Fluoride Archives

Chemist on dangers of fluoride, plus a slide show! >

Some of you may feel I'm beating this into the ground. If so, I apologize. I do feel strongly that understanding fluoride as a toxin is critically important to our health. Remember that 1 in 3 Americans gets cancer during their lifetimes today, an amazing statastic, with similar rates for other diseases. According to Dean Burk, Chief Chemist Emeritus at the U.S. National Cancer Institute, we need to look at fluoride as the single largest contributing factor. I realize that good nutrition is vital, but if you're falling off a cliff while taking anti-oxidants the ground is going to feel the same when you hit bottom.

Floyd Maxwell, a chemist who has studied the fluoride issue in depth FULL TIME for over least ten years. (Lot's of good chemistry here for king!) Click here

And a slide show of data points and references on fluoride poisoning from the INternational Center for Nutritional Research. Click here

A well-written and referenced article by Jackie Alan Giuliano, Ph.D., published by Environment News Service. Click here

Follow Ups:

• - Fluoride and Human Health Studies - Additional info. 16:26:11 5/30/01 (0)
• a summary > Peter B 00:05:48 5/29/01 (1)
  • Re: a summary > (Archive in Fluoride.) Walt Stoll 07:08:46 5/30/01 (0)
• Re: Chemist on dangers of fluoride, plus a slide show! (Archive in fluoride.) Walt Stoll 07:47:41 5/25/01 (0)

In Reply to: Chemist on dangers of fluoride, plus a slide show! > posted by Peter B on May 23, 2001 at 11:03:28:

Thanks, Peter.

Walt

In Reply to: Chemist on dangers of fluoride, plus a slide show! > posted by Peter B on May 23, 2001 at 11:03:28:

Sodium fluoride poisoning through fluoridation of public water introduces a level of ubiquitous exposure that may explain the dramatic rise in cancer rates in the American population during the past fifty years. The federal maximum contaminant level (MEL) for lead is 15 parts per billion (ppb), 5 ppb for arsenic, and 4000 ppb for fluoride. This level of "safety" for fluoride supplementation in no way reflects the dangers of toxicity observed in studies demonstrating the effects of fluoridation, since the government has not acknowledged such studies. When you understand that the phosphate and aluminum industries have succeeded at "lobbying" government to accomodate the convenient disposal of a toxic waste (sodium fluoride [NaF], sodium silicofluoride and hydrofluosilic acids are not naturally-occuring fluorides) using public waters as a means to avoid the expense of proper waste disposal, you begin to see why fluoride may be the most serious threat of chemical exposure Americans are facing. It certainly represents the single largest betrayal of citizens by U.S. public health agencies and their revenue-generating constituents, the phosphate and aluminum industries. Note that European nations have almost universally banned the fluoridation of public waters on the basis of scientific data accumulated over the past fifty years.

The optimum amount of fluoride consumption by humans according to government sources is 1ppm. This amounts to approximately 1mg per litre of water. But fluoride exponentiates in the food supply due to continuous uptake and redistribution through use of public waters in agriculture, livestock hydration, and food processing. No other chemical in our society enjoys this level of ubiquity through recirculation. Produce that is sprayed with fluoride-containing insecticide is then irrigated with fluoridated water, processed into juices that are exposed to still more fluoridation, yielding an end product that provides accumulated fluoride far exceeding "safe" levels established by the EPA. And remember, the soils irrigated with fluoridated water are resupplying fluoride (including aluminum and arsenic left over from phosphate production) to the plants that grow in them.

Tea products can contain well over 100 ppm of fluoride and can average 1mg of this toxin per 6 cups of liquid. This does not provide exposure to naturally-occuring fluoride, which itself approaches toxicity at these levels. The contaminant is sodium fluoride (NaF), sodium silicofluoride or hydrofluosilic acid, all phosphate or aluminum-derived toxins that introduce both arsenic and aluminum in a compound that finds its way into rat poison on many hardware store shelves across America.

Consider the effects of fluoride as a "supplement." The most commonly known is skeletal fluorosis. Symptoms are back stiffness, joint pains, burning sensations, pricking or tingling in the limbs, muscle weakness, chronic fatigue, gastrointestinal disorders, and supressed appetite. Abnormal calcium deposits in bone and ligaments can be observed in those with this condition. In time, victims can be crippled and experience a fusing of the vertebrae. It is not difficult to see the implication of Osteoporosis in this destructive disease process.

Researchers at the University of Bordeaux in France studied the effects of fluoridation in over three thousand individuals 65 years of age or older. The study results indicated a risk of hip fracture significantly higher than for those individuals living in non-fluoridated areas. Only .11ppm of fluoride in water was observed to have such an effect. Americans are constantly exposed to much higher concentrations.

Dr. Sheila Gibson from the University of Glasgow made public his research demonstrating the ability of fluoride to decrease the migration rate of human white blood cells, a process known as leukotaxis. He noted that exposure to minute amounts of fluoride inhibits the white blood cell migration significantly, impeding the immune response in human physiology. An almost complete reduction of white blood cell migration was noted in some experiments. These levels of immune suppression suggest the possibility that daily fluoride consumption at levels typical in fluoridated areas can, over time, lead to the total destruction of one's immune response.

Cancer researchers, in a 16-year study, have found a 17% rise in cancers in U.S. cities exposed to fluoridation. A rise in osteosarcoma, an otherwise rare form of bone cancer, was recorded in men under 20 years of age in fluoridated areas. This result was also evident in a 1989 laboratory study using mice at the US National Toxicology Program.

George Waldbott, founder and chief of allergy clinics in four Detroit hospitals, documented symptoms of more than 500 patients suffering effects he concluded were related to fluoride poisoning. Symptoms included muscular weakness, chronic fatigue, excessive thirst, headaches, skin rashes, joint pains, digestive upsets, tingling in the extremities, and loss of mental clarity. Waldbott used double-blind tests to determine whether fluoride was the cause of symptoms in many of these cases. In each of these controlled experiments, symptoms were abated when fluoride was withdrawn and resurfaced when patients were re-exposed.

Note that fluoride is distributed and redistributed within the human food chain and the environment through fluoridated water, fluoride-infused insecticides, a variety of prescription medications, toothpastes, mouthwash, soda, teas, processed foods, fresh produce, and contaminated soil. These exposures are cumulative and demonstrate why Americans may be experiencing the incredible rates of cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, and other diseases so common since the fluoridation protocol began in 1939. Two thirds of America's public waters are currently being fluoridated.

Follow Ups:

• Re: a summary > (Archive in Fluoride.) Walt Stoll 07:08:46 5/30/01 (0)

In Reply to: a summary > posted by Peter B on May 29, 2001 at 00:05:48:

Thanks, Peter.

Namaste`

Walt

In Reply to: Chemist on dangers of fluoride, plus a slide show! > posted by Peter B on May 23, 2001 at 11:03:28:

You don't need rats to study the effects of fluoride when more than 100 million Americans are already fluoride-dosed. Many studies are available that show the effects of fluoride at 1ppm levels (and lower) at typical water consumption in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. The following is only a partial reference. A huge resource for epidemiological studies on fluoride can be found at the Fluoride Journal.

1. Jacobsen, S., et al. (1992). "The association between water fluoridation and hip fracture among white women and men aged 65 years and older; a national ecologic study." Annals of Epidemiology 2: 617-626.

2. Hoover, R. et al (1991 a). Fluoridation of Drinking Water and Subsequent Cancer Incidence and Mortality. In, Review of Fluoride: Benefits and Risks, Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Fluoride of the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs. Department of Health and Human Services, USA, Appendix E, E1-E51.

3. Hoover, R., et al. (1991 b). In, Review of Fluoride: Benefits and Risks, Appendix F. Time trends for bone and joint cancers and osteosarcomas in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program, National Cancer Institute., Department of Health and Human Services, USA, Appendix F, F1-7.

4. Susheela, A.K. (1993). Prevalence of endemic fluorosis with gastrointestinal manifestations in people living in some North-Indian villages. Fluoride, 26, 97-104.

5. Cooper, C., C. Wickham, et al. (1991). "Water fluoridation and hip fracture." JAMA 266: 513-514 (letter, a reanalysis of data presented in 1990 paper).

6. Danielson, C., J. L. Lyon, et al. (1992). "Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah's elderly population." Jama 268(6): 746-748.

7. Jacobsen, S., J. Goldberg, et al. (1992). "The association between water fluoridation and hip fracture among white women and men aged 65 years and older; a national ecologic study." Annals of Epidemiology 2: 617-626

8. Water Fluoridation & Tooth Decay: Results from the 1986-1987 National Survey of US Schoolchildren. John A. Yiamouyiannis, Ph.D. Vol. 23, No. 2; April, 1990; pp 55-67.
[The LARGEST and most thorough survey ever conducted in the USA, the results of which are hugely embarrassing to the pro-fluoridationists. The ADA does not reference this study or offer to refute it.]

10. Li, Y., C. Liang, et al. (1999). "Effect of Long-Term Exposure to Fluoride in Drinking Water on Risks of Bone Fractures." Submitted for publication. Contact details: Dr. Yiming Li, Loma Linda School of Dentistry, Loma Linda, California, Phone 1-909-558-8069, Fax 1-909-558-0328,
e-mail, Yli@sd.llu.edu.

9. Leading dental researchers (Levine, 1976; Fejerskov, Thylstrup and Larsen, 1981; Carlos, 1983; Featherstone, 1987, 1999, 2000; Margolis and Moreno, 1990; Clark, 1993; Burt, 1994; Shellis and Duckworth, 1994 and Limeback, 1999, 2000), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 1999) are now acknowledging that the mechanism of fluoride's benefits are mainly TOPICAL not SYSTEMIC. Thus, you don't have to swallow fluoride to protect teeth. As the benefits of fluoride (if they exist) are topical, and the risks are all systemic, it makes more sense, for those who want to take the risks, to deliver the fluoride directly to the tooth in the form of toothpaste. Since swallowing fluoride is unnecessary, there is no reason to engage in water fluoridation.