www.rutlandherald.com
Newsweek magazine:
Fluoridation May Not Prevent Cavities, Scientific Review Shows
Video: Fluoride Poisoned Horses
Wayne and Cathy Justus of Pagosa Springs, Colorado show, breed, ride and care for quarter horses. Cathy discovered what was making their horses sick and after extensive medical tests confirmed it without any doubt, the Pagosa Area Water District was persuaded to stop adding hydrofluosilicic acid to the public water supply.
Remember the days when you could get a glass of sweet smelling, good tasting water anywhere? Remember the day when the thirsty traveler could slake his or her thirst from a “public water fountain?” Your mother always told you to “let it run a few minutes to clean the fountain before you drink,” but no one ever got sick from using one. Those were the days when 99 percent of the country was in good health and the really ill people were a minority? Well, today, that has changed. Many people are ill or borderline something or other and no one knows why.
There is a small but persistent group who believe the key to many of the nation’s health problems we face today can be attributed to the water we drink. I’m not talking about the pure spring water found in some old country houses; I’m talking about the fluoridated water found in almost every town and city in the country. Fluoride is a toxic substance that accumulates in the sensitive tissues over time causing a number of adverse health effects including neurological and endocrine dysfunction. The fluoride chemical added to the municipal water supplies is hexafluorosilicic acid (HFSA), which is a byproduct of the fertilizer industry, and is considered a hazardous material.
The people were told the fluoride was added to the municipal water supplies to help prevent tooth decay. That is not exactly the truth. People have the option to use a toothpaste containing fluoride to put the chemical directly on their teeth if they so choose. Why should the rest of the country be forced to drink fluoride if they don’t want to? Everyone deserves a drink of clean, pure water. Pure water is a prerequisite to optimal health that is everyone’s right. At this time, only people with their own wells or springs can drink water that is cleaner and purer than most municipal supplies. Robert Carlton, Ph.D, former EPA scientist, 1992, had this to say about fluoridation. “Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century.”
For more information of this important subject and to be informed should the subject come up for a vote in your town, I urge you to search on a computer for The Fluoride Conspiracy. This document tells it all. I was very surprised to learn our government would jeopardize the health of every American, from newborns to the elderly, to save corporations money. Once this item hits print, I’m sure it will be on the minds of some residents and may be an article on some town warrants. As I go to press, other towns in the U.S. and Canada are considering the “Fluoride Issue.”
This article was an eye-opener to me and I would welcome some feedback from any of you who take the time to look it up.
-- Robert Miller, Publisher of The Vermont Journal
Why in the world is a rural farm in the mountains even connected to a municipal water supply?
ReplyDeleteThis horse farm is a long 14 miles from the source of town water, Hatcher Reservoir, but only 4 miles trom downtown which is 10 miles from the reservoir. The reservoir is about 600 feet higher in elevation than both the farm and downtown.
DeleteHey Phil - are you striving for balance here? Stop that!
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me the opposition of fluoridation raises important questions. I don't think there is "fake" science behind fluoridation, but it is old science, and more recent investigations have raised some red flags. The CDC, WHO, et al should be funding some broader testing to determine if a) there are indeed unacceptable risks to people at large, and b) there are in fact significant benefits from fluoridation.
DeleteWhy aren't people up in arms about iodine, a much more potent poison than fluorine, which is in all our table salt?
ReplyDeleteI think a large part of the non-opposition to idodine is that when people don't get enough, they get goiter, a rather ugly condition (for those of you under 50, it looks like your neck is pregnant on one side) that everybody can see for the rest of the victim's life.
Lack of fluoride, on the other hand merely causes kids' teeth to rot (caries is the #1 childhood illness), and while the results are lifelong, nobody has to be exposed involuntarily to the sight of someone's rotted or missing teeth.
So, fluoridation foes are not going to concern themselves with the dangers of iodine.
But iodized salt has never been forced on anyone, consumers have always been free to choose non-iodized salt in the store without having to pay a penalty in the form of a higher price. Most who don't have their own wells, can end up spending well over $100 ayear on bottled water to avoid drinking the fluoride they don't want.
DeleteTowns pay $10,000 or more a year for the fluoride they add to the public water supply but more than 90% of it just gets wasted, ending up down the drain unused from bathing, washing and flushing. Requiring all bottlers of soft drinks, water and milk to add the standard 1 mg of fluoride per liter of liquid would make much more sense economically.
How about mercury in vaccinations. A certain radio station person in New York, kept telling the audience that these shots caused downs syndrome. When in fact the doctor who claimed that the mercury was bad finally came out and said it was all a hoax of his own invention. I think this I man killed many children because of his dumb announcements.
ReplyDeleteThe concept of fluoridating the water supply came out of corporate greed not some concerned council of public health minded dental experts. In the late 1930’s bad health effects from air-bound fluoride pollution were becoming a growing concern. At the time, the chief source being the industrial waste from the refining of aluminum. ALCOA pretty much held a monopoly on refining aluminum so the finger got pointed at them. Their lead counsel Oscar Ewing was hired in 1944 at a salary of $750,000 a year. 3 years later President Truman appointed him head of the Federal Security Agency. The FSA oversaw the Public Health Service and the same year that Ewing began at the FSA, he initiated a national fluoridation project through the PHS.
ReplyDeleteAlso that same year, the first large scale study of fluoridation was begun, the test was to run in two cities for 10 to 15 years to collect data. (Grand Rapids, MI and Newburgh, NY.) In the meantime, by 1950, 89 cities were already fluoridated, despite no credible evidence ever submitted that demonstrated that it did indeed reduce tooth decay. Eventually, the fluoridation results for Newburgh and Grand Rapids were partially published and largely have been ignored ever since. Although there was no measurable decrease in tooth decay, Newburgh boys had twice the incidence of skeletal deformities and a higher tooth-mottling rate as compared to the unfluoridated control group in nearby Kingston. Seeing how Newburgh fared, Kingston has successfully resisted having its water supply fluoridated ever since. Other Newburgh data was noteworthy, although largely suppressed: Newburgh developed one of the highest heart disease rates in the USA, and girls came to puberty earlier than the control group. The heart disease rate in Grand Rapids doubled after the first five years of the fluoridation experiment.
Now to 2015, The Cochrane Collaboration, a group of doctors and researchers known for their comprehensive reviews–which are widely regarded as the gold standard of scientific rigor in assessing effectiveness of public health policies–recently set out to find out if fluoridation reduces cavities. Read their conclusions in this Newsweek article:
www.newsweek.com/fluoridation-may-not-prevent-cavities-huge-study-shows-348251
Go to Wikipedia to find out that it was not corporate greed, but grassroots public health research that found out that fluoride in certain Colorado water supplies was providing remarkable protection against caries.
ReplyDeleteSince the government's best role is to protect and empower the governed, it made sense to the government to protect 100,000,000 Americans from caries-- and so it cast about for the most efficient way to do that.
The much-bruited-about "bad effects" of fluoride are so rare as to make the anti-fluoridation campaign a laughingstock.
As for an appeal to "informed consent," it would be better to preach to consumers about the far greater danger sugar in soda represents-- but as I've said before, it's easier to dump on the government about fluoride than on a corporation about putting garbage in its food products. The CDC won't sue; you can bet General Mills will.
As for "informed consent,"
Those old naturally fluoride-rich waters contain calcium fluoride which we now know is so poorly absorbed by the body that it is not even considered a toxic waste by the EPA and would be virtualy useless in toothpaste. Waters high in calcium fluoride are generally also high in other dissolved minerals, namely calcium, magnesium, boron and silica all of which help produce strong decay-resistant teeth.
ReplyDeleteAlso there were healthier farming practices back then. Meat and butter contained significant amounts of vitamin K2 because the livestock were 100% grass fed all summer. Enough Vitamin K2 in your diet protects the teeth from decay just as much as fluoride is purported to do. K2 is also important for bone and heart health. But sadly, Vitamin K2 is almost totally lacking in modern supermarket foods. Greens and multi-vitamins only contain Vitamin K1. Farm animals seem good at converting K1 to K2 but humans aren't.
According to the CDC, the three main mechanisms by which topically applied sodium fluoride can prevent decay is (1) enhance remineralization of carious lesions before they become full-blown cavities, (2) inhibit demineralization, and (3) poison the enzymes in the oral bacteria that produce the acids that erode the teeth. (CDC 2001).
While poisoning enzymes in oral bacteria may lead to a desirable result for tooth enamel, poisoning enzymes elsewhere in the body could lead to a host of undesirable results. This, in fact, is one of the reasons why some of the earliest opponents to fluoridation were biochemists, as they were familiar with the use of fluoride to inhibit enzymes in the laboratory and worried about the potential for fluoride to inhibit enzymes in the body.
Breast milk is designed to be the sole source of nutrition for a child, and is thus extremely rich in the nutrients that a baby needs for healthy development. Although dentists had long claimed that fluoride was an essential nutrient, a European team of dental researchers found that breast milk contained a mere 4 parts per billion of fluoride, about 250 times less fluoride than is added to water in fluoridation programs. In fact, the European team found evidence of a protective mechanism that specifically excluded fluoride from the mothers’ bloodstream from entering the milk. According to the researchers:
“The existence of a physiological plasma-milk barrier against fluoride suggests that the newborn is actively protected from this halogen. Hence the recommendation made in several countries to give breast-fed infants fluoride supplementation should be reconsidered.” (Ekstrand 1981).
From the Journal of the American Dental Association 116: 490-5...
“The current reported decline in caries tooth decay in the US and other Western industrialized countries has been observed in both fluoridated and nonfluoridated communities, with percentage reductions in each community apparently about the same.”
SOURCE: Heifetz SB, et al. (1988). Prevalence of dental caries and dental fluorosis in areas with optimal and above-optimal water-fluoride concentrations: a 5-year follow-up survey.
And of course all those reports of the incidence of caries dropping dramatically after the introduction of fluoridated water were part of the sinister plan for world domination devised by the Jewish elders whose scheme was revealed in "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion." As added proof, Garrison Keillor announced that the only durable strategy employed by the Communist International (COMINTERN, as it was known) was the fluoridation of public water supplies around the world.
ReplyDeleteI am mystified as to why Americans insist on creating a dog race to the bottom in so many areas-- education, medical care, quality of life, income inequality, savage (as opposed to rational) capitalism,infrastructure, incarceration, child development, neonatal survival rates, longevity and care for the environment, to name a few-- but at least we in Springfield are being treated to a front row view of how it's done. I thank you for that.
Since absorbable fluoride is naturally rare in water, and probably always has been, it is unlikely that mother's milk was evolved to block it.
ReplyDeleteSince there are other naturally occurring toxic minerals and metals that can leach into water, it is likely the breastmilk barrier filter is there for them too. Also, no one says that natural calcium fluoride is unabsorbable. It is 85 times less absorbable than sodium fluoride. One still could experience effects of too much fluoride from only calcium fluoride over time as it is a cumulative element like lead and arsenic.
Deletehttp://fluoridealert.org/issues/water/
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAbout 350 BC, the Greek philosopher Aristotle classified the spider as having six legs. And for the next 20 centuries everyone believed the spider had six legs. No one even bothered to count.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, who would dare challenge the great Aristotle? Well, along came Lamarck (1744-1829), the outstanding biologist and naturalist. He carefully counted the legs of the spider. And guess how many legs he counted? Exactly eight!
The myth that had been taught for centuries was destroyed because Lamarck bothered to count. Myths are easily accepted as truth if they have been around for a time.
The whole fluoride debate is a nothingburger. People do not die from ingesting it; they do not lose their minds or suffer sterility. If they don't get it, they will likely have more caries, but if they keep their mouths shut, the rest of us won't be bothered by the sight or their bad breath.
ReplyDeleteContrast that with a real problem, like the 14 million families faced with homelessness when the mortgage market collapsed in the Naughties.
Banks screwed them over to make them delinquent, doing such things as charging them thousands of dollars for being pennies short on a mortgage payment, not notifying them of the increased debt load, then charging them even more; telling them that if they skipped three payments they could get financial help (they couldn't); and using fraudulent documents in court to complete the foreclosure.
Not only that, but when the state and federal governments started looking into it, the final result was that some 6+ million families got a $2,000 check ("Here's some money; too bad we took your house") and the guilty parties have been allowed to continue doing the exact same thing.
Now, THAT'S a problem. Is the fluoride issue simply used to distract people from serious threats to life in our country?
So why does my dentist have me slush around that fluoride concentrate when I go for a cleaning?
ReplyDeleteIt has become clear in the last 15 years that fluoride primarily acts topically, according to the CDC. It reacts with the surface of the tooth enamel, making it more resistant to acids excreted by bacteria. Thus, there's no good reason to swallow fluoridated water and subject every tissue of your body to it. Even if you swished every sip around your teeth before swallowing, the level of fluoride in water is just too low to have any significant contact benefit.
DeleteRead more about this in this Newsweek magazine article: www.newsweek.com/fluoridation-may-not-prevent-cavities-huge-study-shows-348251
Fluoride is bio-accumulative. The biggest accumulator of fluoride in the body is the pineal gland which by old age now commonly has as much fluoride as teeth, 300 mg per kilogram. Calcification of the pineal (visible in x-rays), which reduces proper functioning of the gland, has definitely been linked to fluoride.
Research shows the degree of pineal gland calcification is significantly higher with Alzheimer's disease versus other types of dementia. The formation of amyloid plaques in the brain is a feature of Alzheimer's disease.
An important discovery was made indicating that the sleep hormone melatonin that is secreted by the pineal gland when we lay at rest in a dark room also inhibits the formation of plaques and may be effective in the prevention of Alzheimer's. However, melatonin cannot reverse the formation of existing plaques, so is not useful in the treatment of the disease. Experiments in mice suggest that when adequate amounts of melatonin are available earlier in life, it may act to prevent Alzheimer's from developing.
Many investigators attach too much importance to melatonin, ignoring the other pineal hormones and pineal function in the day-time. The most interesting pineal peptides properties are:
Normalization of general immune functions
Supressing tumors
Protection against stress
Antiaging effect (Life extension)
Circadian rhythms regulation
Dimethyltryptamine, or DMT is produced by the pineal gland only at moments of extreme spiritual interaction. It is recognized medically as a “hallucinogen”.
I'm 53. I grew up drinking flouridated water. Even with rather poor dental hygene, I've never lost a tooth, and have only had 3 cavities. Did the flouride do it? I don't know. But it seems to me that with all the risks associated with it, I think we all could just brush our teeth more and live without it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete