Caregiver party affiliation may not be linked to the opposition of community water fluoridation or topical fluoride, but it appeared to be associated with childhood vaccine hesitancy, according to a study recently published in Vaccine.
The authors believe that no other studies have investigated this association.
“Our findings suggest that political affiliation has differential influences on various modes of childhood disease prevention,” wrote the authors, led by Dr. Ana Luiza Peres Baldiotti of the department of oral health sciences at the University of Washington School of Dentistry in Seattle (Vaccine, July 8, 2026, Vol. 89, 128900).
Ideological beliefs and party affiliation can be a vital determinant of a caregiver's views on childhood disease prevention. For example, by undermining public trust in science and medical institutions, right-leaning populist movements have fostered skepticism concerning vaccines and public health measures like community water fluoridation, the authors wrote.
In the U.S., dentists and doctors have reported that more caregivers than ever are hesitant to have topical fluoride applied to their children’s teeth. Public debate over fluoride even led to changes in policy. In 2025, Utah and Florida stopped fluoridating public water systems, triggered in part by anti-fluoride sentiments, including comments made by U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Also in 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration unsuccessfully tried to remove prescription fluoride supplements from the market.
To investigate the potential association between political affiliation, childhood vaccine hesitancy, and fluoride opposition, online questionnaires were sent to five university- or children's hospital-based clinics in four states and via social media between November 2020 and September 2021. Possible correlations were assessed for the 833 surveys submitted, and they were evaluated using regression models, according to the study.
Of the 833 participants, 79.5% were women with a mean age of 41. About 87% of caregivers had a college degree or higher, and 36% reported an annual household income greater than $100,000.
About 37.7% were opposed to topical fluoride, and 37.2% were against community water fluoridation. Nearly 41% of caregivers reported childhood vaccine hesitancy, the authors wrote.
Regression models revealed that caregivers' political affiliation was not notably linked to fluoride opposition (p >0.05). However, party affiliation was significantly correlated with caregiver childhood vaccine hesitancy. Conservative caregivers reported greater odds of childhood vaccine hesitancy than moderate and liberal caregivers (moderate: odds ratio [OR] = 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33 to 0.87; liberal: OR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.85), they wrote.
The findings are associations, the authors wrote, and it’s likely impossible to establish causality indelibly.
“Policymakers and clinicians should continue monitoring evolving attitudes toward both childhood vaccines and fluoride to adapt public health strategies appropriately,” Baldiotti and colleagues wrote.
