Home/.../Facts and Figures/Health Beliefs, Attitudes and Well-being/Fluoridation

Fluoridation

Data Sources: Rapid Risk Factor Surveillance System (RRFSS), 2009 & 2010

Sample: Residents 18 years and over in the KFL&A area.

Released: June 2014

Source of drinking water

Figure A. Respondents' source of drinking water in their household, KFL&A, 2009 & 2010

Table A. Respondents' source of drinking water in their household, KFL&A, 2009 & 2010% (95% Confidence Interval)
Drinking water source	Adults (18+)	95% Confidence Interval
Municipal system	74.6%	71.8, 77.2
Private well	71.6%	68.7, 74.3
Other	73.1%	70.5, 75.5

Interpretation for Figure A

In 2009 & 2010, 66.7% (65.0-68.5) of households in the KFL&A area received their drinking water from municipal systems.

Types of water KFL&A residents drink most often

Figure B. Types of water KFL&A residents drink most often in their household, KFL&A, 2009 & 2010

Table B. Types of water KFL&A residents drink most often in the household, KFL&A, 2009 & 2010, % (95% Confidence Interval)
Type of drinking water	Adults (18+)	95% Confidence Interval
Tap	55.0%	53.0, 57.0
Bottled	17.9%	16.4, 19.5
Both tap and bottled	25.7%	23.9, 27.5
Other	1.4%	0.9, 1.8

Interpretation for Figure B

KFL&A households drink tap water most often, 55.0% (53.0, 57.0). Almost one-fifth of households drink only bottled water, 17.9% (16.4, 19.5) and one-quarter, 25.7% (23.9, 27.5), of households drink both tap and bottled water.

KFL&A households that use filters or purifiers

Figure C. KFL&A households that use filters or purifiers if they usually drink tap water, 2009 & 2010

Table C. KFL&A households that use filters or purifiers if they usually drink tap water, 2009 & 2010, % (95% Confidence Interval)
Category	Adults (18+)	95% Confidence Interval
Yes	87.2%	86.5, 87.9
No	12.8%	12.1, 13.5

Interpretation for Figure C

The vast majority, 87.2% (86.5, 87.9) of KFL&A households who drink tap water use a filter or purifier. This includes both filters and purifiers that are attached directly to the water supply pipes and/or taps OR separate filter and purifiers used in jugs or water bottles.

Type of filter or purifier used

Figure D. Type of filter or purifier used by KFL&A residents, 2009 & 2010

Table D. Type of filter or purifier used by KFL&A residents, 2009 & 2010, % (95% Confidence Interval)
Type of filter	Adults (18+)	95% Confidence Interval
Activated charcoal system	66.0%	62.8, 69.1
Ultraviolet (UV) light	10.3%	8.3, 12.3
Reverse osmosis filtration	5.3%	3.8, 6.8
Other	18.4%	15.9, 21.0

Interpretation for Figure D

Of those households in the KFL&A area that use filters or purifiers for their tap water, 66.0% (62.8, 69.1) use an activated charcoal system.

Fluoride in the water supply

Figure E. KFL&A households who think fluoride has been added to the municipal water supply, 2009 & 2010

Table E. KFL&A households who think fuoride has been added to the municipal water supply, 2009 & 2010, % (95% Confidence Interval)
Category	Adults (18+)	95% Confidence Interval
Yes	73.7%	70.8, 76.5
No	26.3%	23.5, 29.2

Interpretation for Figure E

In 2009 & 2010, 73.7% (70.8, 76.5) of KFL&A households believed that fluoride was added to the municipal water supply. Water in KFL&A currently does not have fluoride added to the water supply. Fluoride was also not added to the water supply in 2009 & 2010. The former Pittsburgh County in KFL&A, which encompassed CFB Kingston and the Royal Military Collage, had a fluoridated water supply until October, 2008, at which point it was discontinued.

Those who support adding fluoride to the municipal water supply

Figure F. KFL&A households who support adding fluoride to the municipal water supply, 2009 & 2010

Table F. KFL&A households who support adding fluoride to the municipal water supply, 2009 & 2010, % (95% Confidence Interval)
Category	Adults (18+)	95% Confidence Interval
Support	73.1%	71.1, 75.2
Do not support	26.8%	24.8, 28.8

Interpretation for Figure F

In 2009 & 2010, 73.1% (71.1, 75.2) of KFL&A households support adding fluoride to the municipal water supply.

Notes

The RRFSS is a random-digit-dialed telephone survey of adults aged 18 years and older, conducted by the Institute for Social Research at York University, on behalf of KFL&A Public Health.

Confidence intervals explained

Researchers look at the "confidence levels" of percentages being compared to decide if there is a statistically significant difference between percentages. A statistically significant difference means that:

the difference between two percentages is unlikely to have occurred by chance alone, and
there is a true difference or change in the percentages.

In this report, 95% confidence intervals will accompany each percentage in all figures and tables. This interval represents the range in which we are 95% confident the true percentage will fall within. In tables, the 95% confidence intervals will be written with the percentage, followed by the 95% confidence interval range in brackets (e.g., 25% (12.3, 32.4)). In figures, the 95% confidence interval is represented by vertical bars in each bar line.