In this article
South Dakota’s community water fluoridation program has drawn attention for its role in reducing tooth decay and improving oral health. While various estimates place the state’s coverage between 73.0% and 93.7%, recent data comparisons show several noteworthy trends worth examining.
This article provides a statistical breakdown of South Dakota’s water fluoride levels, coverage rates, and related oral health outcomes. By focusing on clear data points and regional comparisons, the aim is to help readers understand the scope and impact of these measures on communities across the state.
Below are a few key statistics to set the stage for more detailed data:
These figures highlight the widespread reach of fluoridated systems and underscore the significance of tracking coverage for public health. Next, we delve into more detailed numbers on coverage growth, comparisons with neighboring states, and concentration levels across various systems.
Understanding how water fluoridation coverage has changed over time offers insights into oral health trends statewide.
Although the exact year-by-year breakdown for every period is not publicly reported, these points help illustrate a steady adoption of fluoridation across diverse water systems. Below is a table summarizing groundwater reliance and naturally occurring fluoride coverage in South Dakota.
Water Supply Type | Percentage of SD Systems | Notes |
---|---|---|
Groundwater | 90% | Primary source for most rural communities |
Surface Water | 10% | No recorded fluoride exceedances reported |
Naturally Occurring Fluoride | 12.1% of CWS | Some areas rely on naturally elevated levels |
Juxtaposing South Dakota’s fluoridation figures with surrounding regions underscores the variability in adoption across the Upper Midwest.
These numbers reflect policy differences and local attitudes toward fluoridation, often affecting long-term oral health outcomes and healthcare costs. The table below highlights regional coverage levels side by side.
State | Fluoridation Coverage (%) |
---|---|
Minnesota | 98.3 |
North Dakota | 95.2 |
Iowa | 90.9 |
Nebraska | 88.1 |
South Dakota | 73.0 |
Montana | 62.3 |
Wyoming | 49.6 |
Examining breakdowns across different population groups reveals how socioeconomic factors and regional variations contribute to gaps in fluoridation coverage and oral health indicators.
Such differences underscore the influence of both local water systems and socioeconomic status on oral health. Additional data shows that in states with higher coverage, healthcare costs may decline, as reflected in certain per capita spending trends.
Beyond coverage statistics, examining fluoride concentrations provides insights into compliance and potential health considerations.
Groundwater dynamics, local geology, and treatment protocols shape these concentrations, highlighting the importance of ongoing monitoring. Below is a simplified overview of common fluoride standards for reference.
Guideline | Recommended Level |
---|---|
Centers for Disease Control | 0.7 mg/L |
World Health Organization | 1.5 mg/L (exceedance threshold) |
Surface Water in SD | No known exceedance above 1.5 mg/L |
Groundwater in SD | Variable, requires active monitoring |
Taken together, these figures illustrate the diverse influences shaping fluoridation in South Dakota. Overall coverage remains substantial, but uneven distribution and demographic factors highlight ongoing disparities. Keeping track of both fluoride concentrations and their correlation with oral health trends provides valuable insights for communities and stakeholders alike.
In this article