Long Island’s water is not fluorinated, but a group of dentists and the Nassau County Board of Health may want to change that. According to a press release from the Old Bethpage-based New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, featured on Web site News Long Island, the groups are pushing to re institute the process, which they insist prevents tooth decay.
Here’s a selection from a message, dated Jan. 1, 2007, from the president of the Nassau County Dental Society:
The various dental diseases are being recognized as a major health concern placing tremendous demands on our communities resources. Prevention is paramount to curbing these costs. The coalition is currently exploring the possibility of re-instituting water fluoridation programs in selected communities, recognizing the dramatic and direct positive impact this action would have on the general dental health of these communities.
Opponents, however, point to scientific evidence that fluoride is more toxic to humans than it is beneficial to their teeth.
From the release:
Levittowners voted out 29 years of water fluoridation in 1983. Carle Place and the Nassau communities bordering NYC followed in 1996. The Suffolk County Legislature voted down their Health Commissioner’s fluoridation plan in 1991. Now Long Island is fluoridation-free yet enjoys a lower cavity rate than most fluoridated NYS counties and NYS, as a whole, which is 73% fluoridated.
A 2006 National Research Council (NRC) report reveals that fluoridation poses risks to the thyroid gland, diabetics, kidney patients, high water drinkers and others and can severely damage children’s teeth.
“Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath as to why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” says Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network.
Also, ignoring their own 1990 recommendation for more kidney and allergy fluoride research, NYS Department of Health representatives take part in current Nassau Suffolk Oral Health Coalition meetings where fluoridation is discussed and encouraged but fluoridation dissent is discouraged.
Over 1,100 professionals (so far) have signed a statement urging Congress to stop water fluoridation nationwide and to hold Congressional hearings about why federal officials continue to promote fluoridation in the face of new scientific evidence that fluoridation is ineffective and has serious health risks. ( http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html )
Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three NRC fluoride panel members, two officers in the EPA Union representing 1500 EPA professionals; and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide. Local signers include Long Island dentists Drs. Norman Bressack, Leonard Fazio, Theodore Kastenbaum, Krystna Wolski and physician Richard Carlton. Signer Dr. Arvid Carlsson, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, says, “Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology.”
What’s your take?
Don’t simply quote and link the conspiracy theorists. Try linking someone who deserves an opinion – maybe the American Dental Association – http://www.ada.org/public/topics/fluoride/facts/fluoridation_facts.pdf
Of course flouride is toxic. So is water… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication
I’m sorry Vinny but how can you say water is toxic when it not only makes up 98% of our body, but is what you must drink to survive and be healthy.
However, doing the flouride in school is a terrible idea. The school nurses are not trained dentist. If you’re worried about your kids health take them to a dentist. Dont have dental insurance? Go to a clinic I’m sure they have a dentist there.
FLouride isn’t a quick fix solution!
as my 18 yaer old daughter just died of bone cancer, I was horrified to learn how toxic fluoride is-the latest Harvard study documents that fluoridated communities have higher incidence of this terrible disease than those that don’t-Eurpoe banned its use over 10 years ago-who is pushing this toxin on American citizens?
Why not just take the time to teach your children to brush their teeth on a regular basis? Why leave everything up to others to decide for us? I think any type of chemical added to anything that we have to ingest is a bad idea – period.
It’s very simple. Fluoride is toxic. Don’t put poison in the water. What’s ridicuous is that it’s very difficult to even find toothpaste without flouride.
To top it off, there is no real proof that fluoride prevents tooth decay, so this is a real DUH!
No Fluoride in the water, period, end of story. Who thinks these things up, anyhow? Oh, maybe the fluoride manufacturers, well imagine that.
The most vulnerable in our population are harmed by ingesting fluoride:
1. The aging senior citizens (due to lowered kidney function from high blood pressure and diabetes) as only 50% of fluoride is excreted by the kidneys. All dialysis patients have to have it filtered out by reverse osmosis.
2. The youngest (all newborns who are formula fed instead of being breastfed for the first six months of life, per the AAP) who ingest the most per day on a totally liquid diet–they get more fluoride per day in bottles than their 200# fathers.
The ADA has just said parents who bottle feed had better buy non-fluoridated bottled water or expensive ready-to-feed.
3. The pregnant (Fluoride crosses the placenta and the blood/brain barrier of the fetus they are carrying and may be contributing to autism.)
4. The overweight (it interferes with the thyroid gland’s uptake of iodine) The American Academy of Clinical Endocrinologists in 2003 changed their blood test lab values to reflect our hypothyroid society that they were missing–1/2 of the population now.
And besides fluoride is supposed to work on the enamel topically. What is wrong with teaching all kids good oral hygiene with brushing teeth with toothpaste? That helps them for life.
Anything is toxic in the wrong amounts in the wrong place.
Have you read the National Research Council report? Can you cite it?
Well-documented medical evidence of detrimental effects weighs heavily against fluoridation. Although those promoting fluoridation assure us it is not harmful, they could not prove those claims when testifying in major court cases. Many segments of the population are at risk, such as those with kidney and thyroid impairment. Common sense tells us that it is not plausible for a baby and a 200 pound man to be subjected to the same level of fluoride (1 ppm) that is added to fluoridated water supplies, yet that is what recklessly happens with fluoridation. No chemicals should be deliberately added to our public water supplies that are not needed to give us clean, safe water to drink.
Seriously, you should read the National Research Council report:
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11571&page=1
Among other things, NRC said:
1. A very small proportion of the population is at risk from too much fluoride — 1.2 million people, out of a population of about 300 million people.
2. Not enough fluoride might be a bigger problem than too much — this issue was not researched.
3. There is little evidence to suggest that adding fluoride to prevent dental disease can cause an overdose in anyone. Again, this issue was not researched by the committee.
4. Amounts recommended for reducing dental disease are well below even the lower standard the NRC thinks might be best.
5. There was no comparison of risks and benefits of fluoridating water to prevent dental disease.
It bothers me when people refer to distinguished research bodies and then misrepresent the research from those bodies. I think someone has done that to you here.
Almost 24 years ago, I took the day off to run from Levittown, LI to City Hall, where I met with the then mayor of the City, Ed Koch. I ran this 35 mile run to attempt to educate the public regarding the negative information about fluorides and fluoridation and why the concept ought not to be accepted as either a valid way to reduce tooth decay (it doesn’t work) or a safe way to enhance dental health.
I was right back then, and the evidence indicates that it is even MORE of a deleterious concept today. That is why I urge ALL Long Island residents to do what (apparently) few (or none) of our elected officials–trying to push this poison down our throats–are doing. This is to investigate the chemical and let science and common sense be our guides. You can start with this website which is an article I wrote to encourage the State of PA to NOT fluoridate about 6 years ago. It’s also been updated.
Good luck and that site is: http://tompetrie.net/id6.html.
If you have any questions, please call me at 845-425-6549.
Tom Petrie
Nutritionist
November 27, 2007
For any dentist or dental profession to claim that fluoride in the water has “dramatic” effects on general health amounts hyperbole. Dentists have their brains stuck in the 1950’s when the current research and scientific evidence shows meager to non-existent benefits, and increasing evidence of poorly researched potential and unrecognized harm. The dental community is no longer credible (if it ever was) on this subject.
Natural occurring fluoride is called calcium fluoride. Calcium mitigates the toxic effects of fluoride. It takes 20 times more calcium fluoride to kill 50% of laboratory guinea pigs than it takes for any of the three fluoridation compounds.
90% of tooth decay occurs where fluoridation was never claimed to be effective; the pits and fissures of teeth. Thus, for decades, dentists have been applying plastic sealants to the chewing surfaces of the molars.
The Journal of Public Health Dentistry reported, “50% of US Head Start children have had Baby Bottle Tooth Decay”. Use of Sippy Cups is extending this rampant decay caused by high levels of tooth-surface bacteria that thrive on sugar and pass their acidic waste onto the tooth surface causing the decay. Fluoridated water does not kill the strep mutan bacteria that causes tooth decay.
Advances in Dental Research, June, 1994
“Overall, an average of 86.8% of the dose was retained by the infants, which is about 50% higher than would be expected for adults. …the pharmacokinetics of fluoride in infants reveal(s) a completely different pattern compared to what has been found in adults.” There is a clear need for more information about the renal handling and general metabolism of fluoride in young children and the elderly.”
To: ALL with ‘Common Sense’ about keeping our drinking Waters CLEAN & SAFE.
URGENT!
Know that the actual ‘illicit chemical cocktail’ that is ‘corruptly sold’ by phosphate chemical corporations to 10’s of 1000’s of government regulated municipal water treatment plants all over North America is an USA-EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] ‘Regulated Potential Pollutant’ of Air, Water and Land that is currently derived from primarily the Phosphate ore mining & processing industries ‘HAPS’ units [e.g. Hazardous Air Pollution Scrubbers], and as ‘Silicofluoride’ is regulatorily classified by EPA as a ‘Class 1 ..’HAZARDOUS WASTE’.
Politically appointed USA-EPA highest management is primarily in ‘political complicity’ to allow Silicofluorides to be sold and metered into our precious USA drinking waters. However, recently around 7,000+ EPA professional CAREER ‘non-politically hired’ Scientists, Toxicologists, Chemists, and professional field health workers signed a Petition to EPA top Management requesting ‘fluoridation’ be stopped. Read the PR Announcement at:
http://www.world-wire.com/news/0830050001.html
On March, 2006 a ‘balanced’ distinguished dozen group of Scientists on a National Research Council/National Academy of Science Panel, after 3-1/2 years of their intensely studying recent ‘peer reviewed’ published ‘Fluoride’ SCIENCE as related to possible health endangerment issued a 507 page REPORT in bound book format concerning ALL that they learned and concluded with ‘Recommendations’. One essential Conclusion was that the current USA governmental set maximum established levels for fluoride in drinking water are NOT Protective especially of children from ‘fluorosis’, and lifetime ‘Bone damage’ and other bodily damage! You can read the entire Report ‘FREE’ on Internet, or purchase a copy by going to:
http://nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571
Learn more about the deceit of so called ‘fluoridation’ by reading the just published book by Christopher Bryson entitled, “the fluoride deception”. You can view a summation of what Bryson describes by turning on your speakers and going to: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7319752042352089988&q=fluoride+Bryson&hl=en
____
The daily swallowed DOSAGE of ‘fluoridated drinking water’ swallowed by especially Pregnant Mothers, and very SMALL CHILDREN is UNCONTROLLABLE! Read this article about Amer. Dental Assoc. and CDC [Center for Disease Control] WARNINGS to prevent Babies/Infants from getting ‘fluoride’:
http://www.mothering.com/sections/news_bulletins/november2006.html#fluoride
Many Cities in the USA have ceased, or voted NOT to ‘fluoridate’, especially in the past 10 years. See LIST of those Cities at:
http://www.fluoridealert.org/communities.htm
Finally, know that the AWWA [American Water Works Association] has reported in one of their ‘Water Conservation pamphlets’ that “Less than 1% of utilities treated water is ever consumed [e.g. swallowed] by human beings.” The rest goes to landscape watering, washing uses, and down drains.
So, think of this analogy to the AWWA statement…Would anyone purchase a bottle of 100 EXPENSIVE ‘medicant’ pills, take just one and throw the rest away into our habitats only to pollute our environments? Of course NOT!
NEVER SWALLOW ANY FLUORIDE !
____
The U.S. EPA has acknowledged they can identify NOT ONE long-term study that verifies toxicologically the health safety or effectiveness for any of the fluoridation products.
Is that enough for Long Island government to be leery yet? If not, maybe this could do the trick. Simply google fluosilicic acid, aka hydrofluosilicic acid.
That’s the fluoridation agent in common usage, and which is erroneously pitched as “fluoride” by so many pro- fluoridation “health authorities.”
Data sheets reveal that around 1/4 of this hazardous-rated brew contains fluoride.
Also, among its listed contaminants are arsenic and lead. The hazmat origin of this chemical product is thoroughly revealed w/photos at fluorideAction.net and other good sites.
Perhaps with an investment of only 30-minutes, in my view, good Long Island officials might rightly know if drinking and bathing in water laced by such chemicals on a daily continuous basis is worth the risk or not.
For those who are accustomed to first reading the ingredients of products we consume. making the right choice is much simpler than many seem to make it.
Fluorides, yes, plural! Fluorosilicic acid, used in 95% of drinking water systems (liquid form), comes from phosphate fertilizer industries near where I live in central Florida, Hillsborough and Polk Counties. Look up the element: Fluorine, a halogen gas that forms compounds with most all other elements, exception being calcium and alkalines as Lime form insoluble complexes with fluorides, making it unabsorbable from the gastrointestinal tract. (ref. NAS report for Congress, “Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride”, 1993, page 129.
Your local utilities dept. or library can obtain the American Water Works Association Standard for Fluorosilicic Acid B703-06, the latest issue. The foreword gives the same source and notes the wet scrubber process. And, an entire page of contaminantsm, including lead.
The journal “Neurotoxicology” June 30, 2007, abstract of article on PubMed: “Effects of fluoridation and disinfection agent combinations on lead leaching from leaded-brass parts”, notes with chloramine combined with fluorosilicic acid resulted in a leaching spike of 900ppb.
Got enough yet?
Seriously? Where’s that study?
Fluoride cannot be removed from a public water supply through filters – so why would any American support forcing this chemical on others?
Water is an essential nutrient and forcing citizens to ingest fluoride goes against everything this country was built on.
And, cavities are not caused by a lack of fluoride – just as headaches are not caused by a lack of Tylenol…
Think about motives – why does the ADA support this? How much money are they raking in from the chemical companies…
Wake up, think, educate yourself and stop swallowing their propaganda…
Protect your families…
²Vinny
If you refer to Wikipedia, please read the definition of toxicity too.
“Toxicity is the degree to which something is able to produce illness or damage to an exposed organism.”
I don’t have to tell you that almost anything of what you consume too much will have bad effects on your health?
²Don Levine
You don’t eat toothpaste, do you?
Swallowing Toxic diluted Industrial Fluoride Waste has never been proven safe, nor effective, ever, not genuinely anyway.
Any ruthless individual, who deliberately & knowingly keeps promoting this fraudulent shameless racket & practice, for their very selfish ends, justly deserves to be held accountable for each & every act of harm, be it past, present, or future!!
Anyone who has not carefully researched these issues themselves, will be manipulated, by the ’so called Experts!’
You don’t really believe that dentists would wanna run out of business, do you?
Of course, it’s the other way around!!
BTW, did you know:
“Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production, according to once secret documents. Massive quantities of fluoride– millions of tons– were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. One of the most toxic chemicals known, fluoride rapidly emerged as the leading chemical health hazard of the U.S atomic bomb program–both for workers and for nearby communities, the documents reveal.” —> http://tinyurl.com/2cdju5
As long as there are greedy, evil, selfish & self serving entities out there, the wicked will likely continue to get the upper hand, because of their political power + of course, the money $$$!!
Sugar causes tooth decay – even the sugar manufacturers, who are loath to admit that their product causes any other health benefit, admit that. Why don’t we just ban sugar?
Someone by the name of Ed Darrell has sent several comments, evidently trying, but failing, to uphold the virtues of fluoridation. He acknowledges that about 1.2 million people will be adversely affected by fluoridation in our country, nonchalantly chalking it off as a tiny amount compared to our 300 million population. The federal Safe Drinking Water Act does not agree with Ed Darrell, and neither do I and most people of good will. The Safe Drinking Water Act calls for protecting the most vulnerable people of our country, aiming to protect them from even any ANTICIPATED adverse effects.
Ed Darrell is also trying, again failing, to negate the significance of the findings in the National Research Council (NRC) fluoride report, over 500 pages long, and three years in the making, conducted by a very balanced panel of scientists. The NRC is the research arm of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences (NAS). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requested NRC’s assessment of fluoride’s maximum contaminant level (MCL) which NRC concluded was not protective of the population.
In spite of what Ed Darrell claims, it is a fact that in addition to NRC analyzing the MCL of fluoride in public drinking water, three of the NRC Panel members have confirmed, and others scrutinizing the NRC report have clarified, that the NRC report also INCLUDED A LARGE AMOUNT OF RECENT WELL-DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE OF ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS OF FLUORIDE IN DRINKING WATER at or close to 1 ppm or even lower concentrations. Note: 1 ppm is the amount intentionally added to fluoridated water supplies!
Ed Darrell should take a long, fresh, unbiased look at the fluoridation issue and stop plugging for this costly, hazardous practice of polluting our water supplies with fluoride chemicals.
“Note: 1 ppm is the amount intentionally added to fluoridated water supplies!”
You forgot to mention that it is not always added up to 1ppm: in many places, that is the concentration that is reached by REMOVING fluoride from naturally sources of water that contain more than, as was the standard, 4ppm.
The NRC study you cite recommends that this maximum level be lowered slightly, primarily due to concerns over teeth discoloration and possible health effects if people consumed too much additional fluoride from other sources than drinking water. I, in fact, have minor teeth discoloration: a minor form of the condition that was once known as “Texas teeth” back when natural water sources in some states contained far more fluoride than is allowed today. Of course, this is primarily because I swallowed my toothpaste as a kid (doh!). Not that my anecdotal experience matters, but I’ve never broken a bone or had joint problems, and in fact despite the fact that I almost never brush my teeth and haven’t for decades now (I know, ewww… guilty, lazy secret) I haven’t had a single cavity in all that time.
Anyway, Anyone reading the summary of the results can quickly see that you are misrepresenting and grossly exaggerating what it actually discusses and proposes. There is not any sort of general condemnation of fluoridation, nor do they make the recommendation that it be reduced beyond or even to the 1ppm standard that is used whenever it is added from drinking water (rather than removed).
Human exposure to fluoride has greatly increased since World War II, due not only to fluoridated water and toothpaste, but to environmental pollution by major industries from aluminum to pesticides: fluoride is one critical industrial chemical!
Of course, it’s so good to dump toxic diluted fluoride litter into drinking water & elsewhere, so the more people slowly get poisoned, the better!
This is the very master plan of those evil entities, who are seeking to reduce the population & increase their power & profits!
Anyone, who does not do their Homework or do independent research themselves, will be manipulated!
Be assured, these evil entities do NOT give a %&*# about the general population, except their very own ends!
They will lie, cheat, twist the truth, or do anything, to try prevent people to see the truth.
Very soon, Codex Regulation will ensure that natural vitamins, minerals & herbs, will be under the control of the drug cartel, as well prices will greatly increase, to make it harder for people to stay healthy, or get well, + to forbid to sell herbs as food.
Organic/ Natural Food will also be attacked!
Some of this, is all-ready in place in Germany & Norway.
Education is the key… http://tinyurl.com/ftt2k
I suspect it could be chemically bound up and precipitated out. This site notes a couple of filters that work:
http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryhowtoguide/a/removefluoride.htm
Water is essential, but it’s not a nutrient. Forcing citizens to ingest chlorine also goes against “everything this country was built on,” I supposed — but it sure does prevent disease. I suspect that the nation was not really built on tinfoil hat ideas, however. We have a lot of supplements added to foods to overcome public health items, such as iodine in salt to overcome diseases of iodine shortages, chlorine in water to kill microorganisms, irradiated ergosterol in milk to combat rickets, etc., etc. Public health is a concern for everybody, but there are lots of rational precedents for taking small measures that prevent disease.
Malaria isn’t caused by lack of quinine, either. Fluoride is a preventive against tooth decay, against dental caries. A lack of fluoride makes people more susceptible to cavities.
ADA has an ethics policy that prevents the organization from investing in chemical companies that would benefit from their health recommendations. Dentists were anxious to quit treating cavities and get to the more expensive stuff, like cosmetics and tooth straightening. Joking aside, good public health was their chief aim. I think their first votes on taking such action were in about 1947 (I had to track this down once, and read through the formal resolutions). Every time the issue comes up, some dentists makes the point that they are slitting their own financial throats when they prevent dental disease. Every time that guy sits down, someone points out that there is enough disease even with so much prevented that dentists make a good living.
I think it’s unrealistic, petty and nasty to accuse dentists of malfeasance on such issues. Their success in fighting dental disease is a great model for all the health professions.
I haven’t seen any propaganda from dentists.
Why did that crazy guy in London remove the pump handle? YOu think he had some way to profit from preventing people from getting cholera? Heck, why do you inoculate your kids? Don’t dismiss altruism and wise health policy as potential explanations.
Why the Urgent Need to Dump Toxic Diluted Industrial Litter into Drinking-Water + or Food Sources, as far and wide, as is possible…
1. For the supposed topical benefits.
If we could get people’s average saliva fluoride levels up to the level of toothpaste, we can claim that the dental benefits are worth the risks of cardiac arrest, diminishing IQ, stupefying + controlling the dumb brainwashed sheeple, kidney failure which are bound to happen at this high intake level.
The very good News now is, with DOW’s magnificent sulfuryl fluoride allowances, the extra fluoride in food might just do it, if we can keep up the good work of turning every tap into a dispenser of mouthrinse that you can swallow & digest, soak & bath in + cook with & sprinkle your garden with.
2. For the benefits to seniors’ families.
Seniors live way too long if they avoid fluoride. Water fluoridation helps their bones break with no warning, and death soon follows. Fluoridation is the most humane way of ensuring that their estates can benefit those of us who matter.
3. To increase the GNP index.
Building and maintaining fluoridation plants and equipment create many jobs, and jobs mean more taxes for the government. Fluoride poisoning of waterworks employees creates a constant need for new entry-level, disposable employees who will never get a cent in disability payments for fluoride poisoning, from the many new layers of insurance company bureacracy that will need to be developed to forcefully deny their claims.
4. We still do have 50% of children without mild to moderate dental fluorosis!
Come on, people! Half of the nation is still not getting enough fluoride in their formative years to permanently damage their tooth enamel for life. Get on with the program!!!!
5. People are still not getting enough fluoride from the air.
Coal fired power plants, aluminum smelters, phosphate mines, and steel mills are unfortunatly either shutting down or sadly reducing their fluoride output with modern stupid pollution control technology. Al Gore has just about ruined our chances of getting any wonderful dental benefits from smog.
Well, there you have it. Five good reasons to believe Public Health officials when they scream that dental fluorosis is one of the top ten public health achievements of the twentieth century, right up there with autism (our beautiful gift to you when you vaccinate your baby), and the organochlorine carcinogens that you can’t even get in the public drinking water in Europe or Japan, that’s how backward they are. And don’t get me started on how we saved you from fresh raw foods like milk and almonds.
And remember, there has never been any scientific evidence collected or research conducted in the United States that says fluoridation is harmful. And if there were, we would just suppress it and shoot the scientists. That’s why you don’t need to waste your time voting or trying to use the democratic process to stop us from violating your human rights. We are infallible & are going to poison…pardon, fluoridate the world, and don’t you forget it!
Go read the National Research Council paper. No one proposes to bring fluoride levels in saliva to the levels in toothpaste. According to the sources this thread started with, fluoride added to water to prevent dental disease poses no risk of cardiac arrest, no risk of diminishing IQ, no risk of kidney failure, etc.
Read your own studies, will you?
I’m also not dissuaded from listening to the National Research Council. Their studies on lead in gasoline were on the money. I suppose y’all oppose such public health actions as getting the lead out of gas, though it has produced a dramatic increase in IQ in children.
There are risks to everything in life. So far as has been shown, wearing tinfoil hats reduces none of those risks. I suppose such a hat will protect you from fluoride falling from the heavens.
Excuse me if I decline your offer of such a hat.
Yes we have read the NRC report. It tells us that there is clear evidence that small amounts of fluoride, at or near levels added to U.S. water supplies, present potential risks to the thyroid gland, according to the National Research Council’s (NRC) first-ever published review of the fluoride/thyroid literature.
“Many Americans are exposed to fluoride in the ranges associated with thyroid effects, especially for people with iodine deficiency,” says Kathleen Thiessen, PhD, co-author of the government-sponsored NRC report. “The recent decline in iodine intake in the U.S could contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals,” says Thiessen.
“A low level of thyroid hormone can increase the risk of cardiac disease, high cholesterol, depression and, in pregnant woman, decreased intelligence of offspring,” said Thiessen.
Common thyroid symptoms include fatigue, weight gain, constipation, fuzzy thinking, low blood pressure, fluid retention, depression, body pain, slow reflexes, and more. It’s estimated that 59 million Americans have thyroid conditions.
Robert Carton, PhD, an environmental scientist who worked for over 30 years for the U.S. government including managing risk assessments on high priority toxic chemicals, says “fluoride has detrimental effects on the thyroid gland of healthy males at 3.5 mg a day. With iodine deficiency, the effect level drops to 0.7 milligrams/day for an average male.” (1.0 mg/L fluoride is in most water supplies)
Among many others, the NRC Report cites human studies which show
- fluoride concentrations in thyroids exceeding that found in other soft tissues except kidney
- an association between endemic goiter and fluoride exposure or enamel fluorosis in human populations
- fluoride adversely affects thyroid and parathyroid hormones, which affect bone health
“If you have a thyroid problem, avoiding fluoride may be a good preventive health measure for you,” writes Drs’ Richard and Karilee Shames in “Thyroid Power.”
Ed
ed
Dentists are not the altruistic health practitioners you make them out to be As a result our emergency rooms are inundated with critical care for dentistry problems which most hospitals are not equipped to handle,
Deamonte Driver, a 12 year old boy living in a fluoridated community. He died after many dentists refused to see him. Two weeks in a hospital room and $250,000 bill tossed to the taxpayers didn’t save his life.
Now dentists are under pressure to do something about this because situations like this exist all over the US – at least one other child and one elderly person have died from tooth decay infections that went untreated. There are probably more that didn’t make the newspapers. On top of this 108 million americans don’t have dental insurance.
Dentists don’t want to be mnadated to actually treat low income people because they don’t like government to force them to do anything. Instead they force fluoridation on all of us – giving you the illusion they care about low-income people whom they won’t treat but will gladly treat their water supply.
So arrogant are they that it’s been written in their own dental journal that fluoridation campaigns give organized dentistry political viabllity.
Most dentists now make more money than physicians while working fewer days, fewer hours doing less critical work. Organized dentistry constantly lobbies for laws that benefits themselves.
After 60 years of water fluoridation reaching 2/3 of Americans on public water supplies and virtually 100% via the food supply; with fluoridated toothpaste 95% of the market, a huge amount of fluoridated dental products, an increase in the use of fluoride containing pesticides whose residues remain on our food – tooth decay is rising along with fluoride overdose symptoms – dental fluorosis.
Cavities are linked to poor diet either through poverty or poor food choices. Studies show fluoride is no rememdy for poor diet.
Fluoride also delays eruption of teeth. So early studies are inaccurate.
Further the recent use of the electronic diagnodent shows that fluoride doesn’t prevent decay but it might hide it. Fluoride hardens the outside enamel; but the enamel isn’t a solid sheath covering the tooth. It’s actually closely bound rods. Decay invariably seeps below the surface. Dentists call them fluoride boms – when their little metal explorer pokes an otherwise healthy looking tooth and poof – a huge cavity.
Dentists do enough patting themselves on the back for something they should be embarassed about. They don’t need you patting them on the head.
How dumb is it to put something into the drinking water that is too risky for infants to drink? The ADA now says that no fluoridated water should be given to babies or used to prepare infant formula for the entire first year of life. ADA further recommends that only very low fluoride water be given to babies such as bottled or distilled water. How many parents can or will deal with this properly? They must buy distillers or lug home bottled water since ordinary household filters do not remove fluoride and boiling only concentrates it. What a cost and burden to parents who will have to pay still higher water bills to put this risky chemical into their drinking water. So now we have the bizarre situation of the ADA (and the CDC) continuing to promote fluoridation while admitting it is too risky for our youngest and most vulnerable citizens. ADA’s illogical schizophrenia is all too obvious for anyone who has a functioning brain. And the media generally play along like the lapdogs they have always been for the dishonest agencies that continue to promote random, forced medication through the public water supplies. Go to http://www.fluorideAction.org to learn more about the truth.
Check the NRC study the blogger cited in the first post. It does not in any way say that it’s unhealthy to give fluoridated water to a baby.
Deamonte Driver’s death was regrettable. It has nothing to do with fluoride. He had not seen a dentist, nor most other health practitioners, in quite a while. The point of the story about his death was the necessity of extending health care coverage to kids who don’t have it.
Fluoride prevents tooth decay. It’s not perfect, and it can’t overcome really bad tooth hygiene or great neglect.
Stopping fluoride wouldn’t have done Deamonte any good. Fact is that the fluoride may have added years to his short life.
We don’t know. The government doesn’t have enough money to pay for dental care for kids — which only makes the prevention campaign more urgent.
And, while I agree that not all dentists are altruists, the fact remains that as a group they have an ethical canon against taking money from chemical companies like fluoride refiners, and that the ADA’s call for fluoridated water and better tooth brushing remains the single best public health campaign of the last 150 years. All the talk trying to belittle or denigrate the dentists for these actions is hooey.
What is the idea behind fluoridation?
Is it just a financial thing (make money off the sheeple)? Is it some kind of control thing? Is it a way of getting rid of fluoride waste from nuclear programs? All of the above? Something else? Why the hell did they get the idea to poison our water supplies with this industrial toxin?
It seems it started out as a cover up of the major health problems caused by the release of toxic fluoride, near the early nuclear facilities, such as Oak Ridge, Tennessee and others. This was a way to stone wall potential lawsuits by putting up phony research showing that fluoride was not so harmful as the evidence of illnesses showed.
This bad research was latched onto by the water fluoridation entities. Fluoride replaces calcium in bons and teeth and causes fluorosis when ingested in sufficient quantities.
Fluoride is a poison–more poisonous than lead, slightly less poisonous than arsenic. It also is cumulative and collects in bones and tissues, not just the teeth
Is there any wonder with the lack of assimilable calcium in the food plus other things that prevent mineral uptake that elderly people have brittle bones?
The fluoride dumped in water and that which was used in the nuclear program is very much a toxic poison. It was once a waste product of aluminum smelting and is now a waste product of the phosphate fertilizer industry, fluorosilicic acid.
The idea of passing off this deadly poison as being in some way healthful, or even a nutrient (for those that’ll fall for this propaganda) is merely a ploy of the corporations entities, to find an easy (and even a $$$profitable$$$) way to dispose of some of their hazardous toxic waste.
Fluoride is an accumulative toxin that has more and worse effects as it builds up in the body.
Our so-called public servants have only been spoon fed the bad science surrounding fluoride; same as dentists regarding mercury amalgam fillings and fluoride for teeth. They have all been institutionalized with the propaganda and will not believe anything else, even if it is backed up with studies. Talk about cognitive dissonance, they have a majority bad case of it.
In trace amounts, it is a key disease preventive, especially preventing dental caries. Adding trace amounts in drinking water is amazingly inexpensive, with a huge, almost incalculable payoff in benefits.
But less poisonous than chlorine, which is used to make our water safe, and which is also part of an essential nutrient. Both sodium and chlorine are poisonous and dangerous; as sodium chloride, it is absolutely essential to life.
Lots of things we need to live are poisons, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, in the wrong amounts. Water will kill you, too, if you drink about 16 pints in a short period of time. Too much oxygen can kill you. Carbon dioxide is a deadly poison, too — but if you don’t have it in your lungs to trigger a breathing response, you’ll stop breathing.
What’s your point?
Fluoride – A Medical Fact Which You Can Have Substantiated By Specialists Who Are Not Under The Control Of The Government
The following should open your eyes to a medical fact which you can have substantiated by specialists who are not under the control of the government and can therefore tell the truth.
“All the blood in the body passes through the thyroid gland every 17 minutes, during this 17min passage the gland’s secretion of iodine KILLS weak germs that may have gained entry into the blood through an injury to the skin, the lining of nose or throat, or through absorption of food from the digestive tract, Strong, virulent germs are rendered weaker by each 17 min trip, until finally they are killed.”
“It is well established that the iodine content of the thyroid gland is dependent upon the iodine available in the food and water intake of the individual”
“This gland performs other functions besides killing harmful germs in the blood. The 1st is the rebuilding of energy with which to do the day’s work. The 2nd is to calm the body and relieve nervous tension, and the 3rd relates to clear thinking. Iodine is also one of the best oxidizing catalysts we have.”
“Now while the thyroid gland helpfully stores iodine from the blood passing through it every 17 mins., the gland MAY also BE MADE TO LOSE THAT STORED IODINE IF, for example, WE TAKE IN DRINKING WATER TO WHICH CHLORINE IS ADDED, or use too much sodium chloride, whose common name is table salt.”
“There is a WELL- KNOWN law of halogen displacement. The halogen group is made up as follows;
Halogen … Relative Atomic Weight
FLUORINE..19.
CHLORINE..35.5
BROMINE..80
IODINE..127.
The clinical activity of any one of these 4 halogens is in INVERSE proportion to its atomic weight. This means that any one of the four, CAN DISPLACE THE ELEMENT WITH A HIGHER ATOMIC WEIGHT, but cannot displace an element with a lower atomic weight.”
Therefore FLUORINE with the LOWEST atomic weight CAN REPLACE ALL of the others, but most of all IODINE.
“BUT A REVERSE ORDER IS NOT POSSIBLE.”
Now I can clearly see why “they” are so insistent on this plan of destruction, hope this info puts it all clearly for other descent & genuine men and women.
Ed
I checked out the NRC report and this is what it says:
Babies under one year consume over their adequate intake (to avoid moderate fluorosis, yellow or brown teeth) from the water supply alone at the optimal concentrations (0.7 – 1.2 mg/L).
This is the basis for the American Dental Association’s advisory that fluoridated water should NOT be be use with concentrated infant formula
From the ADA’s website:
“Recent developments led the Association to offer interim guidance on infant formula and fluoride while more research is conducted, said Dr. Daniel M. Meyer, associate executive director, ADA Division of Science.
Those developments include the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s health claim notification Oct. 14 allowing bottlers to claim that fluoridated water may reduce the risk of dental cavities or tooth decay, but not make the claim for bottled water products specifically marketed for use by infants, and the March 22 release of the National Research Council report: ‘Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards.’”
http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/pubs/adanews/adanewsarticle.asp?articleid=2212
Ed said: “Deamonte Driver’s death was regrettable. It has nothing to do with fluoride”
The point is that no American is fluoride-deficient but millions are dentist-deficient. Giving children who are already fluoride oversaturated even more fluoride will lead to more, not less, tooth decay. And focusing on water fluoridation as a solution to the access to care problem is ludicrous, especially when dentists spend millions of dollars and months of their time forcing fluoride into people via their water supply when they could actually be treating people who need their care.
Ed said, “And, while I agree that not all dentists are altruists, the fact remains that as a group they have an ethical canon against taking money from chemical companies like fluoride refiners.”
But dentists have no problem taking money from the corporations who profit from fluoride.
Dentists refuse lto ive or work in rural Alaska where people sometimes pull their own teeth because they are in so much pain and have no access to dental care. Alaskans came up with a solution. The Alaskans hired Dental Health Aide Therapists (DHATs) trained in New Zealand for two years who are able to drill, fill and pull teeth as effectively but more cheaply than dentists.
DHATs have worked for decades very successfully in other developed countries.
The American Dental Association and the Alaska Dental Society spent millions of dollars suing the DHAT program because it infringed upon their lucrative monopoly. Thank goodness the dentists lost. DHATs should spread their good dental care to the lower 48. But those dentists you claim to care so much will do everything they can to stop this efficient, effective, cost-saving measure because it encroaches upon their bottom lines.
As dentists are morphing into cosmeticians, they are leaving a gigantic gap for some other group to step into. And it’s time
Millions of Americans are fluoride deficient. That’s why it works as a preventive of disease when added to water. According to the NRC study, 1.2 million people are at risk of getting too much. There are a hundred times that, maybe two hundred times that number who are at risk because they don’t get enough.
You’re willing to sacrifice the health of 200 million people for a minor gain, maybe, in some circumstances? I’m unwilling to make such a gamble.
Dental caries can kill, as your example indicates. Prior to 1950 and the beginning of mass fluoridation, bad teeth were common. In many areas in America few adults over the age of 40 had their teeth. This was a major health problem. 50 years of fluoridation, 50 years of Crest’s campaign (now extended to almost all other toothpastes), 50 years of hard campaigning by dentists to get people to get regular checkups instead of waiting a decade between visits, and dental disease doesn’t kill like it did.
How many deaths do you think we should force from dental disease in order to provide unmottled teeth in a few?
Let’s be clear: We know there are huge human costs without the dental care. You haven’t mentioned the costs, but we need to consider who will die if fluoride isn’t provided.
As I pointed out, it’s quite possible that fluoride treatment kept Mr. Driver alive years beyond when he would have died. The problem had nothing to do with fluoride excess; if fluoride made his teeth healthier, it well could have been the reason he didn’t die much earlier.
No, you’re missing my point: They have ethical canons which specifically prevent them taking money from the corporations who profit from the fluoride. Were you the person who first raised that issue? There is not an iota if evidence here that any dentist profits from fluoride treatments. None. I pointed out that ethical canons prevent it. As a pragmatic matter, I doubt any dentists are involved in the capture or mining, refining and sale of fluoride — why would you have a dentist involved.
So that’s a canard, a false claim. It’s an unfair and untrue allegation against health care professionals.
Those ruthless entities who poison our water + food & cause diseases should be brought to justice and be punished, according to these criminals deeds.
For instance Fluoride is an extremely dangerous chemical and is known as the “wild-cat” element because it is very difficult to know how it is going to react. The USA has been saturated with it since January 1945, and other countries have since followed, and it has sometimes been made mandatory, which has just happened in South Africa.
Fluoridation is based on deliberate false or misleading evidence, and outright fraud, as it was claimed by some nuts, that it is extremely safe and harmless! The US Food and Drug administration (FDA) claimed it was an essential nutrient; but the FDA informed new jersey assemblyman john v. kelly that there was no file on record for f, and nothing to show it’s safety or effectiveness; so it is experimental, and violates the “Nuremberg Code”, and the ‘Un International covenant on Civil and Political Rights”.
In 1943 the atomic bomb was being constructed in New Jersey, USA, and to construct an atom bomb millions of tons of Fluoride are required. The workers and neighbouring people were severely affected by Fluoride poisoning, which had severe physical (including cancer; heart disease; loss of teeth etc.) and mental effects; so the government of the USA, terrified of being sued for billions of dollars, moved the construction site to a wilderness, and told the American people that Fluoride was so good for the teeth and should be dumped into their drinking water.
The medical and dental professions were to a great degree bought or threatened, and industries such as aluminium, fertilizer, etc. got rid of a dangerous toxic waste product.
Fluoride will damage the immune system, and cause many diseases including cancers, and heart diseases, which of course, is very good for drug companies entities and the careers and pockets of ruthless medical and dental academics entities. Fluoride will also destroy Vitamin E, which helps to protect against heart disease, AIDS, etc., and dental tartar, signals lack of Vitamin E.
It is important to take natural Vitamin E, as it is much better than the artificial, but it is difficult to get as most suppliers either make artificial only, or mix artificial with natural, and label all as Vitamin E.
Inorganic iron will destroy Vitamin E, inside or outside the body. Vitamin E can protect against heart disease and cancer, which will affect profitable drugs.
The incidence of heart disease is high and that of cancer is rising rapidly, and this is blamed on smoking, but does not explain why cancer of the lungs and coronaries were uncommon prior to 1945, although billions of cigarettes had been smoked by millions of people; but it does coincide with fluoridation, as does the increase in mouth and breast cancers. In the body Fluoride is converted to Hydrofluoric Acid, which is a very strong and corrosive acid, and is a known carcinogen. Hydrofluoric Acid will attack glass and destroy it, which is why topical Fluoride is delivered to a dental surgery in plastic containers, and never in glass containers.
Fluoride will interfere with the thyroid gland, which was well demonstrated by Prof. Douw G. Steyn of Pretoria, South Africa. The action of the thyroid gland is not fully understood, but it is known that lack of thyroid (hypothyroidism) causes delayed eruption of teeth, and white teething is now delayed up to 3-4 years. Lack of thyroid is known as a cause of lethargy and fatness; whilst excess causes hyper-excitability and thinness; but this is not always the case, as hyperactive children can be a result of hypothyroidism, often due to Fluoride interfering with I (iodine); and in Martindale (a pharmocopeia), Lugol’s, an iodine solution, is recommended for it, and it may be that ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder) is due to hypothyroidism. I have found that Lugol’s assists eruption in delayed teething, and is useful for Bruxism (grinding of teeth).
The USA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) admit that no testing has been done on the Toxicity of fluorosilic acid, although other studies indicate anti-social behaviour.
The very severe rioting in USA cities, was in fluoridated cities, caused by black youths, and Fluoride would affect their thyroids, which may be more reactive, and if the adults were lethargic it would be ideal for rioting.
That’s complete balderdash.
Ed said “Millions of Americans are fluoride deficient.”
I truly think you believe this is the case. But I hope you will take the time to search the literature and show us the studies that prove you are right. I think you will be shocked to discover your information is incorrect.
Fluoridation does not save money or teeth
Here’s Why:
Eighty percent of all tooth decay occurs in about 20% of the population, usually low-income people who can’t afford to pay a dentist. If they are poor enough, they qualify for government reimbursement programs, like Medicaid. Unfortunately, most over 80% of dentists refuse Medicaid patients.
When a small cavity isn’t filled, it can grow, fester and absess and then qualifies for emergency room treatment, usually paid for by the government
Severe tooth decay is responsible for 2/3 of hospital visits by children under six in New York State (1), where almost 73% of the population drinks fluoridated water. Even in 100% fluoridated New York City, more children required cavity-related hospitalizations, proportionately, than two of New York State’s largest non-fluoridated counties, Suffolk and Nassau, whether payment was made by Medicaid or privately.
One New York City hospital charged from $929 to $12,199 to treat 96 children with severely decayed teeth, excluding the dentist and anesthesiologist fees. Children needed extensive work including stainless steel crowns, extractions, root canal therapy, fillings, other restorations, periodontal procedures, surgeries and/or more.
New York State hospital charges for the 2,726 early childhood cavities-related surgical visits required by children under six, in 1999, lie anywhere between $2.5 and $33 million, report NYS Department of Health Dentists, Kumar and Green, and others, in the Winter 2003 Journal of Public Health Dentistry, who also report they may be underestimating the numbers of children so treated.
National Medicaid costs for hospital treatment of early childhood cavities are between $100 to $200 million annually.
Even after hospital treatment, these children return with new lesions, say Kumar and colleagues.
In fact, poor New York City children have more tooth decay than the national average, despite fluoridation(6). And many get no dental care.
This is how Jonathan Kozol explains it in his book Savage Inequalities about life in the South Bronx (NYC): “Bleeding gums, impacted teeth and rotting teeth are routine matters for children….. Children live for months with pain that grown-ups would find unendurable. …I have seen children with teeth that look like brownish, broken sticks. I have seen teenagers who were missing half their teeth….”
Also, NYC African American adults studied have more cavities than all adults nationally,” reports “Dental Clinics of North America,” January 2003.
In 1984, New York City spent 2.4 million dollars on fluoridation chemicals, equipment and manpower, according to a DEP letter answering a New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation freedom of information request (7). Now fluoride chemicals, alone, cost the city $6 million annually, “The New York Sun” reports (8). The cost today of fluoridation in New York City is somewhere between $6 – $14 million.
The notion that any Americans are “fluoride-deficient” is absurd. Nobody needs fluoride, ever. It’s not a nutrient of any sort, not a micronutrient, not an essential trace element. U.S. Government agencies have repeatedly confirmed that.
In any case, fluoridation is contrary to fundamental medical principles:
* Hippocratic oath — First, do no harm. (Fluorosis IS harm.)
* Principle of informed consent — Patient has the right to refuse medication.
* Modern toxicology — Fluoride is a deadly poison, no question about it.
* Modern pharmacology — It’s crazy to force everyone to drink unmeasured amounts of fluoride.
* Modern endocrinology — fluoride is an endocrine disruptor, according to the NRC (2006).
Are my posts going into your spam filter for some reason? They are not appearing here.
Stuck in spam filters somewhere is a longer, more specific answer. But, Sally, here’s the bottom line: Stopping fluoride in drinking water will not help anyone who cannot afford dental care; it will definitely increase the number of people who need dental care, and those who need emergency dental care.
When fluoridation ends – so do cavities
January 24, 2001 –Cavity rates declined in several cities that stopped water fluoridation, new studies report, contradicting American Dental Association (ADA) predictions.
Fluoride added to over 62% of US water supplies is supposed to reduce tooth decay but these six studies from dental journals show it hasn’t and, in fact, may have increased the likelihood of rotten choppers.
“No increase in caries (cavities) was found in Kuopio (Finland) 3 years after the discontinuation of water fluoridation,” according to Caries Research (1). In fact, when Kuopio was compared to a similar never fluoridated Finnish town, cavity rates in both towns either remained the same or decreased six years after fluoridation was stopped in Kuopio.
Seven years after fluoridation ended in LaSalud, Cuba, cavities remained low in 6 to 9 year olds, decreased in 10 to 11 year-olds, significantly decreased in 12 to 13 year olds, while caries-free children increased dramatically, reports Caries Research (2).
East German scientists report, “following the cessation of water fluoridation in the cities Chemnitz (formerly Karl-Marx-Stadt) and Plauen, a significant fall in caries prevalence was observed,” according to Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology (3). Additional surveys in the formerly-fluoridated towns of Spremberg and Zittau found. “Caries levels for the 12-year-olds of both towns significantly decreased… following the cessation of water fluoridation.”
Not only did decay rates remain stable during an 11-month fluoridation break in Durham, NC, between September, 1990, and August, 1991 but dental fluorosis declined in children born during that period, according to the Journal of Dental Research (4)
In British Columbia, Canada, “the prevalence of caries decreased over time in the fluoridation-ended community while remaining unchanged in the fluoridated community,” reported in Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology. (5)
In 1973, the Dutch town of Tiel stopped fluoridation. Researchers counted drilled, missing, and filled tooth surfaces (DMFS) of Tiel’s 15-year olds, then collected identical data from never-fluoridated Culemborg. DMFS initially increased in Tiel then dipped to 11% of baseline from 1968/69 to 1987/88 while never-fluoridated Culemborg’s 15-year-olds had 72% less cavities over the same period, reports Caries Research. (6)
A recently released government report out of Canada (7) shows similar negative results and offers a reason.
Fluoridation was launched in the 1940’s when dentists believed fluoride’s beneficial effects were achieved internally, through the bloodstream then absorbed inside the teeth.
The Centers for Disease Control now concedes that “Fluoride works primarily after teeth have erupted” However, the CDC offers this caveat “The prevalence of dental caries in a population is not inversely related to the concentration of fluoride in enamel, and a higher concentration of enamel fluoride is not necessarily more efficacious in preventing dental caries.”
Therefore, swallowing fluoride makes as much sense as swallowing nail polish to paint your toenails.
I rather wish we could stick to what the CDC actually says:
http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/index.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4834a2.htm
OK, have it your way, we’ll stick to what the CDC says:
On August 17, 2001, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control released new fluoride recommendations. See http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm
“Fluoride works primarily after teeth have erupted…”
“Fluoride ingested during tooth development can also result in a range of visually detectable changes in enamel opacity… because of hypomineralization.”
“…chalklike, lacy markings across a tooth’s enamel surface… In the moderate form, >50% of the enamel surface is opaque white. The rare, severe form manifests as pitted and brittle enamel. After eruption, teeth with moderate or severe fluorosis might develop areas of brown stain. In the severe form, the compromised enamel might break away, resulting in excessive wear of the teeth.
“Fluoride-containing paste is routinely used during dental prophylaxis (i.e., cleaning). The abrasive paste, which contains 4,000–20,000 ppm fluoride, might restore the concentration of fluoride in the surface layer of enamel removed by polishing…Fluoride paste is not accepted by FDA or ADA as an efficacious way to prevent dental caries.”
“Few studies evaluating the effectiveness of fluoride toothpaste, gel, rinse, and varnish among adult populations are available.”
“Saliva is a major carrier of topical fluoride”
“The concentration of fluoride in ductal saliva, as it is secreted from salivary glands, is low — approximately 0.016 parts per million (ppm) in areas where drinking water is fluoridated and 0.006 ppm in nonfluoridated areas.
“This concentration of fluoride is not likely to affect cariogenic activity”
“The prevalence of dental caries in a population is not inversely related to the concentration of fluoride in enamel, and a higher concentration of enamel fluoride is not necessarily more efficacious in preventing dental caries.”
“Today, all U.S. residents are exposed to fluoride to some degree, and widespread use of fluoride has been a major factor in the decline in the prevalence and severity of dental caries in the United States and other economically developed countries.”
The following is the reference for the above statement and shows it is based on belief not science:
1) Bratthall D, Hänsel Petersson G, Sundberg H. Reasons for the caries decline: what do the experts believe? Eur J Oral Sci 1996;104:416–22.”
“Fluoride ingested during tooth development can also result in a range of visually detectable changes in enamel opacity… These changes have been broadly termed enamel fluorosis, certain extremes of which are cosmetically objectionable… Severe forms of this condition can occur only when young children ingest excess fluoride, from any source, during critical periods of tooth development.…Concerns regarding the risk for enamel fluorosis are limited to children aged < 8 years old”
From Table 2 – Adequate intake of fluoride (to avoid moderate fluorsis or yellow or brown teeth) for:
· a baby 0-6 months old or 16 pounds is 0.01 milligrams day (mg/day)
· a child 6-12 months or 20 pounds is 0.5 mg/day
· a child 1-3 years or 29 pounds is 0.7
· a child 4-8 years or 48 pounds is 1.1 mg/day
“In a survey of four U.S. cities with different fluoride concentrations in the drinking water (range: 0.37–1.04 ppm), … infants aged 6 months ingested 0.21–0.54 mg fluoride per day”
How about we don’t cherry pick stuff out of the reports to try to make the reports of the CDC say something the reports don’t say.
From the abstract of that report:
According to the report, most people get about the right amount, and that prevents cavities.
Was that the point you were trying to make?
I’ve been educating myself and others regarding the history of fluorides, the dangers of fluorides and artificial water fluoridation programs and the idiocy of using the public water supply as a means by delivering a dose of a toxic industrial waste product. Unfortunately, despite the plethora of data on the dangers of these compounds, the majority still doesn’t know much of the issue.
It would be helpful if consumers and journalists alike were to turn off their television sets and study the issue in some depth. A good way to do this would be by going to http://www.fluoridealert.org, http://www.fluoridation.com or my site, http://tompetrie.net/id6.html. (Caution, all these sites have many pages of data–mine is 60 reasons to be opposed to fluoridation, if one is not enough!)
Even ten minutes of studying the issue would convince anyone that we’re already getting WAY too much fluoride (from many sources) even without water fluoridation programs, this fluoride IS causing numerous health problems in millions of individuals AND that it must be stopped immediately.
Happy studying,
Tom
Nutritionist
Spring Valley, NY
And yet, Tom, the CDC and other health officials say less than 1% of Americans get enough fluoride naturally and might be at risk of getting too much.
What are you studying that convinces you you’re so different from 99% of us who can use some supplements to prevent cavities, as studies for 60 years have proven?
And, if you’re so hell-bent against taking deadly poisons into your system, how to you live? Both sodium and chloride are essential nutrients, while being deadly poisons.
I think some serious study of risk assessment is in order.
Ed Darrell,
Seems, you’re getting paid big $$$ to poison, pardon fluoridate the masses out there!
Or you are one of the entities producing it!
Are you able to cite any similar garbage to fluoride, which saves BIG Industry from disposing it properly in a toxic waste dump, even to claim its an essential nutrient?
Sure, sure, you would love the majority of people out there, to be dumb un-informed individuals, who cannot reason themselves, via some basic common logic & sense, to further your very own ends + those of your kind!
Remember the sweet Un-changeable Universal Law: “What goes around, comes around!”
You like to be a partaker of poisoning the masses?
Riches are a temporary thing.
All the pain & sufferings to other people, will one day make its way back to you, its 100% GUARANTIED!!!
—> http://tinyurl.com/ate2x <—
No amount of Money, will safe You or anyone else from justful Karma, just so you know!
You will learn sooner or later, or the very hard way, as will those of your kind, who manipulate others for their very selfish own ends!
Andre,
I have no financial interest in this at all, other than my kids’ teeth. I have been involved in public health issues for more than 30 years, and I’ve seen this issue go around three or four times.
I note with chagrin again how your response is to accuse me of some misdeed when I merely note the facts. The studies that kicked off this thread call for fluoridation. The information provided from all public health agencies verify the utility and safety of fluoridation, and all studies done by reputable groups demonstrate the public health benefits of proper fluoridation.
So, I point again to the CDC work that indicates perhaps a million Americans might be subject to more than the recommended amount of fluoride for good dental health — and I wonder what it is that bothers you? You have no evidence of a problem. So you attack me?
No amount of money changes the facts. You will learn, later if you resist it, that facts are stubborn things. Name calling advances your cause only with the smallest of people.
If the facts are on your side, why not present them? If you disbelieve, then tell us you disbelieve.
Your beliefs do not change the facts.
The claim that the antifluoridationists use “selective” techniques to “manipulate” data is false. The very “Father of Fluoridation”, H. Dean studied hundreds of towns for his fluoridation model that started all this body rotting stuff being put in our water. He only reported findings on 21 towns! Can you say “selective data” ten times real fast? Everything that the pushers accuse the opponents of fluoride of doing are the very things that they do!
You have a person that does work for Colgate being accused of holding back data from a publicly funded study on cancer for almost 15 years! The dope pushers simply do NOT want the truth to be told and will stop at nothing to discredit the professional people that DARE to speak out against their lies. This present information age, I hope, will stop the high crimes they have purported against an innocent public, right around the whole world. And I will say that I am not like some that are just OK with getting this poison stopped. I hope they hang everyone involved!!!…
You may note that the poison fluoride pushers try to get their say in about “fluoride is good” anyway they can. They can not continue to combat the vast amounts of information- increase in broken bones, brain damage to kids, lower IQ’s, ADD, ADHD, birth defects, miscarriages, hypothyroidism, and the like that is becoming more readily available on the web. But we have to get the message out- one person at a time! Are there “crazies” out there? Of course. But eventually you have to look at the over 1200+ professional people, including a Nobel Prize winner in Medicine, that have signed the Professional Statement to end Fluoridation worldwide, and conclude- these professionals can not ALL be crazy! And, you will notice that all the poison pushers only want you to trust them. I will invite you- Do not get hung up on the mantra- do your own research!
Can you say “misrepresenting the research?”
Why do you claim the 21 towns presented were not representative? Why do you fail to mention that all his data were available for analysis — if you’re going to question his conclusions, you need to do it on the basis of his data, not your own intimations with no knowledge of what the data actually say.
How do you square his findings with those of the CDC, who surveyed every city in the nation, and came up with similar results — for more than 40 years?
Perhaps he was right. Your claims don’t invalidate anything.
Nothing you say against fluoride cannot also be said against chlorine and iodine, both also essential elements in humans. The question is not whether these elements are poisons — they are (as are selenium, copper, iron, and and any number of other things we absolutely must have to stay healthy). The question is, in the forms recommended, is there harm?
And the study that kicked off this thread finds overwhelmingly there is insignificant harm to adding fluoride in trace amounts to drinking water, but very significant harm in not having the fluoride there for 297 million Americans.
Why do you want to harm the health of 297 million Americans?
Why do you hate America and Americans so?
high cholesterol diet list
It is tiring striving to calculate the hours we\’ve invested looking up High Cholesterol Diet Rescue 1250 Cholesterol In sites.
To test the proponents claims, put them to the test, on a long overdue Congressional hearing!
They will NOT be able to stand up, to their fraudulent claims!
Guaranteed!!!
Not genuinely anyway…