Monday, November 08, 2010

No More Fluoride in the Water - Waterloo, Ontario

CDC and ADA Now Advise to Avoid Using Fluoride
Posted By Dr. Mercola
November 13 2010
A new study in the Journal of the American Dental Association finds once again that, contrary to what most people have been told, fluoride is actually bad for teeth.
Exposure to high levels of fluoride results in a condition known as fluorosis, in which tooth enamel becomes discolored. The condition can eventually lead to badly damaged teeth. The new study found that fluoride intake during a child's first few years of life is significantly associated with fluorosis, and warned against using fluoridated water in infant formula.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is of a similar opinion. According to their website:
"Recent evidence suggests that mixing powdered or liquid infant formula concentrate with fluoridated water on a regular basis may increase the chance of a child developing ... enamel fluorosis."
Dr. Mercola's Comments:
It was 2007 when the American Dental Association (ADA) first warned that parents of infants younger than a year old "should consider using water that has no or low levels of fluoride" when mixing baby formula, due to concerns about fluorosis.
Now the Journal of the American Dental Association has published a study that found increased fluorosis risk among infants who were fed infant formula reconstituted with fluoride-containing water, as well as used fluoridated toothpastes.
The authors noted:
"Results suggest that prevalence of mild dental fluorosis could be reduced by avoiding ingestion of large quantities of fluoride from reconstituted powdered concentrate infant formula and fluoridated dentifrice."
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has also followed suit, warning on their Community Water Fluoridation page that mixing powdered or liquid infant formula concentrate with fluoridated water on a regular basis may increase the chance of a child developing enamel fluorosis.
They also state:
"In children younger than 8 years of age, combined fluoride exposure from all sources—water, food, toothpaste, mouth rinse, or other products—contributes to enamel fluorosis."
This is as far as the CDC warnings go, however, and they continue to state that water fluoridation is safe -- and dental fluorosis is only a "cosmetic" problem. In reality, neither of these assertions is true.
Dental Fluorosis is a Sign of Excessive Fluoride Intake

Dental fluorosis results in white and brown spots on your teeth. It is only caused by fluoride -- typically due to ingesting too much fluoride during your developing years, from birth to about 8 years of age. According to the CDC, about one-third of U.S. children aged 12 to 15 years have very mild to mild forms of enamel fluorosis on their teeth.
Promoters of fluoridation say that these markings are "just cosmetic," but it can also be an indication that the rest of your body, such as your bones and the rest of your organs, including your brain, has been exposed to too much fluoride also.
As Dr. Paul Connett, a chemist specializing in environmental chemistry, explained in our recent interview:
"We know that 32 percent of American children have been overexposed to fluoride because you have this telltale sign of dental fluorosis, which in its mildest form is little white specs. But when it gets more serious, it affects more of the surface of your teeth and it becomes colored; yellow, brown and orange mottling of the teeth …
The teeth are the window to the bones. If you've seen the damage to the teeth, what damage can you not see?"
In other words, if fluoride is having a detrimental, visual effect on the surface of your teeth, you can be virtually guaranteed that it's also damaging something else inside your body, such as your bones.
Bone is living tissue that is constantly being replaced through cellular turnover. Bone building is a finely balanced, complicated process. Fluoride has been known to disrupt this process ever since the 1930s.
Why it's Dangerous to Swallow Fluoride
The United States is one of only eight countries in the entire developed world that fluoridates more than 50 percent of its water supply. It is added under the guise that it helps prevent and control tooth decay …
This is in spite of the fact that there never been any demonstrated difference in tooth decay between countries with fluoridated and non-fluoridated water, and no difference between states that have a high- or low percentage of their water fluoridated.
Even promoters of fluoridation concede that the major benefits are topical; fluoride works from the outside of the tooth, not from inside of your body, so why swallow it?
The fluoride added to your drinking water is in fact a chemical waste product! It is NOT something you should use as a supplement to your diet.
There are plenty of studies showing the dangers of fluoride to your health, such as:
Increases lead absorption
Disrupts synthesis of collagen
Hyperactivity and/or lethargy
Muscle disorders
Brain damage, and lowered IQ
Bone fractures
Lowers thyroid function
Bone cancer (osteosarcoma)
Inactivates 62 enzymes
Inhibits formation of antibodies
Genetic damage and cell death
Increases tumor and cancer rate
Disrupts immune system
Damages sperm and increases infertility
As far as tooth decay is concerned, this is not caused by lack of fluoride.
Tooth decay is caused by acids in your mouth, typically created from sugar being metabolized by bacteria (Streptococcus mutans), and as you may already know, the number one source of calories in the United States is high fructose corn syrup.
The acid produced then attacks your enamel. Eventually the bacteria can get into the dentine, at which point tooth decay sets in. So there are far better options for decreasing tooth decay than using a topical or ingested poison, with a chief one being minimizing your intake of sugary foods and eating a healthful diet.
You typically don't find dental caries in more primitive societies that do not consume vast amounts of sugar like in the United States.
Make Sure Your Children are Not Exposed to Fluoride
One of dentist Bill Osmunson's main concerns is water fluoridation for infants. The ADA and the CDC now both recommend that infants NOT receive fluoridated water for drinking, nor for making their formula, as fluoridated water contains 250 times more fluoride than mother's milk.
"We shouldn't fluoridate water and harm our most vulnerable," Dr. Osmunson says.
It is my strong belief and recommendation to avoid giving your children fluoridated water.
Unfortunately, the only way to ensure your water is pure enough to drink is by installing ahigh quality water filtration system in your house, such as a reverse osmosis filter that can filter out much of the fluoride and other dangerous water contaminants like disinfection byproducts (DBPs).
Remember that most bottled water also typically contains fluoride, even though it's not stated on the label, and whatever you do, avoid using "nursery water," which is fluoridated water sold specifically for infants.
Fluoride in your drinking water is one more reason why breastfeeding your infant is so essential. Nature has kept breast milk virtually fluoride-free for a reason.
If you are unable to breastfeed and are instead using formula, make sure the water you use is fluoride-free. Again, for now the best way you can provide pure, fluoride-free water to your family is by using a reverse osmosis filter, which you can install in your home.
Even better, if you are unable to breastfeed use this recipe to make homemade infant formula using raw milk and no water at all.
Keep in mind also that if you are a pregnant woman it is equally important for your water to be fluoride-free, as this chemical can harm your developing fetus.
The Ultimate Solution is to Get Fluoride Out of Tap Water
Even though the ADA and the CDC have issued warnings that parents not use fluoridated tap water to make infant formula, neither of them has openly informed the public!
So there are millions of parents out there using tap water to make up formula, oblivious of the fact that the agencies that promote fluoridation in this country have issued a specific warning against using fluoridated water for this purpose.
Not only that, but by fluoridating the municipal water supply you doom many low-income families to fail to protect their young children from this dangerous drug, even if they have this information, as they simply don't have the resources to install a reverse osmosis system.
This is why the only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of water fluoridation in the United States.
The Fluoride Action Network is an absolutely phenomenal resource for further education, and they're doing much to pressure the US government for change. We will be working together to devise a complete game plan to tackle this issue head on. Once we reach the tipping point, which may be as little as 5 percent of the population, we will be able to reverse the policies of water fluoridation.
Our strategy will begin with addressing Canada, because 60 percent of Canada is already un-fluoridated. If we can get the rest of Canada to stop fluoridating their water, we believe the U.S. will be forced to follow.
You can visit for the most recent updates and progress, as well as tips on how you can get involved and take action in this important cause.
In addition, I highly recommend getting a copy of Dr. Connett's new book, The Case Against Fluoride, for more information on the bad science and political agendas that got this toxic chemical in our drinking water and is, at least for now, keeping it there.
Waterloo votes to remove fluoride from its drinking water
Tuesday, October 26th, 2010
The Waterloo Record reports that, “Residents have voted narrowly to remove fluoride from tap water in Waterloo, St. Jacobs and Elmira. …Monday’s fluoride referendum was decided by the tightest margin. The anti-fluoride side won with 50.3 per cent, beating the pro-fluoride side by fewer than 200 votes out of more than 30,000 cast.”
“The fluoride vote is non-binding. Fleming said the public will now be looking to regional council to respect the referendum results as they have pledged, and remove fluoride. Kitchener and Cambridge do not fluoridate their water. Waterloo residents twice endorsed fluoridation by referendum, in 1981 and 1982.”
“Fluoridation proponents argue the weight of credible science strongly shows that adding fluoride strengthens tooth enamel and limits cavities, with no known risks at recommended levels. They point to a lower rate of tooth decay in Waterloo schoolchildren, compared to Kitchener and Cambridge. Critics claim the chemical used to fluoridate water is a threat. They dismiss scientific assertions that the practice is sound and effective and allege health risks including cancer, bone disease and dental damage. They also complain that fluoridation is a violation of personal rights.”
On April 16, Martin Mittelstaedt of the Globe and Mail reported that, “When it comes to fluoridating drinking water, Ontario and Quebec couldn’t be further apart. Ontario has the country’s highest rate of adding the tooth-enamel-strengthening chemical into municipal supplies, while Quebec has one of the lowest, with practically no one drinking fluoridated water.”
“More than three-quarters of Ontario residents live in areas where municipal water supplies contain the chemical. In Quebec, 94 per cent have water free of the additive, according to figures published by Health Canada in 2007. Since then, Quebec City has voted to stop fluoridating, indicating that the difference between the two provinces is currently even more pronounced.”
“But surprisingly, the two provinces have very little difference in tooth-decay rates, a finding that is likely to intensify the ongoing controversy over the practice of adding fluoride to water as a public health measure.”
Health Concerns
Hardy Limeback, the head of the preventive dentistry program at the University of Toronto, says, “Fluoridation is no longer effective (and adding the chemical to water is) more harmful than beneficial.”
“A number of medical journal studies have linked exposure to altered thyroid function, and to reduced IQ levels in children, although the intellectual impairments were found at levels of the chemical in water well above those used for municipal supplies. The most worrisome study, by Harvard researchers, appeared in 2006 in the journal Cancer Causes and Control and found that boys aged 7 exposed to high levels of fluoridated water were about four times more likely to develop childhood osteosarcoma. It’s a rare bone cancer that felled Canadian icon Terry Fox and almost always leads to amputations.”
Around the World
Fluoridation is primarily done in Canada, the United States and Australia, but almost nowhere else in the world. Western Europe and Japan have almost no fluoridated water supplies.
For a list of countries around the world that have banned the fluoridation of drinking water, go to
Across Canada
“13.5 million Canadians, or about 43 per cent of the population, live in communities with fluoridated tap water.” Less than 4 per cent of the drinking water in British Columbia has been fluoridated.
The Council of Canadians
We have taken the position that there are environmental and health concerns associated with the fluoridation of drinking water, and that this is an issue best decided through public consultation and debate at the local level.
The Globe and Mail article noted, “Many community groups have sprung up across Canada lobbying to stop the practice, which is subject to repeal by local referendums.”
The Council is also working with Eau Secours in Quebec which is opposing the Charest government’s plans to increase the fluoridation of drinking water there from about 3 per cent to 50 per cent.
Voters say no to fluoride, K-W merger talks
By Jeff Outhit, Record staff
October 25, 2010
Waterloo Region — Residents have voted narrowly to remove fluoride from tap water in Waterloo, St. Jacobs and Elmira. And enough of them have said no to defeat merger talks between Kitchener and Waterloo.
Monday’s fluoride referendum was decided by the tightest margin. The anti-fluoride side won with 50.3 per cent, beating the pro-fluoride side by fewer than 200 votes out of more than 30,000 cast.
As for potential merger talks, they are considered dead after Kitchener residents heartily endorsed them two-to-one, but Waterloo residents heartily rejected them two-to-one.
Waterloo Mayor Brenda Halloran said her city will not enter into merger discussions, but will continue to discuss joint services with Kitchener that make sense.
“A no vote means no,” Halloran said. “We will still of course be good neighbours, good friends.”
Tricia Siemens, a Waterloo bookseller, agrees merger talks will not happen. She helped lead the failed call for a yes vote in both cities.
“It’s disappointing, but we all have to respect the democratic process,” Siemens said. “At this point, done is done.”
She said the vote was only about launching talks, but she figures many people interpreted it as a vote on a potential merger.
The vote against fluoride was tighter than Robert Fleming expected. He helped lead the charge to remove a substance that has been added to Waterloo tap water since 1967, as a public health measure to prevent tooth decay.
“I’m glad that Waterloo will enjoy non-fluoridated water,” he said. “Even though it (the vote) was tight, it’s rewarding.”
“We’re disappointed,” said Dr. Harry Hoediono, a Kitchener dentist who helped lead the pro-fluoridation forces. “We respect the citizens of Waterloo in their decision.”
Most Ontario tap water is fluoridated. The practice is considered safe and effective by the public health department and by more than 90 medical and health organizations.
Hoediono, soon to be president of the Ontario Dental Association, expects tooth decay will now rise in Waterloo. Fluoride opponents dismiss the concern.
The fluoride vote is non-binding. Fleming said the public will now be looking to regional council to respect the referendum results as they have pledged, and remove fluoride.
Kitchener and Cambridge do not fluoridate their water. Waterloo residents twice endorsed fluoridation by referendum, in 1981 and 1982.
Fluoridation proponents argue the weight of credible science strongly shows that adding fluoride strengthens tooth enamel and limits cavities, with no known risks at recommended levels.
They point to a lower rate of tooth decay in Waterloo schoolchildren, compared to Kitchener and Cambridge.
Critics claim the chemical used to fluoridate water is a threat. They dismiss scientific assertions that the practice is sound and effective and allege health risks including cancer, bone disease and dental damage. They also complain that fluoridation is a violation of personal rights.
Supporters of merger talks, including some prominent business leaders, argued the cities need to plan their future without needless rivalries, to compete for investment and talent on the world stage.
Critics countered that the cities can compete with each other and the world without a costly, unnecessary union.
They saw a merger plot in disguise, predicted discussions would be expensive and disruptive, complained that community identities would be threatened, and pointed to co-operation as the way forward.
Waterloo Watch Says Fluoride In Our Tap Water Is Unnecessary
Waterloo Region To Decide On Plebiscite Issue
By: Carole Clinch
The Town of Dryden, Ontario voted against fluoridation of their water on April 22nd, ending a debate that has gone on for more than one year. Council will decide what to do with the $300,000 they set aside for the intended fluoridation. Perhaps Waterloo Region would save $300,000 a year if they stopped fluoridating. Both Kitchener and Cambridge have natural fluoride in their water. (0.1-0.3ppm) Ninety-eight percent (98%) of Europe has said no to fluoride.
We’re finding out now that adding fluoride to drinking water to prevent cavities simply doesn’t make sense.
Recent research demonstrates clearly that drinking fluoridated water does not prevent cavities. The same research shows a growing list of harmful effects. In a recent Globe and Mail article (Nov 28, 2007) Warren Bell, former head of the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment stated; "The days of wholesale deliberate fluoridation ... are numbered."
There have been significant developments in policy and in the research which are worth noting. For example, Health Canada now states that prescribing controlled doses of pharmaceutical grade fluoride under the care of a doctor is no longer recommended: "Health Canada does not recommend the use of fluoride supplements (drops or tablets).”
Fluoride is a toxic chemical. Read the government warnings regarding toothpaste and mouthwash:
“Keep out of reach of children under 6 yrs of age.”
“If you swallow more than used for brushing, get medical help or contact a PoisonControlCenter right away.”
"If more than used for brushing is accidentally swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Centre right away."
“Never give fluoridated mouthwash or mouth rinses to children under six years of age, as they may swallow it.”
“Use non-fluoridated toothpaste or no toothpaste for young children.”
A pea-size amount of fluoridated toothpaste contains about 0.25mg of fluoride. One glass of fluoridated water contains the same amount of fluoride. We are told not to ingest the pharmaceutical grade fluoride in toothpaste. We are told to ingest the industrial grade fluoride in drinking water.
The fluoridation chemicals (hydrofluorosilicic acid, arsenic and lead) are all toxic substances from Schedule 1 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Agency list. Toxic substances are man-made and accumulate in our bodies over our life time.
Environment Canada also states that; “Hydrofluorosilicic acid is identified as a dangerous good under the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations and has been classified as a Class 8 corrosive substance.” The disposal of these “hazardous waste” products is expensive. They may not be put into our lakes, rivers or streams.
We are paying companies to put their hazardous waste into our drinking water, hence source water. Shouldn't these companies pay for the disposal of their own hazardous waste, in a manner that does not cause environmental or human health harm?
The new 2002 Safe Drinking Water Act of Ontario does not permit the addition of “drinking water health hazards” to our drinking water and dilution of contaminants is “no defense”. Toxic substances by definition are “drinking water health hazards.”
Health Canada, the US Food and Drug Administration, and the US Environmental Protection Agency, have not been able to find any chronic toxicology studies to demonstrate safety of the actual products used in water fluoridation systems after 60 years of use.
Ingesting Fluoride is not Effective – Use Topically
What is clearly emerging in the research literature is that fluoride is a toxic substance which should not be ingested, but should be applied topically, on the surface of the teeth. We apply sunscreen on our skin, where it is effective. We do not swallow it because it is toxic.
98% of Europe does not use water fluoridation. Many countries have banned it outright. Quebec City discontinued water fluoridation on April 1, 2008; Niagara Region passed a by-law in February 2008 prohibiting water fluoridation. Thunder Bay recently said no thanks to water fluoridation. The number of citizens drinking fluoridated water in British Columbia and the province of Quebec has dropped to about 4%.
Policy Lags Behind the Science
The Physician’s Desk Reference discusses the 1 to 4% of the population which may be hypersensitive to fluorides. Our understanding of allergic and hypersensitive reactions is enhanced by the research on penicillin and peanuts. There is a growing awareness that for some individuals there is no safe dose.
The American Dental Association recommends that children under 12 months of age should not consume fluoridated water.
A recent review in The Lancet describes fluoride as "an emerging neurotoxic substance" that may damage the developing brain.
The National Research Council has identified fluoride as an "endocrine disruptor" while recent research from Harvard University has found a connection between fluoride and bone cancer that is “remarkably robust”.
According to Dr. Kathy Thiessen, co-author of the National Research Council 2006 Report on Fluorides in Drinking Water: “A carcinogenic (cancer-causing) effect of fluoride cannot be ruled out from the available data, and at the very least, a cancer-promoting effect is likely. For carcinogenic substances, the risk of cancer increases with the amount of exposure, such that even a very low exposure carries with it some cancer risk.”
Individuals with kidney disease and young children are unable to adequately filter toxins and individuals who drink large volumes of water such as lactating mothers, athletes and outdoor workers ingest more of these toxins on a daily basis, therefore are susceptible to overdose.
Evidence suggests that those with kidney impairment should avoid fluoride consumption. The US National Kidney Foundation’s alleged failure to warn kidney patients that they are particularly susceptible to harm from ingested fluoride from drinking water and other sources is the subject of a precedent-setting letter to the Foundation from a legal firm.
Is collateral damage to infants and minorities an acceptable price for fluoridation?
We cannot control the dose
Concentration is quantity of fluoride in a volume of water, expressed as milligrams fluoride in one liter of water (mg/L or ppm). Dose is quantity of fluoride ingested in a day, expressed as milligrams of fluoride in a day (mg/day).
Any discussion of fluorides in drinking water must acknowledge the global increase of fluorides, as discussed in the January 2008 Scientific American article “Second Thoughts About Fluoride”. Fluorides are present in the air, water, foods (pesticides, fertilizers and post-harvest fumigants contribute to the fluoride content in our food chain), consumer products and drugs. Increased uses of fluoridated drinking water in the processing of foods and beverages have a multiplier effect in the food chain.
We cannot control the dose of these ubiquitous fluorides because we cannot tell individuals how much to drink. Calculating how much fluoride exposure individuals receive from other sources is virtually impossible. Due to this inability to control the dose, it is reasonable to assume that the incidence and severity of such adverse health effects is likely to rise with the increases in fluoride exposures from all sources.
According to the US National Research Council 2006 Report on Fluorides in Drinking Water, fluorides in drinking water are the largest source of fluorides (representing approximately 60% of our daily consumption).
How can anyone claim that water fluoridation provides a SAFE dose when the dose cannot be controlled?
Below is a chart demonstrating the fluoride doses at various fluoride concentrations (0.6-1.5mg/L), based on the amount of water consumed in a day. High water consumers (athletes, lactating mothers, soldiers, outdoor workers, diabetic patients) consume up to 12 liters of water per day:
Water/day Fluoride consumed/day by concentration level
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.5(mg/L)
1L/day 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.5(mg/day)
2L/day 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 3.0
3L/day 1.8 2.4 3.0 3.6 4.5
4L/day 2.4 3.2 4.0 4.8 6.0
5L/day 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.5
6L/day 3.6 4.8 6.0 7.2 9.0
7L/day 4.2 5.6 7.0 8.4 10.5
8L/day 4.8 6.4 8.0 9.6 12.0
9L/day 5.4 7.2 9.0 10.8 13.5
10L/day 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 15.0
11L/day 6.6 8.8 11.0 13.2 16.5
According to the United Nations: “As a general guideline, prolonged total Fluoride intake exceeding 1.0 mg/day can produce clinical signs of Fluorosis in adults."
Many communities in Southwestern Ontario have fluoride concentration levels well in excess of the Health Canada maximum acceptable contaminant level (MAC) of 1.5mg/L, such as Stratford (2.1mg/L), Sebringville (2.76mg/L), Chepstow (1.89mg/L), Mitchell (1.93mg/L), to name a few.
The use of hydrofluorosilicic acid may be doubling our exposure to lead through the interaction of fluorosilicates with lead pipes, lead solder and leaded brass infrastructure components. We also need to be concerned about the arsenic we are adding to our drinking water. It is a level 1 carcinogen.
The Thyroid-Iodine-Fluoride Connection
Thyroid pathologies such as simple goiter and hyperthyroidism, and breast mastopathies such as fibrocystic breast disease and breast cancer are associated with iodine deficiency and seem to be preventable. Fluoride is a well-established enzyme disruptor. It interferes with the uptake of iodine in thyroid and extra-thyroid tissues like the breast, which require iodine for normal architecture and function. A growing number of researchers and clinicians hypothesize that breast changes due to iodine deficiency lead to breast cancer.
Iodine is an essential nutrient. Fluoride is not. “Health Canada does not consider fluoride as an essential nutrient.”
Fiscal Imbalance
Municipalities, burdened with burgeoning costs of these fluoridation chemicals due to shortages may now upload dental health care to where it rightfully belongs – to the province – with the announcement by the McGuinty government on March 17, 2008 to spend $135 million over 3 years on a dental care plan for low-income families. Providing effective delivery of dental education and dental care which can be targeted to those in need is essential if our society is seriously interested in facilitating improvements in oral health.
An ideal environmental solution to pollution
Rebecca Hamner from the United States Environmental Protection Agency wrote in 1983; “In regard to the use of fluosilicic acid as a source of fluoride for fluoridation, this agency regards such use as an ideal environmental solution to a long-standing problem. By recovering by-product fluosilicic acid from fertilizer manufacturing, water and air pollution are minimized.”
In response to the above comment, Dr. Hirzy, Senior Vice-President of one of the EPA Headquarters Union wrote; "If this stuff gets out into the air, it's a pollutant; if it gets into the river, it's a pollutant; if it gets into the lake, it's a pollutant; but if it goes right straight into your drinking water system, it's not a pollutant. That's amazing!"
With background levels of fluoride (up to 0.25mg/L) in the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence waterway exceeding the Canadian Water Quality Guidelines (0.12mg/L), adding these toxic substances into our drinking water, hence source water is not a sustainable activity. Harm of aquatic species such as water flea and salmon is known to occur at these current background levels, and where sewage effluent enters our waterways, the fluoride levels are in excess of 1.0mg/L, diluting to background levels only after several kilometers.
<1% of fluoridated water is actually consumed.
>99% is returned to our environment and our source water.
Is this an efficient or effective method for delivering this drug?
Hurricane damage to some of the mining facilities in Florida has created a temporary shortage in fluoridation chemicals. This shortfall is mitigated by increased exports of these fluoridation chemicals from China.
To learn more about the complex environmental, legal, public health and ethical issues surrounding water fluoridation please visit Waterloo Watch or the Fluoride Alert Network.
Industrial by-product consumed by millions of Americans lowers IQ, causes cancer
Paul Joseph Watson
The establishment media will have to find a new tactic with which to ridicule those who oppose the fluoridation of water after a major new Scientific American report concluded that "Scientific attitudes toward fluoridation may be starting to shift" as new evidence emerges of the poison's link to disorders affecting teeth, bones, the brain and the thyroid gland, as well as lowering IQ.
"Today almost 60 percent of the U.S. population drinks fluoridated water, including residents of 46 of the nation's 50 largest cities," reports Scientific American's Dan Fagin.
Fagin is an award-wining environmental reporter and Director of New York University's Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program.
"Outside the U.S., fluoridation has spread to Canada, the U.K., Australia, New Zealand and a few other countries. Critics of the practice have generally been dismissed as gadflies or zealots by mainstream researchers and public health agencies in those countries as well as the U.S. (In other nations, however, water fluoridation is rare and controversial.)"
Indeed, the zeitgeist for scoffing at those who spoke of the dangers of mass medicating the public against their will with fluoride was the deranged and paranoid character of General Ripper in the hit 1964 Peter Selllers movie Dr. Strangelove.
But that stereotype is quickly fading as serious scientific research uncovers proof that all the horror stories about sodium fluoride told down the decades are essentially true.
The Scientific American study "Concluded that fluoride can subtly alter endocrine function, especially in the thyroid -- the gland that produces hormones regulating growth and metabolism."
The report also notes that "a series of epidemiological studies in China have associated high fluoride exposures with lower IQ."
"Epidemiological studies and tests on lab animals suggest that high fluoride exposure increases the risk of
bone fracture, especially in vulnerable populations such as the elderly and diabetics," writes Fagin.
Fagin interviewed Steven Levy, director of the Iowa Fluoride Study which tracked about 700 Iowa children for sixteen years. Nine-year-old "Iowa children who lived in communities where the water was fluoridated were 50 percent more likely to have mild fluorosis... than [nine-year-old] children living in nonfluoridated areas of the state," writes Fagin.
The study adds to a growing literature of shocking scientific studies proving fluoride's link with all manner of health defects, even as governments in the west, including recently the UK , make plans to mass medicate the population against their will with this deadly toxin.
In 2005, a study conducted at the Harvard School of Dental Health found that fluoride in tap water directly contributes to causing bone cancer in young boys.
"New American research suggests that boys exposed to fluoride between the ages of five and 10 will suffer an increased rate of osteosarcoma - bone cancer - between the ages of 10 and 19," according to a London Observer article about the study.
Based on the findings of the study, the respected Environmental Working Group lobbied to have fluoride in tap water be added to the US government's classified list of substances known or anticipated to cause cancer in humans.
Cancer rates in the U.S. have skyrocketed with one in three people now contracting the disease at some stage in their life.
The link to bone cancer has also been discovered by other scientists, but a controversy ensued after it emerged that Harvard Professor Chester Douglass, who downplayed the connection in his final report, was in fact editor-in-chief of The Colgate Oral Health Report, a quarterly newsletter funded by Colgate-Palmolive Co., which makes fluoridated toothpaste.
An August 2006 Chinese study found that fluoride in drinking water damages children's liver and kidney functions.
Facts About Fluoride
- Fluoride is a waste by-product of the fertilizer and aluminum industry and it's also a Part II Poison under the UK Poisons Act 1972.
- Fluoride is one of the basic ingredients in both PROZAC (FLUoxetene Hydrochloride) and Sarin nerve gas (Isopropyl-Methyl-Phosphoryl FLUoride).
- USAF Major George R. Jordan testified before Un-American Activity committees of Congress in the 1950's that in his post as U.S.-Soviet liaison officer, the Soviets openly admitted to "Using the fluoride in the water supplies in their concentration camps, to make the prisoners stupid, docile, and subservient."
- The first occurrence of fluoridated drinking water on Earth was found in Germany's Nazi prison camps. The Gestapo had little concern about fluoride's supposed effect on children's teeth; their alleged reason for mass-medicating water with sodium fluoride was to sterilize humans and force the people in their concentration camps into calm submission. ( Ref. book: "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" by Joseph Borkin .)
- 97% of western Europe has rejected fluoridated water due to the known health risks, however 10% of Britons drink it and the UK government is trying to fast track the fluoridation of the entire country's water supply.
- In Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg fluoridation of water was rejected because it was classified as compulsive medication against the subject's will and therefore violated fundamental human rights.
- In November of 2006, the American Dental Association (ADA) advised that parents should avoid giving babies fluoridated water.
- Sources of fluoride include: fluoride dental products, fluoride pe sticides, fluoridated pharmaceuticals, processed foods made with fluoridated water, and tea.