has high rates of preventable tooth decay and increasing access to fluoridated water will improve oral health, and mean fewer costly trips to the dentist for more New Zealanders."
The irony is that to back a move that decades of his predecessors have been too spineless to implement, the good doctor has embraced not only Sir Peter, but also the WHO. He noted that Sir Peter, the Royal Society of New Zealand and a panel of experts had, in 2014, concluded "there is compelling evidence" that fluoridation "produces broad benefits for the dental health of New Zealanders".
So why, you have to wonder, does he turn his back on these very same experts when it comes to their advice on a sugar tax, preferring instead to follow the self-interested clamour of the fizzy drink manufacturers and the grocery trade lobbyists?
Dr Coleman tells us that in 2013, 40 per cent of all 5-year-olds had already experienced tooth decay, with 35,000 kids between 1 and 4 years having had a decaying tooth extracted that year. He said fluoridating water would reduce tooth decay in children by 40 per cent.
But not, he fails to add, if they keep guzzling bottles of sugar-laden drinks.
You only have to pick up the latest WHO guidelines on sugar intake to learn that fluoride, for all its merits, is no match for the high sugar intake of modern diets. This sugar mixes with bacteria in the mouth to create acids which eat away at the tooth enamel leading to cavities. Fluoride can delay the process, says WHO, but not prevent it.
Still, taking the decision-making of this important public health issue out of the hands of politicians, both local and national, is long overdue. In Auckland, for instance, it will hopefully end the odd anomaly where the citizens living in the boundaries of the long-gone Onehunga Borough drink unfluoridated water, while their neighbours in the rest of the Super City enjoy treated water.
Onehunga has historically drawn its water from local springs and in 2001, following an earlier round of amalgamation that brought Onehunga and the other isthmus councils into an enlarged Auckland City, a "referendum" on whether to fluoridate Onehunga water was conducted. Only a third of ballot papers were returned, with 62 per cent against change. Despite the local community board bravely voting for change, the full council voted 10 to 9 to retain the status quo.
Up and down the country the issue bubbles, as local fanatics pop up to litigate their anti-science. Credit for kicking off the latest decision goes to former Auckland Council chief planning officer Roger Blakeley who, in February 2014, wrote to Sir Peter, the Royal Society and Ministry of Health asking for a review of the scientific evidence.
This was followed up in July that year, with delegates to Local Government New Zealand's annual conference voting strongly to have this "public health issue" taken over by national health authorities. The Gluckman-Royal Society report followed soon after with the expert advice Dr Coleman has embraced.
Shame about the sugar.
Debate on this article is now closed.
