.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

UK Against Fluoridation

Thursday, October 18, 2018



I wish David would drop his umms but you can speed up the video which makes listening easier.

Same video on dozens of news outlets

12 hours ago
From a young age, most of us are taught to brush, floss and swish. But some groups are speaking out against ..

Science Says Fluoride in Water Is Good for Kids. So Why Are These Towns Banning It?

"You cannot tailor public health to the whims of a small group of people," says the president of the nonprofit American Fluoridation Society

Fluoride prevents cavities and tooth decay, something confirmed by numerous studies, yet a small but vocal minority has gotten dozens of cities to remove the naturally occurring compound from the water supply, NBC News reported.

"Anti-fluoridationists" blame fluoride for lower IQs and diseases, despite long-established science. The American Dental Association says that 74 cities have voted to remove fluoride from their drinking water in the last five years, and proposed bans are on the ballot in two more cities this November.

"You cannot tailor public health to the whims of a small group of people," said Dr. Johnny Johnson, a retired pediatric dentist who leads the nonprofit American Fluoridation Society. "If you are doing that, you are harming a large group of people."

While nearly 75 percent of the United States gets fluoridated water, more than 80 percent of New Jersey residents do not, and the Texas Republican Party now opposes water fluoridation as well.


Whim! 

Just found this in another report of the same issue.
.
Dr. Johnny Johnson, a retired pediatric dentist who is president of the nonprofit American Fluoridation Society, calls the anti-fluoride efforts "cult-like."

So I belong to a cult and act on a whim.

Wednesday, October 17, 2018

Parry Sound doctors supporting fluoridation misinformed, reader

I read the Oct. 5 opinion letter by a group of local doctors trying to convince Parry Sounders to vote in favour of fluoridation in the upcoming plebiscite.

As one of the persons derogatorily labeled as a "so-called expert," I’d like to offer some corrections and facts in response based on science, not politics or endorsements.

Claim1: “As health professionals we serve as first-hand witnesses to the impact that poor dental hygiene has on the overall health of the community.”

This is an odd statement, since physicians do not practice dentistry and are not familiar with dental science.

Fact: poor dietary choices (frequent sugar intake) cause cavities. “Poor dental hygiene” is a not a major factor in the prevalence and severity of dental decay.

Claim 2. Cavities cost Canadians over a billion dollars a year.

Sounds impressive, but that’s only $27/person/yr.

Fact: Other dental costs, including cosmetic dentistry to treat the dental fluorosis side effects of fluoridation, are 12 times higher.

Claim 3. The truth is, fluoride in drinking water has been scientifically studied for over 70 years without ever finding evidence that the low levels recommended in municipal drinking water have any negative health effects

Fact: While fluoridation has been in place for 70 years, studies have not been conducted to show safety. Our expert review panel (the National Academies of Sciences Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water) reviewed over hundreds of studies on fluoride toxicity. See https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11571/fluoride-in-drinking-water-a-scientific-review-of-epas-standards  We found several problems with fluoride in drinking water because fluoride accumulates in the body, primarily the skeletal system.

Our own study (Chachra et al, 2010) published after our NAS Review of 2006 comparing the bones of fluoridated Torontonians with the bones of the non-fluoridated Montrealers showed that the people in Toronto had more fluoride in their bones and the physical properties of their bones had changed. Fluoride accumulation in bones weakens them.

But if you don’t look for problems you won’t find them.

There has never been a randomized, double-blinded clinical trial to see if fluoridation actually works. This kind of study is required for every drug that seeks approval from Health Canada or the US FDA.

Claim 4. In recent years, when communities have voted to remove fluoride from drinking water, cavity rates have risen. 

Fact. This is incorrect. Nearly all studies, including in Canada, showed that where fluoridation was halted, dental decay continued to drop. The increased dental decay claimed was anecdotal and could not be backed up with good science. We published a critique of the findings in Calgary after it stopped fluoridating in 2011 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28994462)

Claim 5. It is true that swallowing too much fluoride toothpaste can cause your teeth to stain (known as fluorosis); an uncommon finding even in those who brush regularly and have fluoride in their town water.  

Fact. Dental fluorosis occurs when too much fluoride is ingested from birth to age 6 years. It is the total fluoride that is ingested that is important. By far, fluoridated water is the largest contributor, especially when a baby is given infant formula made with fluoridated tap water. Unfortunately dental fluorosis, a permanent scarring of the teeth, is now a very common side effect of fluoridation. Some estimates are that 1 in 10 children have unsightly dental fluorosis in fluoridated areas.

Claim 6. The point is, there are no known negative health effects from the amounts of fluoride added to municipal drinking water, despite decades of study on the topic.

Fact: The good doctors are obviously not up on their science. There are 4 studies published in the last two years that linked prenatal exposure to fluoride to lowered IQ in the children later in life. One study showed that dental fluorosis was associated with lowered IQ. This is not ‘misinformation’ as the doctors suggest. These are peer-reviewed studies from highly respected international researchers.

Claim 7. Will updating our fluoridation system cost money? Yes, but not as much as it will to deal with all the cavities we will face if we don’t.

Upgrading Parry Sound’s fluoridation system to current standards will cost taxpayers at least $350,000. Add to that $150,000 over the next 15 years to maintain and run the system. The total cost is at least $0.5 million.

What are the dental cost savings Parry Sound families can expect after 15 years of fluoridation? 

Fact: The most up-to-date peer-reviewed study (Slade et al, 2018) shows that 0.5 teeth might be saved per teenager exposed to fluoridated water since birth.

There are about 850 teens in Parry Sound. Saving 0.5 tooth/teen from decay will save families in Parry Sound about $85,000.

Spending $0.5 million to save $85,000 in dental costs is not wise way to spend taxpayers’ money.  I was told that the cost to fluoridate will be recovered from increases in Parry Sound water bills.

Claim 8. It’s worth noting that no Canadian town has ever removed fluoride from water because of actual health concerns related to these low levels of fluoride

This is another unsupported claim. When Canadian towns have the opportunity to weigh the risks vs the benefits and look at all the health concerns, they usually vote to discontinue the practice.

Fluoridation is medication, as ruled by Supreme Court of Canada. You cannot control the dose. Everyone is obliged to take it whether they need it or not. It will harm the most susceptible even if they do not provide consent to this ‘medical treatment’.

In most medical schools graduates are asked to uphold the oath “primum non nocere” which is “first do no harm”.

But then those advising you to vote for fluoridation, including your medical officer of health and the group of doctors who wrote the OpEd letter, are not liable for any harm that fluoridation will cause your family.

Because of the Fluoridation Act of Ontario, if the answer to the referendum is in the affirmative, a majority of 51% of the community can tell the other 49% they have to contribute to the cost of fluoridation, pay for fixing dental fluorosis their children will get, pay for a home filtration system that removes unwanted fluoride and try and avoid foods made with fluoridated drinking water including foods served in the restaurants and coffee shops of Parry Sound.

This time Parry Sounders have a say whether or not they want fluoridation. It’s not up to the council, whether for or against.

Dr. Hardy Limeback BSc, PhD (Biochem), DDS

Reason to switch to fluoride-free toothpaste during pregnancy

Reason to switch to fluoride-free toothpaste during pregnancyThe findings of new research may make you want to switch to fluoride-free toothpaste while pregnant. Read on to find out why…

A study of over 200 pregnant women and their children found that higher levels of urinary fluoride during pregnancy are associated with more ADHD-like symptoms in school-age children.
“Our findings are consistent with a growing body of evidence suggesting that the growing foetal nervous system may be negatively affected by higher levels of fluoride exposure,” said Dr Morteza Bashash, the study’s lead author and researcher at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Canada.
Researchers analysed data from 213 mother-child pairs in Mexico City that were part of the Early Life Exposures in Mexico to Environmental Toxicants (ELEMENT) project, which recruited pregnant women from 1994 to 2005 and has continued to follow the women and their children ever since........................

Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

Dr. Chuck,

A couple good responses to your good questions on "legal" and "NSF."

I would agree with you, most US court cases have ruled in favor of fluoridation, but not all.  And certainly international courts have not been as good to fluoridation.  Few have wrestled and ruled on the science.

Those two issues of (A) courts and (B) NSF are too big to cover here, but I will add to other posts.

(A)    Courts generally support governments, so those harmed with excess fluoride have a higher standard to gain.    (Courts took years to rule against tobacco, long after science was firm.)

1.   As you may know, like a scientific study, courts try to focus on one variable and often it ends up to be a war of court terms rather than the benefits and risks of fluoride.  Only one case I know of, considered the science and that court ruled in favor of the science which is opposed to humans ingesting more fluoride. . . fluoridation.  On appeal the science was not reviewed.

2.   The EPA approved SF for a post-harvest fumigant with residual concentrations up to, for example, dried egg of 900 ppm, similar to toothpaste.  Most dried egg is fed to children and seniors in schools and retirement homes. . . the most vulnerable.  On petition, an administrative judge ruled against the EPA on all counts.  Seeing the serious loss, Dow Agro went around the EPA and had Congress approve SF as a post-harvest fumigant in the Farm Bill.  Doesn't mean SF is safe, just means money makes laws.  The politicians I talked to did not realize what they had signed.

3.   The court is currently reviewing fluoride in a TSCA suite.  We shall see how that plays out in a year or so.   The neurotoxicity of fluoride is central.

(B)  Regarding NSF.   Do not trust NSF to evaluate the safety or efficacy of fluoride ingestion.
1.  NSF is a private company and documentation is not available to the public.  We don't know how "honest" NSF presents their data.  And what we know is a concern.

2.  NSF had a rule that permitted contaminants in a product, limiting the contaminant to 10% of the EPA's MCL added to the water.   Sounds simple enough.  10% of EPA's 4 mg/L MCL for fluoride would be 0.4 ppm.   NSF would therefore permit fluoridation up to 0.4 ppm.  

So I called NSF and asked them about the rule.  They agreed and explained it to me as I have to you.  I then asked, "why NSF permitted fluoridation to 1.2 ppm when 10% of 4 ppm MCL is 0.4 mg/L?"   Long pause.  Finally, NSF said they would call me back and did not.  I called a week later and asked again.  The person I talked to said the 10% applies to contaminants in the product, not the product itself.

I asked, "if we called fluorosilicic acid or sodium fluoride by a different name such as lead or silicate or arsenic, would the dilution of the product be limited to 0.4 ppm of fluoride?"  NSF responded, "well yes."  

NSF makes no sense.  Change the name and the product cannot be added to the water at current concentrations?   Nothing about a name change will change the toxicity of the product.

Since then, NSF has made an exeption to fluoride.    And exceptions for fluoride are what we see with all agencies and fluoridationists, such as the EPA, CDC, FDA, and others.  The rules are written and changed not based on health and safety, but on politics and money.   When it comes to fluoride, NSF protects the fluoride manufacturers and those purchasing the fluoride.   Their decision is not based on science or health.  Their data is not open for public review.  

Do NOT rely on NSF for the health and safety of fluoridation.

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH  



Three New Studies Link Fluoride to Brain and Thyroid Disorders



Don't know how old this video is but I haven't seen it before.

F.A.N. Newsletter

Below is a second press release sent out by York University in this past week on new fluoride research. This release focuses on their new study showing that Canadian adults who are iodine deficient and have higher fluoride exposure are at an increased risk of hypothyroidism.  See study:   
Please read, and share the following press release with your local media outlets.

October 14, 2018
Canadian adults who have higher levels of fluoride exposure and are deficient in iodine may be at an increased risk of underactive thyroid, according to a new study.
“Concern about exposure to fluoride disrupting thyroid function has been suggested in the past,” said Christine Till, the study’s senior author and associate professor at York University. “In fact, up until the 1960s, fluoride was prescribed as a suppressant for overactive thyroid. While our findings only establish an association, not cause-and-effect, they are important because they suggest a potential effect of fluoride on thyroid function at levels of exposure that are typical for Canadians.”
The study, “Fluoride exposure and thyroid function among adults living in Canada: Effect modification by iodine status”, published in Environment International, used population-based data from Cycle 3 of the Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS), which includes health-related data collected by Statistics Canada from a nationally representative sample of Canadians.
The study consisted of 6.9 million adults between the ages of 18 and 79 years. Adults who were diagnosed with a thyroid disorder, or who were on thyroid medication, as well as pregnant women, were excluded.
Exposure to fluoride comes from a variety of sources, though the major source of intake is from drinking water that is fluoridated to prevent tooth decay. Approximately 39 per cent of the population in Canada receives artificially fluoridated drinking water compared with about 74 per cent of the U.S. population.
The research team, based out of York University in Toronto, and the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, tested whether higher levels of fluoride in urine are associated with disrupted thyroid function in adults living in Canada. Thyroid hormones help to regulate many vital bodily functions, including breathing and heart rate, digestive function, muscle strength, body temperature, and mood. They are also critical during pregnancy for fetal brain development.
Fluoride was measured in urine samples, which were then adjusted for dilution. Thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) was measured in blood samples and used to assess thyroid function. The analyses also adjusted for other factors that could influence TSH level, including age, sex, body mass, as well as calcium levels in blood.
The association between urinary fluoride level and underactive thyroid function was not seen among the general population of adults, consistent with past studies.
However, the researchers then tested whether the impact of fluoride exposure may be dependent upon having adequate iodine levels.
“Prior studies investigating fluoride exposure and thyroid function among adults did not consider iodine status – an important modifying factor,” said lead author, Ashley Malin, a former graduate student from the Department of Psychology at York University and now a post-doctoral fellow at the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. “It was particularly important that we considered iodine status in this study because iodine deficiency is relatively common among adults in Canada.”
Iodine is essential for the production of thyroid hormone and iodine deficiency is believed to exacerbate thyroid-disrupting effects of certain chemicals, including fluoride. In the current study, almost 18 per cent of adults fell in the moderately-to-severely iodine deficient range.
The mechanism by which fluoride and iodine interact to affect thyroid function is not yet fully understood.
“Fluoride may interfere with enzymes that contribute to thyroid hormone synthesis and active transport of iodine into the thyroid,” Malin said. “Iodine may also facilitate bodily excretion of fluoride, thereby buffering the thyroid from its potential adverse effects.” 


“If we can understand the reasons behind this association, we can then begin to develop preventive strategies to mitigate the risk,” said Till, who is also the principal investigator of a grant funded by the National Institutes of Health aimed at examining fluoride exposure in a large Canadian sample of pregnant women.

Tuesday, October 16, 2018

Five More Fluoride-Condemning Studies are Published - When Is It Enough?

NEW YORKOct. 15, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- Five new published studies support previous research linking fluoride to thyroid disease; ADHD; overdosing formula-fed infants and bias in government reports. Another reveals pregnant Canadians have higher urine fluoride levels in fluoridated vs. non-fluoridated areas which previous studies linked to offspring's lower IQ, reports New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF).
1) Fluoride exposure coupled with iodine deficiency is linked to thyroid disease, report researchers in Environment International (December 2018). They report that this is the first human population-based examination of chronic low-level fluoride exposure on thyroid function that considers residents' iodine status.
"I have grave concerns about the health effects of fluoride exposure," said lead author Ashley Malin, "And not just from my study but the other studies that have come out in recent years," (quoted from Bienkowski).
2) "Higher levels of fluoride exposure during pregnancy were associated with global measures of ADHD and more symptoms of inattention [in offspring]," researchers report in Environment International (December 2018). This is consistent with a growing body of evidence linking neurotoxicity to early-life fluoride exposure, they report.
3) "Significantly more infants, particularly those under six months old, will exceed the UL [Upper Limit] when consuming formula reconstituted with 0.7 ppm [fluoride] water, increasing their risk of developing dental fluorosis." (Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry, 2018).
"The primary adverse effects associated with chronic, excess fluoride intake are enamel and skeletal fluorosis." (NAS 1997).
The CDC encourages the addition of fluoride chemicals into public water supplies to reach 0.7 ppm without adequately informing parents about the consequences of fluoride overexposure.
4) Organizational bias compromised the integrity of fluoride research from the beginning and persists today (Medical HypothesesDecember 2018) The authors identify ten major flaws in a recent US National Toxicology Program (NTP) fluoride experiment as an example of how institutional bias can skew science.
5) Canadian pregnant women have double urine fluoride levels in fluoridated vs. non-fluoridated areas (Environmental Health PerspectivesOctober 10, 2018). Previous Mexican research links urine fluoride levels in pregnancy to offspring's lower IQ. The Canadian and Mexican women's fluoride levels are similar which causes concern.
Attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President says, "Fluoridation must be stopped. Politics, not science, keeps it afloat. Let's sink it."
Contact: Paul Beeber, JD, nyscof@aol.com, 516-433-8882 http://FluorideAction.Net
SOURCE New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.

F.A.N. Newsletter

Below is a press release sent out by York University on their study showing double the fluoride urine levels in pregnant Canadian women living in fluoridated communities than for their non-fluoridated counterparts.  See study:   
Please read, and share the following press release with your local media outlets.

October 2018
A new study led by York University researchers has found that fluoride levels in urine are twice as high for pregnant women living in Canadian cities where fluoride is added to public drinking water as for those living in cities that do not add fluoride to public water supplies.
The study “Community Water Fluoridation and Urinary Fluoride Concentrations in a National Sample of Pregnant Women in Canada” was published today in Environmental Health PerspectivesIt is the first study in North America to examine how fluoride in water contributes to urinary fluoride levels in pregnant women. The research was conducted as part of a larger study funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) investigating whether early life exposure to fluoride affects the developing brain.
“We found that fluoride in drinking water was the major source of exposure for pregnant women living in Canada. Women living in fluoridated communities have two times the amount of fluoride in their urine as women living in non-fluoridated communities,” said Christine Till, an associate professor of Psychology in York’s Faculty of Health and lead author on the study.
The Maternal Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) study recruited 2,001 pregnant women between 2008 and 2011. The women lived in 10 large cities across Canada. Seven of the cities (Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, Sudbury, Halifax, Edmonton and Winnipeg) added fluoride to municipal water while three (Vancouver, Montreal and Kingston) did not.
Urine samples were collected during each trimester of pregnancy for over 1,500 women. Fluoride levels in municipal water treatment plants that provided water to each women’s home were obtained. Information about each woman’s demographics, lifestyle and medical history was also collected.
In addition to fluoridated water, sources of fluoride can include toothpastes, mouth rinses, as well as processed beverages and food, especially those made with fluoridated water. Beyond water, products such as tea have previously been found to have high concentrations of natural fluoride.
In this study, fluoride level in water was the main determinant of fluoride level in the women’s urine. Higher consumption of black tea was also correlated with higher levels of urinary fluoride in pregnant women.
The levels of fluoride among pregnant women living in fluoridated communities in Canada were similar with levels reported in a prior study of pregnant women living in Mexico City where fluoride is added to table salt.
“This finding is concerning because prenatal exposure to fluoride in the Mexican sample has been associated with lower IQ in children. New evidence published today in Environment International also reported an association between higher levels of fluoride in pregnancy and inattentive behaviours among children in the same Mexican sample,” said Till.
The research team, including experts from Simon Fraser University, Université Laval, Indiana University, University of Montreal and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, is investigating whether prenatal exposure to fluoride in Canadian children results in IQ deficits, similar to the Mexican study.


Fluoride has been added to public drinking water in Canadian and American communities since the 1940s as a means of preventing tooth decay. Today, about 40 per cent of Canadians and 74 percent of the U.S. population on public water supplies receive fluoridated water.

Monday, October 15, 2018

Canadian studies prompt researcher to voice grave concerns

Press Release: Fluoride Free New Zealand
New Canadian studies prompt researcher to voice grave concerns about fluoride
Last week three new studies were published on fluoride adding more weight to an already overwhelming body of evidence that fluoridation is not safe.
“I have grave concerns about the health effects of fluoride” said Ashley Malin, lead author of the Canadian Fluoride-Thyroid study and a researcher at the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.
Published in Environmental International, the study found that the thyroid stimulating (TSH) hormone of pregnant Canadian women with low iodine was increased by fluoride. High TSH levels indicates the thyroid is not working properly. Hypothyroidism is known to cause depression, anxiety and obesity.
second study, published in Environmental Health Perspectives, found that most fluoride exposure for Canadians came from fluoridated drinking water and that pregnant women in fluoridated areas had nearly twice as much fluoride in their urine as pregnant women in non-fluoridated areas. The lead author of this study, an associate professor and researcher at York University, Christine Till, says “I am certain the safety of fluoride ingestion has not been proven”.
The third study, also published in Environmental International, found that children whose mothers were exposed to fluoride during pregnancy had higher rates of ADHD. This study, funded by the US Government, was carried out using the same data as the landmark IQ study, Prenatal Fluoride Exposure and Cognitive Outcomes in Children at 4 and 6-12 Years of Age in Mexico, published last year. It found IQ was reduced with increased fluoride exposure.
The fact that the Canadian women living in fluoridated areas have been found to have the same levels of fluoride as the women in Mexican, demonstrates the relevance of the IQ and ADHD studies to the Canadian population. Research in NZ shows women in fluoridated areas also have the same level as the Canadian women..New Zealanders are also known to be iodine deficient.
The case against continuing to force this medical treatment on millions of New Zealanders by way of water fluoridation is now beyond reasonable doubt. The Ministry of Health should accept this fact and abandon advocacy of an outdated practice.
As a former dental health officer for Auckland, the late Dr John Colquhoun, said in evidence to a court, “It is my best judgement, reached with a high degree of scientific certainty, that fluoridation is invalid in theory and ineffective in practice as a preventative of dental caries. It is dangerous to the health of consumers".
Our children deserve better.
ENDS

Sunday, October 14, 2018

Watch: Fluoride can impair intelligence says professor but former Health Minister says water fluoridation is safe, beneficial

Anti-fluoride activist Professor Paul Connett has shared his views during an interview with TVNZ 1's Breakfast programme this morning, with a counter argument given by former Health Minister Jonathan Coleman.
Professor Connett, who has a PhD in chemistry, made numerous points, but one of the main ones was that he believes research suggests fluoride can impair intelligence.
For counter balance, Breakfast invited former government Health Minister Dr Jonathan Coleman on the show, who said he still believes fluoridation of drinking water is completely safe and beneficial.
Water supplies in many New Zealand regions has been fluoridated for more than 60 years due to its beneficial effects on oral health, according to the Ministry of Health.
Fluoridation in New Zealand typically adjusts the amount of fluoride present in water to between 0.7 and 1 parts per million.
A 2007 Ministry for the Environment report showed that 95 per cent of the 279 groundwater sites it tested had naturally occurring fluoride concentrations of 0.56 parts per million, or less.

Episode 183: Fluoride: The Hidden Cause of Acne (& What to Do About It)

Partial transcript of Podcast
 Many of us realize just how important the gut microbiome is to health and are familiar with things like probiotics and fermented foods that can help optimize gut health. But did you know that our bodies are made up of many bacterial ecosystems and that without them, our health would crumble. Our skin is the largest ecosystem or microbiome and often it needs a little help. Modern hygiene products deplete the necessary beneficial bacteria on our skin and the AO+ Mist’s patented Ammonia-Oxidizing Bacteria (AOB) work by consuming the ammonia in your sweat and producing beneficial byproducts for your skin, which brings balance to your skin biome and helps restore its natural ecosystem. What I love about this mist is that is has almost completely removed the need for me to wear deodorant since ammonia is the stinky part of sweat, and it has become a vital part of my skin care routine. All Mother Dirt products are plant-based with minimal ingredients, and they are gentle, effective and great for the whole family. You can save 20% on your first purchase with code FREESHIP20 at motherdirt.com/wellnessmama to learn more and buy now. This episode is brought to you by Perfect Keto. I have heard from a lot of you who are trying the keto diet right now. And Perfect Keto has several products that make it so much easier and tastier. They have keto-friendly sports drinks with zero additives, zero carbs, and only high-quality ingredients. And I've gotten so many questions about this. They also have exogenous ketones that raise blood ketone levels up to 1.5 millimoles per liter. So that would be simulating a fast. A lot of people use these exogenous ketones to increase mental performance, and energy production, and fat burning without the need to do extended fasting. And Perfect Keto really just helps make ketosis available to everyone, everywhere, all the time without the need to do extended fasting, like I said. You can check out these and all of their other products at perfectketo.com/healthymoms. And if you use the code HEALTHYMOMS, all uppercase, you can save 20% on any order. Katie: Okay. Hello and welcome to the Wellness Mama Podcast. I'm Katie from wellnessmama.com. And today's episode is going to answer a question I get a lot from you guys and have not even made time to write about specifically yet. And that is Fluoride and what it does to our bodies. And I am here with Melissa Gallico who's the author of "The Hidden Cause of Acne" and "F is for Fluorite: A Feasible Fairytale for Free Thinkers 15 and up." She's also no rookie when it comes to research. She's a former military intelligence officer, a Fulbright Scholar, an FBI Intelligence Analyst, and she has instructed classes for the FBI Intelligence analyst at Quantico, and provided intelligence support for National Security Investigations. She graduated with honors from Georgetown and has a masters from the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. She's obviously well-educated, well-traveled and well-researched and I cannot wait to jump in. So, Melissa welcome and thanks for being here. ................................

Saturday, October 13, 2018

F.A.N. Newsletter

Below is a press release sent out by the University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health on their latest study of fluoride's neurotoxicity; see study:   
Please read, and share the following press release with your local media outlets.

October 2018
Higher levels of urinary fluoride during pregnancy are associated with more ADHD-like symptoms in school-age children, according to University of Toronto and York University researchers.
“Our findings are consistent with a growing body of evidence suggesting that the growing fetal nervous system may be negatively affected by higher levels of fluoride exposure,” said Dr. Morteza Bashash, the study’s lead author and researcher at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health.
The study“Prenatal Fluoride Exposure and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Symptoms in Children at 6–12 Years of Age in Mexico City,” published today in Environment International, analyzed data from 213 mother-child pairs in Mexico City that were part of the Early Life Exposures in Mexico to Environmental Toxicants (ELEMENT) project, which recruited pregnant women from 1994 to 2005 and has continued to follow the women and their children ever since.
Tap water and dental products have been fluoridated in communities in Canada and the United States (as well as milk and table salt in some other countries) by varying amounts for more than 60 years to prevent cavities. In recent years, fierce debate over the safety of water fluoridation — particularly for children’s developing brains — has fueled researchers to explore the issue and provide evidence to inform national drinking water standards.
The research team — including experts from the University of Toronto, York University, the National Institute of Public Health of Mexico, University of Michigan, Indiana University, the University of Washington and Harvard School of Public Health — analyzed urine samples that had been obtained from mothers during pregnancy and from their children between six and 12 years of age to reconstruct personal measures of fluoride exposure for both mother and child.
The researchers then analyzed how levels of fluoride in urine related to the child’s performance on a variety of tests and questionnaires that measure inattention and hyperactivity, and provide overall scores related to ADHD. Analyses were adjusted for other factors known to impact neurodevelopment, such as gestational age at birth, birthweight, birth order, sex, maternal marital status, smoking history, age at delivery, education, socioeconomic status and lead exposure.
“Our findings show that children with elevated prenatal exposure to fluoride were more likely to show symptoms of ADHD as reported by parents. Prenatal fluoride exposure was more strongly associated with inattentive behaviours and cognitive problems, but not with hyperactivity,” said Bashash.
This work builds off of previous research the team published on this population demonstrating that higher levels of urine fluoride during pregnancy are associated with lower scores on tests of IQ and cognition in the school-age children.
ADHD is the most common psychiatric disorder diagnosed in childhood, affecting between five and nine percent of all school-aged children.
“The symptoms of ADHD often persist into adulthood and can be impairing in daily life,” said Christine Till, Associate Professor of Psychology at York University and co-author on the study.
“If we can understand the reasons behind this association, we can then begin to develop preventive strategies to mitigate the risk,” said Till, who is also the principal investigator of another National Institutes of Health-funded grant examining fluoride exposure in a large Canadian sample of pregnant women.

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), funded this study.

UK - Fluoridated Milk Programme

Leigh Puddifoot made this Freedom of Information request to Cheshire West and Chester Council
Dear Cheshire West and Chester Council,
I should be most grateful if you would answer the following questions. 
Is your education authority still running a fluoridated milk programme in (a) primary schools and (b) nurseries? 
If so, please send me details of any evaluation studies which have been completed in order to justify the continuation of the scheme. 
If the fluoridated milk programme in (a) primary schools and (b) nurseries is NOT still running, please provide the following information: 
1. When the fluoridated milk programme ceased in (a) primary schools and (b) nurseries. 
2. Why the programme ceased in (a) primary schools and (b) nurseries. 
3. Have dental hygiene programmes replaced the provision of fluoridated milk in (a) primary schools and (b) nursery settings? If so how many primary schools and nurseries are providing dental hygiene tuition? 
Please state the percentage of schools and nurseries which are NOT providing dental hygiene tuition. 
I thank you for your kind attention to the above.
Yours faithfully,
Leigh Puddifoot

USA - Questions on Water Fluoridation MMWD Refuses to Answer

Posted by: Mary Larkin
We have shown MMWD Board Members many times the solid legal basis for MMWD to eliminate fluoride chemicals from of our public water. Yet the Board, Legal Counsel and General Manager's response is to refuse to read the evidence presented and instead, continue to push spurious excuses for continuing this criminal practice.

1) Are MMWD Board Members, Legal Counsel Mary Casey and General Manager Krishna Kumar saying that the 1995 CA State water fluoridation mandate forces them to add a CA Code of Regulations listed toxic, corrosive hazardous waste to our drinking water?

Where in the mandate does it state that MMWD is being forced to use the fluoride chemical hydrofluorosilicic acid? Why is MMWD using industrial grade, toxic, corrosive chemicals and not a pharmaceutical grade, FDA approved form?

2) Is MMWD telling us that even though the FDA states that fluoride chemicals used for the purpose of cavity prevention are drugs; and the FDA lists Hydrofluorosilicic Acid (HFA), the fluoride chemicals MMWD adds to our water, as an unapproved drug, that the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) has the authority to override the FDA and approve HFA for ingestion for the purpose of cavity prevention?

3) Mary Casey's story about MMWD Real Estate revenue qualifying as the needed "separate income" is meaningless. All MMWD revenue is comingled. The mandate does not force MMWD to do their accounting this way.

4) Why is MMWD continuing water fluoridation without having done an environmental study? The California Environmental Quality Act is another reason MMWD is not bound by the mandate. MMWD must halt water fluoridation until an environmental study on its impact is done.

5) HFA combined with chloramines and the anti-corrosive chemicals added because HFA is highly corrosive, creates and extremely toxic cocktail of chemicals and their toxic effects are greatly exacerbated when combined.

6) Why do MMWD Board Members refuse to take a vote to end water fluoridation?

7) Do MMWD Board members understand that what they are doing is medicating us without our individual consent, without dosage control and without medical oversight? None of the Board Members has a medical license, so they should not be practicing medicine via our water supply. The Board Members do not have the medical knowledge to understand what these chemicals are doing to our bodies.

8) There is already a law in the State of California under the Health and Safety Code that provides for free, TOPICAL fluoride treatments to children in their schools. This law provides for a much safer, economical, more effective and accurate way of providing fluoride treatments that does not force the entire population to participate in a medical process that is only intended for children. The Health and Safety Code leaves this medical treatment to licensed, dental practitioners.

CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 104830-104865 104830.

Pupils of public and private elementary and secondary schools, except pupils of community colleges, shall be provided the opportunity to receive within the school year the topical application of fluoride or other decay-inhibiting agent to the teeth in the manner approved by the department. The program of topical application shall be under the general direction of a dentist licensed in the state and may include self-application…

Response to Pro-Fluoridation Claims by Paul Connett, PhD

Claim 1: There is no difference in principle between chlorination and fluoridation. This is wrong. Chlorination treats water; fluoridation treats people. Water is treated with chlorine to make the water safe to drink. It kills the bacteria and other vectors that carry disease. Chlorination is not without its critics, but millions of lives have been saved by this process. Fluoridation, on the other hand, is not used to make the water safe. It simply uses the public water supply to deliver medicine. Such a practice is rare, indeed, for obvious reasons. Once medicine is added to tap water, key controls are lost. You cannot control the dose, and you cannot control who gets the medicine. Moreover, you are forcing medication on people without their informed consent and, especially in the case of low-income families, without their ability to avoid the medicine if they wish.

Claim 2: an effort to persuade citizens that the chemicals used in fluoridation are not hazardous waste products of the fertilizer industry.

Claim 3: Fluoride is a nutrient. In order to establish that a substance is an essential nutrient, a researcher has to remove the substance from the diet and demonstrate that disease results. This has not been shown to occur with a lack of fluoride, nor is fluoride known to contribute to any normal metabolic process.

Claim 4: Fluoridation is no different than adding iron, folic acid, or vitamin D to bread and other foodstuffs. There is a world of difference: Iron, folic acid, and vitamin D are known essential nutrients. Fluoride is not. 2. All of those substances have large margins of safety between their toxic levels and their beneficial levels. Fluoride does not. 3. People who do not want those supplements can seek out foods without them. It is much more difficult to avoid tap water.

Claim 5: The amount of fluoride added to the public water system, 1 ppm, is so small it couldn’t possibly hurt you. Promoters use analogies such as 1 ppm is equivalent to one cent in $10,000 or one inch in sixteen miles to make it appear that we are dealing with insignificant quantities of fluoride. Such analogies are nonsensical without reference to the toxicity of the chemical in question. For example, 1 ppm is about a million times higher than the safe concentration to swallow of dioxin, and 100 times higher than the safe drinking water standard for arsenic; it is also up to 250 times higher than the level of fluoride in mother’s milk.

Friday, October 12, 2018

Canada - We all just want to be healthy, happy, writes Parry Sound's Andrea McIntyre


Upon becoming aware of the letter signed by the doctors of Parry Sound, I began a quick search on the internet for the World Health Organization's (WHO) current take on water fluoridation.
In 2006, they put out a strong cautionary news article about the adverse effects of water fluoridation. But then I came upon this article published in the 2014 February issue of The Scientific World Journal: Water Fluoridation: A Critical Review of the Physiological Effects of Ingested Fluoride as a Public Health Intervention.
From the abstract I quote "As part of efforts to reduce hazardous fluoride ingestion, the practice of artificial water fluoridation should be reconsidered globally, while industrial safety measures need to be tightened in order to reduce unethical discharge of fluoride compounds into the environment. Public health approaches for global dental caries reduction that do not involve systemic ingestion of fluoride are urgently needed."
They discuss natural fluoride compounds versus the current chemical compounds used to combat dental caries, as well as the science used to study the effects of fluoridation when it started in the 1950s.
I quote again: "The United States' lead in instituting artificial water fluoridation led to its acceptance by the World Health Organization as an effective oral health intervention. At least 30 nations instituted artificial water fluoridation policies. However, a number of countries including Sweden, The Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland stopped fluoridating their water supplies due to concerns about safety and effectiveness[ , .2]. Currently, only about five per cent of the world's population-350 million people--(including 200 million Americans) consume artificially fluoridated water globally. Over the past two decades many communities in Canada, the USA, Australia, and New Zealand have stopped fluoridating their water supplies and in Israel the minister for health announced in April 2013 the end of mandatory water fluoridation. However, public health authorities continue to try and develop new community water fluoridation schemes.
"The fluoridation debate highlights the dynamics of science and power. To date, the dominant narrative has been that water fluoridation is safe and effective, with advocates claiming strong scientific support and the endorsement of the practice by major dental and public health bodies as evidence of its effectiveness. This is despite key questions about the efficacy and effectiveness of ingested fluoride, concerns about safety, and questions about ethics and legality, producing a debate that is a potent mixture of scientific, professional, corporate, and ethical arguments. This paper provides a reasoned assessment on the magnitude of the main positive impact of fluoride ingestion on human health (i.e., prevention of dental caries) compared with the established and potential adverse impacts. In particular, it raises questions about what an acceptable safety margin should be for ingested fluoride and questions why normal rules of safety normally applied to assessments of harm and benefit are not applied to water fluoridation."
"We examine the key arguments and evidence relating to three areas of current debate- efficacy and effectiveness, adverse impacts on health, and ethics. The paper concludes that given the questionable evidence of benefit and increasing evidence of harm the policy of water fluoridation for the prevention of dental caries should be abandoned in favour of more effective interventions combining community-wide and targeted oral health interventions."
I would suggest that those who are vehemently pro-fluoridation read the paper in its entirety. Science is not static. We used to put lead in paint, mercury in fillings, asbestos in insulation and use arsenic to preserve wood. The science is updated.
The benefits are less than the potential harm. Is this the future we want to create for our children? Or ourselves? Do we want to flood 98 per cent of the water with toxic waste added straight into the environment? Do we want to replace the calcium in our bodies with fluoride?

Reddit

What does everyone think about fluoride being added to water sources?

Excess fluoride is proven to calcify the pituitary gland causing a diminish in the production of melatonin. If there is less or an unbalanced amount of melatonin in the brain that alters sleep cycles and rest patterns, leading to all sorts of problems but mainly makes people more subservient. Could this be a method of the government preventing people turning on them and stopping civil wars or so they can pass laws which a hundred years ago would of resulted in civil wars. Freedom is slowly dying, in Britain you can get Imprisoned for using hateful language. I don't agree with hateful language but what happened to freedom of speech? I mean this is from the 1998 Human Rights Act "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression." - British people are literally having their human rights taken away and doing nothing about it.

Only 10% of the UK is fluoridated so that negates that theory but no doubt they want to put it in all of our drinking water and I don't think it is just for the underprivileged children's teeth.

Thursday, October 11, 2018



He does mention fluoride



Lively lot. Filmed 2013 After that procession they had to win a No vote.

CDC Awards Local Communities for Water Fluoridation Quality


The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is awarding 50 Michigan public water systems, the Water Fluoridation Quality Award.

The award recognizes communities that maintained a consistent level of optimally fluoridated water throughout 2017.

According to the MDHHS, Fluoridation is the adjustment of fluoride in the water to a level that is optimal for preventing tooth decay.

A total of 1,499 water systems in 30 states received the award, including some right here in our area.

Those local communities include Boyne City, Charlevoix, Clare, East Jordan, Elk Rapids, Ludington, Otsego, and Traverse City.


What about all those water companies who don't get it right?

Study: Fluoride levels in pregnant women in Canada show drinking water is primary source of exposure to fluoride


October 10, 2018Faculty of Health, fluoride, media news release
TORONTO, October 10, 2018 – A new study led by York University researchers has found that fluoride levels in urine are twice as high for pregnant women living in Canadian cities where fluoride is added to public drinking water as for those living in cities that do not add fluoride to public water supplies.

The study “Community Water Fluoridation and Urinary Fluoride Concentrations in a National Sample of Pregnant Women in Canada” was published today in Environmental Health Perspectives. It is the first study in North America to examine how fluoride in water contributes to urinary fluoride levels in pregnant women. The research was conducted as part of a larger study funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) investigating whether early life exposure to fluoride affects the developing brain.

“We found that fluoride in drinking water was the major source of exposure for pregnant women living in Canada. Women living in fluoridated communities have two times the amount of fluoride in their urine as women living in non-fluoridated communities,” said Christine Till, an associate professor of Psychology in York’s Faculty of Health and lead author on the study.

The Maternal Infant Research on Environmental Chemicals (MIREC) study recruited 2,001 pregnant women between 2008 and 2011. The women lived in 10 large cities across Canada. Seven of the cities (Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, Sudbury, Halifax, Edmonton and Winnipeg) added fluoride to municipal water while three (Vancouver, Montreal and Kingston) did not.

Urine samples were collected during each trimester of pregnancy for over 1,500 women. Fluoride levels in municipal water treatment plants that provided water to each women’s home were obtained. Information about each woman’s demographics, lifestyle and medical history was also collected.

In addition to fluoridated water, sources of fluoride can include toothpastes, mouth rinses, as well as processed beverages and food, especially those made with fluoridated water. Beyond water, products such as tea have previously been found to have high concentrations of natural fluoride.

In this study, fluoride level in water was the main determinant of fluoride level in the women’s urine. Higher consumption of black tea was also correlated with higher levels of urinary fluoride in pregnant women.

The levels of fluoride among pregnant women living in fluoridated communities in Canada were similar with levels reported in a prior study of pregnant women living in Mexico City where fluoride is added to table salt.

“This finding is concerning because prenatal exposure to fluoride in the Mexican sample has been associated with lower IQ in children. New evidence published today in Environment International also reported an association between higher levels of fluoride in pregnancy and inattentive behaviours among children in the same Mexican sample,” said Till.

The research team, including experts from Simon Fraser University, Université Laval, Indiana University, University of Montreal and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, is investigating whether prenatal exposure to fluoride in Canadian children results in IQ deficits, similar to the Mexican study.

Fluoride has been added to public drinking water in Canadian and American communities since the 1940s as a means of preventing tooth decay. Today, about 40 per cent of Canadians and 74 percent of the U.S. population on public water supplies receive fluoridated water.