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

UK Against Fluoridation

Thursday, July 31, 2008


New York – July 31 — New science indicating fluoride’s dangers to the brain and other organs will be presented by prominent fluoride research scientists during back-to-back conferences of the International Society for Fluoride Research (ISFR) and the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) in Toronto August 7-11.
Fluoride, added to water supplies ostensibly to prevent tooth decay, is also in virtually all non-organic foods and beverages. Fluoride's brain effects were never examined prior to water fluoridation.
Recently, because of health concerns, Health Canada recommended that fluoride levels be lowered in Canadian water supplies, children's toothpaste and infant formula but claims that “the weight of evidence does not support a link between fluoride and intelligence quotient deficit.”
“It is hard to believe that any "weight of evidence" analysis could possibly dismiss fluoride's neurological impacts. There have now been over 40 animal studies which show that fluoride can damage the brain, and no less than 18 studies which show that fluoride lowers IQ in children, and only 2 that don't. I look forward to reading the full report when it is made available,” says Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Executive Director.
According to ISFR conference organizer, Dr. Hardy Limeback, “Our conference features experts who researched the dangers that fluoride poses to human health. Our keynote speaker, Dr. A.K. Susheela, (Executive Director, Fluorosis Research and Rural Development Foundation, India) probably knows more about fluoride's toxic effects to the body than any other living scientist. It is important that officials who promote water fluoridation hear what she and others have to say," says Limeback.
Susheela can also explain to Medical Doctors, often untrained in fluoride toxicology, how to diagnose, treat and reverse early fluoride toxicity symptoms which can mimic arthritis and irritable bowel syndrome.
The latest issue of ISFR’s journal, Fluoride, published 12 newly-translated Chinese studies, which report fluoride’s effects on the brain, including the lowering of IQ in children. These and other brain studies will be reviewed at both conferences.
Coupled with these conferences, the Toronto-based Citizens for a Safe Environment (CSE) will host two public meetings with FAN in downtown Toronto on Monday August 11.

According to CSE director Karen Buck, “These meetings will give the public information they don’t get from our government or dental organizations. In the afternoon, a panel will address the question of whether Toronto should stop fluoridating its water. In the evening experts will explain fluoride’s dangers to health.”
After receiving an invitation to attend these meetings, the Ontario Dental Association (ODA)sent out a news release urging legislators and communities to stand up in support of fluoridation; but they won't do so, themselves.
"The best way that the ODA can get communities and politicians to stand up for water fluoridation is to provide, in person, a cogent and scientifically-referenced defense of fluoridation at the afternoon forum," says CSE President Karen Buck. ODA has yet to respond.
At all three events, Dr. Vyvyan Howard, an infant and fetal pathologist, and president of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, will be presenting a major review of studies on fluoride’s brain effects, including the translated Chinese studies.
"The best way to lower children’s fluoride intake, as Health Canada suggests, is to stop fluoridation," says Connett. "It makes no sense to prescribe fluoride drugs to children via the water supply at levels which are between 150 and 250 times higher than the level in mothers’ milk.”

New study shows calcium significantly improves children's bone health

.........."It's never too early to make bone health a priority. These findings continue to support the research that shows milk is an important source of calcium which helps build and maintain strong bones, muscles and teeth in children," said Ann Marie Krautheim, R.D., senior vice president of Nutrition Affairs for the National Dairy Council. "Consuming 3 servings of low-fat or fat-free dairy foods each day gives children not only the calcium they need, but also eight other essential nutrients, including potassium, phosphorus and protein." ............

They would rather force fluoridation - why did they stop school milk?

Children's Choppers

Children's Choppers
Contributed by Shawn Arnold - Posted: July 30, 2008 9:00:00 AM
Even a mom that has had kids for what seems like ages can learn something new. On a recent visit to a dental cleaning and checkup for my little angels, I learned a few extra things.
As my friendly family hygienist, Jenny, was schooling me on the proper pediatric dental etiquette, I explained a little of what I do. She armed me with some great information to pass along to you parents.
Ever hear of dental fluorosis? Not me.
This is one of the reasons children's toothpaste doesn't contain fluoride. I knew not to use fluoridated toothpaste on my little ones, but I didn't know for how long. Jenny explained how important it was for children to not use toothpaste that is fluoridated, aka adult toothpaste, until children reach the age of six years old.
If you let you child use fluoridated toothpaste too soon, you run the risk of them developing dental fluorosis. I went online and looked up more information about this result. Wikipedia included pictures of the effects of over fluoride exposure.
Another tip that Jenny, a mom herself, told me; if you can only seize your child once a day to brush their teeth, the most important time of the day to brush is before bedtime. Of course you should shoot for often -- two to three times a day -- but get them good at night.
The other important thing she wanted to stress to the mommy public is soda consumption.
Jenny started telling me all about how terrible sodas are for your teeth. Ryan takes this time to chime in - cute as can be with his dental bib and raised in the chair almost to the ceiling - how he's a HUGE fan of Mountain Dew. Great timing, kiddo!
According to The Academy of General Dentistry, long-term soda drinking erodes tooth enamel because many soft drinks have high PH levels, making them nearly as corrosive as battery acid.
If you consider the range, it almost makes you wonder why any of us drink sodas???
Water has a PH of 7.0 and battery acid is 1.0. The major soda manufactures' products come in at around a PH of 2.5. Yikes!

Thanks Jenny for a great dental visit and valuable information to arm all of us moms with. And for all to know, Ryan was cavity free. Austin, on the other hand--..

UK - Tooth decay hits childrenAround 50 per cent of children in some schools in Stafford,

Tooth decay hits childrenAround 50 per cent of children in some schools in Stafford, Stone and surrounding villages show signs of tooth decay by the age of five, according to a report being put before health bosses today.

The board of South Staffordshire Primary Care Trust is being asked to approve a Dental Commissioning Strategy for 2008 to 2013 which aims to improve the oral health of the area.

The strategy, which also looks at the provision of orthodontists and how to improve rates of gum disease and oral cancer, if approved by the board today will be followed by a period of consultation and lead to an action plan for dentistry up until 2013.

In his report to the board, director of commissioning, John Wicks said that levels of tooth decay in children is generally low across South Staffordshire due to the fact 75 per cent of the area has fluoridated water and levels overall are half what they were in the late 80s.

He said: “Notwithstanding this positive picture of oral health, there are inequalities within the PCT area. Stafford, Stone and the surrounding villages are not covered by water fluoridation schemes and decay levels here are generally higher. In some schools around 50 per cent of children have experience tooth decay by the age of five.”

Tooth decay can lead to pain, sepsis, tooth loss and other problems later in life and is linked to lots of sugar consumption.

He added: “Because the disease is linked to lifestyle, in particular poor diet, children in deprived communities tend to experience more disease.”

Among his recommendations to improve the situation he suggests that the PCT with neighbouring PCTs and the West Midlands Strategic Health Authority (SHA) on extending existing water fluoridation schemes to cover the remaining areas and health promotions schemes to promote the use of toothpaste with fluoride and reduce the amount of sugar people eat.

He also advises that the PCT should consider these inequalities when commissioning new dental practices or expanding services in these areas of greatest needs.

UK - Bolton Talks planned over fluoride in water

Talks planned over fluoride in water
10:41pm Wednesday 30th July 2008
By Jane Lavender »
A CONSULTATION on whether fluoride should be added to the water supply in Bolton could be held as early as next year.
A report compiled by the Fluoride Evaluation Group is being sent to each of the North-west’s 24 primary care trusts.
It outlines four possible schemes — costing between £35 million and £102 million — to add fluoride to the water supply, and all of them include Greater Manchester.
A Primary Care Trust spokesman said: “Bolton PCT will examine the evidence presented in the report, alongside local data on oral health needs and in the context of our existing strategy to improve oral health locally.
“It is important to stress we are still some way from a decision even on whether to consult on fluoridation.”

USA - Flushing out fluoride

Flushing out fluoride
Posted 5 hours ago
The Observer
Municipal officials are once again being asked to wade into the fluoride controversy in light of a new Health Canada study calling for reduced levels of the cavity-fighter in drinking water.
Point Edward Mayor Dick Kirkland said he will ask that flouride be removed entirely from drinking water at the August committee meeting of the Lambton Area Water Supply System (LAWSS).
"We've tried before to get it out of that water plant," said Kirkland.
He described fluoride as "nasty stuff," after years of working with the chemical at a local industrial company.
"It's expensive to put it in the water and there's a question whether it's doing any good."
A panel of experts convened by Health Canada has recommended new optimal concentrations of fluoride in drinking water. The study suggests that fluoride levels are ingested from a variety of sources by children and infants, and it should be lowered in drinking water and be monitored.
The report's authors want Health Canada to adopt a level of 0.7 milligrams per litre as the optimal target in drinking water. The maximum acceptable concentration is currently 1.5 mg/L.
LAWSS plant manager Reg McMichael said fluoride levels in local drinking water are between 0.5 and 0.8 mg.
"Optimally, we keep it around 0.6 mg," he said.
If a decision is made to reduce the level, that could be accomplished simply by direction of Lambton's Medical Officer of Health.
To remove it entirely , however, would be a little tougher, McMichael said.
The issue was first put to voters back in 1960. Removing fluoride would require a plebiscite, as the LAWSS plant provides fluoridated water to six municipalities.
"You would need a majority decision, where a majority of voters in a majority of municipalities would vote to remove it," McMichael said.
The issue has long been a contentious one, said Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley.
When city council last tackled it in 2005, Bradley cast the deciding vote to break a 4-4 tie to continue with the status quo on fluoridating drinking water. The vote followed a bitter exchange of words between councillors.
Bradley said he welcomes the opportunity to re-address the issue.
"I have no difficulty based on new information. It's a worthy discussion."

Wednesday, July 30, 2008


Canada - Does Your Child Get Too Much Fluoride?

Does Your Child Get Too Much Fluoride?
Canada Moves to Limit Exposure to Fluoride
Photo: dozenist / Wikimedia Commons
By Dan Shapley
Fluoride must be good. Every government and public health organization in the world endorses its use, so effective is it at fighting cavities. It's presence is promoted on toothpaste to encourage parents to buy the best for their families. It's added to public drinking water supplies to subtly boost the public's exposure.
But is it all too much?
Health Canada, the federal public health agency of our North American neighbor, thinks so.
An expert panel has recommended that the government "cut the recommended amount in drinking water, encourage the use of low-fluoride toothpaste by children and have makers of infant formula reduce levels in their products," according to the Toronto Globe & Mail.

Fluoridation of water, particularly, has been controversial among a small set of advocates for decades. Dismissed as conspiracy theorists, they point to controversial studies linking fluoride exposure to rare bone cancer, learning deficiencies and other ills, as well as well-documented link between over-exposure and the mottling of tooth color, a purely aesthetic problem called fluorosis. (They have also pointed out that brushing fluoride on teeth is effective, whereas ingesting it appears less so, or not at all.)

Canadians, if the panel's recommendations are accepted, will soon be counseled to limit childhood exposure to fluoride. That doesn't mean the panel endorsed the notion that fluoride poses a health risk; indeed, it said the weight of evidence is against any link between fluoride and cancer or IQ deficits, according to the Globe & Mail. But incidence of fluorosis could increase if exposure isn't lowered, the panel said.

Given that Health Canada sat on the recommendations for more than a year, and that U.S. health agencies have routinely spoken strongly in favor of fluoride use, it's unlikely that the government will take any strong action to reduce exposure to fluoride. That leaves it up to parents if they are concerned.

Conditions Cause Sciatica: Which Is Causing Your Pain?

-- Fluorosis -- Fluorosis is an excessive level of fluoride in the body. It may result from chronic inhalation of industrial dusts or gases contaminated with fluorides, prolonged ingestion of water containing large amounts of fluorides or accidental ingestion of fluoride-containing insecticides. The condition may lead to calcified spinal ligaments or softened bones and to degenerative conditions like spinal stenosis.

Canada - Too much fluoride?

Too much fluoride?
Tue, 2008-07-29 14:55.
Shuyee Lee
The fluoride debate continues.
A panel of experts commissioned by Health Canada says fluoride levels in everything from water to the amount of toothpaste used, should be lowered to protect children's health from over-exposure.
The panel is recommending reduced fluoride exposure because it's worried children might be getting too much of the chemical from diet, water and toothpaste, leading to health problems such as teeth stains (fluorosis) and rare bone cancers.
But Dr. Stéphane Schwartz of the Montreal Children's Hospital's dental clinic says she's heard these arguments before, especially from powerful anti-fluoride lobby groups.
"They like to go around, very aggressive, and they scare people."
Schwartz says the fluoride levels seen in water and toothpaste use are far from excessive, and judging by the children's teeth she sees on a regular basis, may not even be enough.
"Chances are that, mostly in Montreal and in Quebec, you cannot get too much fluoride, it's impossible."The panel also suggests makers of infant formula reduce levels in their products.

Wonder who she is referring to? No such thing as fluorosis in Montreal and Quebec then.

Canada - Panel recommends reducing fluoride in water

Panel recommends reducing fluoride in water
Updated Tue. Jul. 29 2008 9:49 PM ET
The fluoridation of water is one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th Century, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
But now, an expert panel recommends reducing the amount of fluoride - a chemical that helps prevent toot decay -- in drinking water. The panel says this, along with other measures, would better protect children from developing fluorosis, a mottling of the teeth that occurs with too much fluoride.
In a report posted to Health Canada's website, the panel also recommends encouraging the use of low-fluoride toothpaste by children between the ages of 0 and 3, and reducing the levels in infant formula.
The panel suggests a fluoride level of 0.7 parts per million. The current allowable range is 0.8 to one ppm.
Health Canada told CTV News that it will accept the recommendations, but the ultimate decision on implementation will be left up to individual municipalities.
In a report dated April 2008, the panel said the risk of dental fluorosis, mottling of the teeth, in children drove its recommendations.
However, the panel suggested Canada doesn't face a major problem with fluorosis.
"From a health perspective, there is no reason to be concerned about the actual prevalence of very mild and mild dental fluorosis in Canada," it said.
"In addition, the actual prevalence of moderate dental fluorosis in Canada is low, and all evidence suggests that since 1996 there has been an overall decreasing trend of dental fluorosis in Canada."
Some people have tried linking fluoride use, intended to prevent tooth decay, to a wide variety of health concerns, including:
increased cancer risk
lower IQs
increased bone fracture risk
immune system, developmental and reproductive problems
"Weight of evidence does not support a link between exposure to fluoride and increased risks of cancer," the panel wrote. It drew the same conclusion about claims of lower IQs and immune, developmental and reproductive problems.
On increased bone cancer risk, the panel said: "Studies that do not control for confounding factors, such as intake of calcium, fluoride, or vitamin D supplements, intake of other medication, or consideration of traumatic fractures, should be interpreted cautiously."
The panel concluded: "The current Maximum Acceptable Concentration (MAC) of 1.5 mg/L of fluoride in drinking water is unlikely to cause adverse health effects, including cancer, bone fracture, immunotoxicity, reproductive/developmental toxicity, genotoxicity, and/or neurotoxicity."
The current MAC should be reaffirmed, the panel said.
Anti-fluoride lobby groups, meanwhile, don't want any added fluoride, saying it can contribute to everything from cancer to bone loss.

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

UK - City's child tooth decay problem

City's child tooth decay problem
Nearly half of all five-year-olds in Stoke-on-Trent have fillings or teeth missing because of decay, health officials have said.
The city's dental health is in the bottom third of the national league table, the primary care trust said.
It said it would spend money to bring in more NHS dentists, improve dental hygiene education, and has called for fluoride to be added to the water.
Kate Taylor-Weetman, who wrote the report, said money was available.
The city's director of public dental health said 46.3% of five-year-old children who attended schools in Stoke-on-Trent had fillings or missing teeth.
'Very pleased'
Each child had on average four damaged, missing or filled teeth, her report said.
She said: "Historically in Stoke-on-Trent we have had a lower number of dentists compared to the population in other areas.
"We are though getting more growth money from the government to enable us to start buying more dental services to actually provide treatment for local residents.
She added: "We're very pleased that we are actually now in a position, compared to two years ago when we had no money for dentistry, that the PCT now has money for dentistry and we're able to start developing services for local residents."

No money for dentistry - what did they expect. Good excuse to bring in fluoridation.

Dear Editor:

Dear Editor:
As we are all suffering fluoride fatigue, I intended no more letters but must respond to the personal attack from the antifluoridationist (Letter to the Editor, July 22) from a country whose name has become synonymous with diseased teeth.

Even in Mexico, bad teeth are called “los dientes ingles.” The writer attempts to confuse by conflating the World Health Organization maximum fluoride concentration of 1.5 mg/liter with total intake. The U.S. maximum for fluoridation is 1.2 mg/liter, and Aspen’s is even less at 1.0 mg/liter. Thyroid function is not a problem in areas in the United States naturally fluoridated with 8-12 mg/liter.

The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) has not issued a statement on fluoride intake for those with kidney disease. The site the writer references is a report of an attack on the NKF by an antifluoridationist.

Extra Vitamin D or calcium, beyond the standard recommendations, will not improve teeth, but nutritional fluoride imparts such a dramatic benefit that it was certified an essential nutrient in 1968, although mention was also made of increased bone density and reduced calcific artherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries). But then no Aspen adult would want that, would they?

What kind of person would regard “it only helps children,” even if it were true, as a winning slogan against one of the United States’ most cost-effective public health measures? Some antifluoridationists have let their otherwise perhaps admirable libertarianism turn their hatred of “the government” into a hatred of fluoride. The hard-core true-believers have mitigated the emotional discomfort caused by their inchoate paranoid fears and anxieties by fixating them upon fluoride.

One could argue, better fluoride than other objects of fixation: black males, Chinese “yellow peril” and Jewish international bankers. While anti-fluorides have been misinforming each other and the public, they have ignored what is, by far, the most increased form of pollution since World War II: artificial microradiation. Check it out, as it is worthy of your concerns and a subject you can really get your teeth into.

William Glenn, M.D.
Snowmass Village

inchoate paranoid fears!

Monday, July 28, 2008

Lennon-Connett Fluoridation debate

I.O.M Full debate for and against.

USA - Fluoride petition pushes toward goal in Hastings

Fluoride petition pushes toward goal in Hastings
(7/27/2008) By Ginger ten Bensel - The fluoride debate is heating up once again in Hastings.
The city is already putting the issue on the November ballot, but one group wants to change the wording. They want people to better understand what exactly is going in their water.
Nebraskans for Safe Water have just twelve days left to get enough signatures to change the wording of the fluoridation question on the November Ballet.
“We're three quarters of the way to our goal,” said Butch Hughes.
Right now the group has over fifty volunteers helping circulate their petitions, going door to door and volunteering at the Adams Co. Fair. Hughes believes they are well on their way and by Aug. 8th, they will have more than enough certified signatures.
“To use the correct language on the ballet as far as the fluoridation that is going to be put in if it would pass, which is a fluoristic acid which is a highly contaminated fluoride we think we need to have it on the ballet,” said Hughes.
But Hastings City Council member Kathy Peterson says that she feels having two questions about fluoridation on the ballet could be confusing for some voters.
“I worry if one proposal is voted in saying we don't want fluoridation and the other one says we do want fluoridation and then what do you do when we have two issues on the ballet again that's another confusing point that might occur,” said Kathy Peterson.

Peterson says that all cities in the state who are having the issue of fluoridation placed on the ballet is using the same wording.

“We as a city council had contacted the league of cities to make sure we had the correct wording on our ballet,” said Peterson.

But for now both sides for the fluoridation issue will continue to do their best to educate the public so they are ready to make their own decisions in November...

“The most important things that we do are what our citizens want, after they've been fully educated. Whatever side they decide to choose they need to make that best decision based on knowledge,” said Peterson.

Sunday, July 27, 2008

Prof Connett (part 2 Cooney response)

Some fear fluoride, too

Neil Steinberg
A few loons are scared of drinking water, others link cell phones to brain cancer -- why do we find innovation so frightening?
When fluoride was first put into drinking water, most welcomed it as the boon it was. Rotten teeth became mostly a thing of the past.

There was a vocal lunatic fringe -- when isn't there? -- of John Birchers and right-wing nuts whose innate paranoia convinced them that fluoride was part of the vast conspiracy.

Lack of scientific evidence only convinced them of the depth of the plot. Some believe it still. "International Bankers' Influence on Fluoride and Drinking Water is Poisoning Us" announces one of the many Web sites on the subject.

The obvious flaw in their reasoning is: hundreds of millions of Americans have been guzzling fluoridated water for the last half century. If it was bad for us, we'd have picked up on it by now.

Cell phones are not quite as ubiquitous as water, not yet anyway. But they are popular enough to attract the loons. Dr. Ronald Herberman, director of the Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, would seem, by merit of his title, not to be the sort of person leaping to suppose that cell phones cause brain cancer, the current hunch of the urban myth set who figure holding an electronic gizmo so close to your head has to cause something bad.

Herberman says science takes too long, and we should cut back cell phone usage now, particularly among children. Better safe than sorry, says he.

Let's pretend for a moment the myth is true -- cell phones increase the risk of brain cancer some tiny degree. So what? Why are old risks accepted with a shrug while new risks spook us? Thousands of people die horribly every year in car accidents, and we yawn, and wouldn't even buckle our seat belts if our vehicles didn't nag us with their electronic scoldings.

Yet let something be new -- relatively new, since the 25th anniversary of the first commercial U.S. cell phone call is this autumn -- and once-respected scientists are making sweeping public statements based on nothing. It's sad.

It is sad but for a different reason. Statements like this must make people like Prof Connett despair.

Saturday, July 26, 2008

Fluoride Linked to Thyroid Damage

Fluoride Linked to Thyroid Damage
Posted by: SallyStride
There is clear evidence that small amounts of fluoride, at or near levels added to U.S. water supplies, present potential risks to the thyroid gland, according to the National Research Council’s (NRC) first-ever published review of the fluoride/thyroid literature.(A)
Fluoride, in the form of silicofluorides, injected into 2/3 of U.S. public water supplies, ostensibly to reduce tooth decay, was never safety-tested.(B)
“Many Americans are exposed to fluoride in the ranges associated with thyroid effects, especially for people with iodine deficiency,” says Kathleen Thiessen, PhD, co-author of the government-sponsored NRC report. “The recent decline in iodine intake in the U.S could contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals,” says Thiessen.
“A low level of thyroid hormone can increase the risk of cardiac disease, high cholesterol, depression and, in pregnant woman, decreased intelligence of offspring,” said Thiessen.(C)
Common thyroid symptoms include fatigue, weight gain, constipation, fuzzy thinking, low blood pressure, fluid retention, depression, body pain, slow reflexes, and more. It’s estimated that 59 million Americans have thyroid conditions.(D)
Robert Carton, PhD, an environmental scientist who worked for over 30 years for the U.S. government including managing risk assessments on high priority toxic chemicals, says “fluoride has detrimental effects on the thyroid gland of healthy males at 3.5 mg a day. With iodine deficiency, the effect level drops to 0.7 milligrams/day for an average male.”(E) (1.0 mg/L fluoride is in most water supplies)
Among many others, the NRC Report cites human studies which show
- fluoride concentrations in thyroids exceeding that found in other soft tissues except kidney
- an association between endemic goiter and fluoride exposure or enamel fluorosis in human populations
- fluoride adversely affects thyroid and parathyroid hormones, which affect bone health
“If you have a thyroid problem, avoiding fluoride may be a good preventive health measure for you,” writes Drs’ Richard and Karilee Shames in “Thyroid Power.”(F).
Scientific American quotes John Doull, professor emeritus of pharmacology and toxicology at the University of Kansas Medical Center, who chaired the NRC committee , “The thyroid changes do worry me.”

Fluoridation - At Any Cost - Part 1 of 3

Friday, July 25, 2008

UK Southampton Echo

Dr. Vyvyan Howard on Fluoride in Drinking Water

This is a new video well worth seeing.

UK Southampton Echo Fluoride book to be changed after criticism

Fluoride book to be changed after criticism
By Jon Reeve
HEALTH chiefs have admitted that information due to be given to the public about fluoridating water supplies was unfairly balanced in favour of the scheme.
An education booklet containing arguments for and against the plan to put fluoride in tap water will now be changed after criticism it was biased.
Anti-fluoridation campaigners have already accused the South Central Strategic Health Authority, which will ultimately decide whether to give the plan to fluoridate water to 20,000 homes in Southampton and Hampshire the green light, of peddling propaganda.
Yesterday, the SHA board agreed to change documents designed to inform residents about fluoride during the consultation, after hearing feedback suggesting they don't fairly represent both sides.
Director of communications and corporate affairs, Olga Senior said focus groups felt the literature gives a good case for fluoridation, but failed to provide reasons against it.
"The feedback told us if what you want to do is give balance, you haven't done that," she said.
"The pro-fluoridation group bases its arguments on science. The group against also bases its argument on reports and science.
"What doesn't seem to have come out at this stage is that balance."
The board agreed at the meeting to put consultation back two weeks to change the literature.
Board chairman, Dr Geoffrey Harris said: "We do need to be assured that in the public consultation document we are not closing down one side of the argument."
As revealed in the Daily Echo, Hampshire Against Fluoridation has lodged a formal complaint with the authority, saying the decision to take the issue to a public consultation was based on flawed facts.
Chairman John Spottis-woode has demanded the process be abandoned, because he believes evidence showing negative effects of fluoridation has been ignored.
Mr Spottiswoode last night welcomed the move to revise the literature.
The consultation will run until December 19, and the SHA board will make a final decision at a special meeting in February.

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Children will die younger than their parents, minister warns

Children will die younger than their parents, minister warns
By Rosa Prince, Political Correspondent
Last Updated: 7:15AM BST 24 Jul 2008
The children of today are likely to die at a younger age than their parents as a result of the increasing obesity crisis, a senior Cabinet minister has warned.............

Quick what can we put in their water?

Populations Receiving Optimally Fluoridated Public Drinking Water - United States, 1992-2006

.................Attainment of the Healthy People 2010 objective will require 1) recognition by policymakers and the public that dental caries remains an important public health problem and that fluoridation is an equitable and cost-effective method of addressing the problem, even in smaller populations where the per-capita cost of fluoridation is higher; 2) continuing science-based education of the public about the established safety of fluoridation; and 3) the political will to adopt new fluoridation systems in communities that are not served currently (10). To overcome the challenges facing fluoridation, public health professionals at the national, state, and local level will need to enhance their promotion of fluoridation and commit the necessary resources for equipment, personnel, and training.

Promotion or propaganda?

USA - Letter

Dear Editor:

The proper response to this raging debate over fluoridation of Aspen’s water has a simple solution. We all know that governments study things to death.

OK, so most of Europe’s nations have banned its use as a drinking water additive. I urge Aspen’s City Council to have staff contact the appropriate government agencies and ask for a detailed response as to why they banned fluoride.

I know that the AMA and the American Dental Association praise fluoridation and have shut down debate, calling critics quacks and worse, but they’ve both been wrong.

Jon Busch

Lining Up For Free Dental Care


CBS) Going to the dentist can be a painful experience. But for many, the real pain comes when trying to pay for it. More than 100 million Americans don't have dental insurance. That's more than one-third of Americans. What can they do? CBS News correspondent Seth Doane found one answer, as part of his continuing series on The Other America.
Even before dawn, some people have been waiting for hours.
When Doane visited the line outside a free dental clinic, he asked "what time did you guys get here?"
"One o'clock," a group said.
Others have waited for years just to see a dentist. It's a luxury the uninsured can't afford.
"Oh gosh, no way," one said. The other: "Way too expensive."
But in Loveland, Colo., for two days only, dental care is free.
Bruce Bergstrom, head of America's Dentists Care Foundation, organizes free dental clinics around the country. Everywhere he goes, he sees the need.
At 5 a.m. the line wraps around a block.
"Isn't that tragic?" Bergstrom said. "It really is. To me it's tragic."
With an exhibit hall transformed into a massive dental clinic, they do what they can: cleanings, fillings, extractions, root canals - all for free.
Eight hundred volunteers, including 113 dentists, have donated time and skill - and pay their own way.
"This is costing you a lot," Doane said to volunteer pedicatric dentist John Fales.
"Yeah, it is, but it's just a way to give back," he said.
Fales closed his Kansas City office for a few days and flew five members of his staff to the clinic.
One of his first patients is 8-year-old Jericho Rogers, who was up at 2 a.m. to get there.
"He says he hasn't seen a dentist in three or four years - are you surprised by looking at his mouth?" Doane said.
"No, not at all," Fales said. "There's a lot of children running around in the United States that have cavities just like this - and mostly just for lack of good dental insurance coverage."
Jericho's parents need help, too. His mom's job at a sandwich shop doesn't provide dental.
If she had to have six cavities filled by a dentist and pay for it, what would she have to pay?
"Probably over $1,000," said dentist Stephanie Kaufmann.
"A thousand dollars? That's my rent payment a month - so, it's either rent or get my teeth fixed … well, I'm going to go for a roof over my head!" Cindy Rogers said.
Her husband, Richard, has a mouth full of problems, too. A job in a lumber store that doesn't cover it and a price tag he can't afford.
"Oh, no way," he said. "I'd have to sell my car to pay for that."
About 1,500 patients were treated that day - and given more than $1.2 million worth of care
"I can't afford this expense," said Mandy Lujan, who brought her toddler in. "So it's a blessing to be able to bring her here and have the work done that we need to have done."
A trip to the dentist is nothing anyone looks forward to, but for those who can't afford to go at all, a little pain doesn't hurt at all. NYSCOF: Loveland, Colorado, has been fluoridated since 1954

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

Great fluoride debate
By Jon Reeve
IT is meant to be the independent body even-handedly navigating the tricky waters of a public consultation over controversial plans that have split opinion.

But the organisation that oversees Hampshire's healthcare has been formally accused of being biased over proposals to add fluoride to the tap water of nearly 200,000 residents.
On the eve of the consultation process being finalised, anti-fluoridation campaigners have lodged a complaint with South Central Strategic Health Authority, saying decisions have been based on flawed information.
Hampshire Against Fluoridation believes failings in the process mean at least £180,000 of public money has already essentially been wasted.
Tomorrow, the authority's board is due to decide on the details of how the three-month public consultation - being conducted at the request of Southampton Primary Care Trust which wants fluoridation - will be carried out.
But ahead of that meeting HAF's chairman, John Spottiswoode has called on the SHA to abandon the fluoridation process before that starts.
"The public consultation is clearly going to be a sham, being run as a propaganda exercise for water fluoridation, with the aim of achieving a pre-determined outcome," he said.

"The whole fluoridation episode is a disgrace to the health authorities and undermines any trust or confidence that we may have placed in their decisions in the past."

As previously reported by the Daily Echo, public views expressed during the consultation could be ignored if they are not based on accepted scientific reasoning and evidence.
That means a majority of respondents could potentially say they do not want fluoride added to the water supplies, but the scheme being given the green light anyway.
The SHA was last night unable to issue a formal comment on the complaints, but insisted the process would be fair, and no decision has yet been made on the plans to add fluoride to water.
The controversial proposals will see 160,000 residents - 67 per cent of the city's population - receiving added fluoride in their tap water in a bid to improve the city's chronic dental health problems. Around 36,000 more living in Eastleigh, Totton and Netley would also get extra fluoride as their homes are covered by the same water distribution centre.
A report going before SHA board members tomorrow says the proposals for the consultation have been checked by solicitors to ensure it is run according to legal guidelines set down by the Government especially for fluoridation.
Although the details have yet to be confirmed, the report says the consultation will include public drop-in events and Question Time style debates to allow residents to voice their concerns and have queries answered.
Leaflets and posters will be displayed in GP practices, dental surgeries, libraries and other community centres to increase awareness, and regular updates will be posted on a special website.

Fluoride needed in water? Bunkum!

Dear Editor:
An M.D. such as William Glenn should have the words “do no harm” tattooed on his forehead. Fluoride in tap water is a compulsory medicine that causes physiological change. Although its concentration in the water can be controlled to within ±0.2 mg per liter, the dose cannot.

Many people who need to drink more than one liter of water per day will ingest more fluoride than is good for them, and it’s a bio-accumulative poison. It can be drunk, eaten, absorbed and inhaled. (If the glass windows in the water-treatment plant are etched, fugitive emissions must be injuring water engineers’ lungs.) The aggregate of fluoride intake is often more than the WHO maximum guideline of 1.5 mg per liter. Three cups of tea each day, daily hot baths and tap water will bring the level up to 1.5 mg per liter or equivalent.

The halogen theory states that the halogens with the lower atomic masses displace those with the higher atomic masses. Thus fluorine/fluoride displaces iodine. Iodine is essential for thyroid health. If the diet is low in iodine and the iodine is displaced by fluoride, the body starts to malfunction. Perhaps Dr. Glenn has had a few hypothyroid patients in his surgery. But I’ll bet he hasn’t recommended abstinence from fluoride.
An M.D. would never encourage a patient taking an unspecified medicinal dose and would always consider the age, sex, body weight and kidney health of the patient when prescribing. The U.S. National Kidney Foundation has recently issued a position statement on fluoride: www.kidney.org/atoz/pdf/Fluoride_Intake_in_CKD.pdf. It’s recommended reading for all M.D.s.

A recent North American longitudinal study has concluded that pregnant women should take Vitamin D so that their babies’ teeth are strengthened. Fluoride has no place in a tiny baby’s body.

Joyanne Warren
Coventry, UK

Drug Residues in Drinking Water

Drug Residues in Drinking Water
Back in February, this column focused on the fact that the U.K. Health Minister was making noises about expanding water fluoridation, despite the fact that the evidence suggests that this practice is far from “evidence-based.” The proposal was based on the claim that fluoride is essentially a medication (that is, one that can cut dental disease). However, reading today’s British Medical Journal made me realize that fluoride might not be the only drug being pumped into homes in the U.K. and elsewhere [1].

In the piece in question, freelance journalist Geoff Watts details reports of pharmaceutical drugs ending up in the water supply. He points out that after ingestion, drug residues can end up passing from our bodies into the sewage system via our urine. Sometimes individuals will “cut out the middle man” by simply flushing medication down the toilet.

Drugs that make their way into the sewage system may contaminate nature. However, we are not immune to the effects of such contamination because the purification of water before it appears in our kitchen taps may fail to rid it of all its pharmaceutical pollutants.

Mr. Watts starts by citing an American press report from March that claimed that a wide spectrum of medications, including antibiotics, anticonvulsants, mood stabilizers, and sex hormones, have been found in the drinking water supplies of more than 40 million Americans. In a subsequent senatorial hearing on the issue, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was lambasted for its alleged complacency.

There have been problems on the other side of the pond too. For example, a researcher at the Technical University of Berlin’s Institute of Food Chemistry found drugs in samples of Berlin tap water. Italian researchers have found chemical and medicinal products in the drinking water from the Lake Maggiore area.

Mr. Watts also points to the work of a Hawaii-based researcher who, last year, reviewed all the reports she could find regarding drug residues in water systems in Europe and America. Apparently, between them, the reports identified 10 drugs in drinking water. Mr. Watts says: “The amounts were low, but the findings undermine any comfortable assumption that water treatment plants can be counted on to remove all contaminants.”

The body responsible for ensuring the purity and safety of the water supply in the U.K. is the Drinking Water Inspectorate. Mr. Watts points that the Drinking Water Inspectorate is confident that the country’s “sophisticated treatment processes … installed to remove pesticides and other organic substances from source waters are equally effective at removing minute traces of pharmaceutical residues.” But, as Mr. Watts goes on to point out, the reports of drug residues in water supplies “make it clear that some systems are less than perfect for at least some drugs.”
This British Medical Journal piece has not done anything, obviously, to reassure me about the purity of drinking water, and my advice remains to avoid drinking it straight from the tap. One strategy might be to filter the water, and relatively economical under-sink systems are available for this. I do not know how good they are at taking out specific drug residues. However, these filters will go at least some way to improving the purity of tap water, in a way that is quite environmentally friendly.

Another option, of course, is to choose bottled water, which is likely to be far cleaner than tap water from the perspective of drug residues, chlorine, and fluoride, but may itself be tainted by residues from plastic bottles. Buying mineral water in glass gets around this, though it should also be borne in mind that bottled water may have a considerable environmental impact, especially if it is being drunk outside its country of origin.


1. Watts G. How clean is your water? BMJ 2008; 337:a237

Dr. John Briffa is a London-based doctor and author with an interest in nutrition and natural medicine.
Dr. Briffa's Web site

Spain’s Minersa to become main shareholder in SA hydrofluoric acid venture

Spain’s Minersa to become main shareholder in SA hydrofluoric acid venture
Text Size
By: Christy van der Merwe
Published on 22nd July 2008
Spanish fluorspar producer Minersa would replace Tunisian aluminium fluoride maker ICF as the major shareholder and technology partner of Alfluorco, a South African hydrofluoric acid and aluminium fluoride joint venture, diversified-miner Metorex said on Tuesday.......................

How California Decreed You Drink Fluoride in your Water

How California Decreed You Drink Fluoride in your Water
Posted by: SallyStride
Ignoring the democratic process and discouraging a healthy dialog, the California Dental Association worked secretly, quickly and dishonestly to pass a 1995 California fluoridation law, that forces most California communities to add fluoride chemicals into the public water supplies, whether Californians want it or not, according to “The Fluoride Victory,” published in the Journal of the California Dental Association.(1)It's supposed to stop tooth decay in tap water drinkers; but it doesn't.
California Assemblywoman Jackie Speier, working with the California Dental Association (CDA), sponsored the fluoridation bill, eventually signed into law in 1995, forcing all California water companies, with 10,000 service connections, to add nonessential fluoride chemicals into the drinking water without constituent or local governing body approval, discussion or referendum.
“To make the most of the element of surprise, it was decided that Speier would wait until the last possible moment to introduce her fluoridation bill,” writes author Joanne Boyd.
“’We pretty much knew we’d catch (the anti-fluoridation faction) by surprise because it wasn’t well known outside of the dental community what was going on,' said Liz Snow, assistant director of CDA’s Government Relations (lobbying) Office. ‘But we didn’t want to give the other side any more time to mobilize than absolutely necessary,’” writes Boyd.
William Keese, CDA Director of Government Relations, a lobbyist, received many compliments from other lobbyists on the campaign.
“I wouldn’t say we pulled a rabbit out of a hat, but it was a coup. We worked hard at getting prepared and using the element of surprise to our advantage. We moved fast and did it in one year," Boyd quotes Keese as saying.
Many of the nation’s most familiar pro-fluoride lobbiests, were involved in the California battle including zealous fluoridationist, dentist Michael Easley brought in from Kentucky, at the time. (By the way, tooth decay doubled in Kentucky after water fluoridation (2)).
To the antifluoridation folks, Easley brags, I'm Public Enemy Number 1. (3) Easley travels world-wide touting one issue, fluoridation. Easley used taxpayer money to create a biased, document about fluoridation containing factual errors.(12)
Intending to insult anti-fluoridationists, Boyd quotes lobbyest Snow as saying, “’When you’re a single-issue person – when that issue pops up, regardless of where it is – that’s where you go,’ Snow said. They remind me of Deadheads. Anywhere the Grateful Dead would go, there would be the same group of followers.” Snow’s criticism more aptly fits Easley or the national lobbyests provided by the country-wide dentists’ union, the American Dental Association (ADA).
Unlike pro-fluoridation special-interest groups, fluoridation opponents use their own time, their own money, usually to protect their own drinking water and have actually studied the issue. There are different opponents in every town.
On the other hand, the ADA, went all out to support the 1995 California fluoridation bill, assisting in spokesperson training, legislative testimony and providing literature to distribute, reports Boyd.
With decades of commercials, advertisements and organized dentistry’s web of support, influence and money working against them, and during the OJ trial, Californians opposed to fluoridation hardly had a chance to voice dissent.
The California campaign is a "blueprint" for organized dentistry to push fluoridation across the USA. This despite evidence fluoridation fails to reduce tooth decay by the same dentists who told the California legislature the opposite.

Untrained to diagnose fluoride’s adverse effects, California fluoridationist and dentist “Howard Pollick, …, likened the anti-fluoride activists to the Flat Earth Society. ‘Ever since science proved that the earth is round, there’s been a Flat Earth Society whose members refuse to acknowledge a scientific truth.”’ Pollick's quote is in “The Fluoride Victory.”
Pollick should join the Flat Earth Society – in fact – he should be their President because he doesn’t even believe his own research.
According to Pollick and colleagues, "It may...be that fluoridation of drinking water does not have a strong protective effect against early childhood caries (ECC)," was reported in the Winter 2003 Journal of Public Health Dentistry(4).
Howard Pollick, DDS, is a clinical professor with the University of California San Francisco School of Dentistry, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dental Sciences, and co-chairman of the California Fluoridation Task Force. Pollick is now also the American Dental Association fluoridation spokesperson .
Pollick's team studied 2,520 California preschool children as part of the “California Oral Health Needs Assessment of Children Study” which helped convinced California legislators to mandate fluoridation statewide in 1995(5).
A majority of Asian-American children that Pollick and his research team studied, lived in areas with fluoridated water; yet they suffered with the highest prevalence and the greatest amount of cavities.
"...the primary sampling units were selected on the basis of fluoridation status: three were fluoridated urban regions, two were rural (nonfluoridated),and five were non-fluoridated urban regions," they report. "Our analysis did not appear to be affected by whether or not children lived in an area with fluoridated water," reports Pollick et al.
Pollick reports in the "International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health" that infant formula made with optimally fluoridated water might create brown and pitted permanent teeth(17). We wonder if Pollick, turned fluoridation lobbyest in Arkansas, informs elected bodies that, if they fluoridate their water supplies, they must provide bottled fluoride-free water for infant consumption.
Many studies show children's teeth will grow in stained if fed formula reconstituted with fluoridated water.(18) And November 2006, the ADA admitted that mixing infant formula with fluoridated water is not advised because of the high risk of dental fluorosis. Oddly, the Centers for Disease Control usually follows the ADA and issued its warning only on the CDC's website.
On 9/2/04 Pollick presented selective pro-fluoridation information to two committees of the Arkansas legislature, instigating a state-wide fluoridation law, telling legislators to disbelieve anti-fluoridationists because they use the internet. Unfortunately, for Pollick, we use his own words to contradict what he tells legislators in private. I guess that's why he doesn't recommend the internet.
Organized dentistry gets an A+ for political savvy; but an F for fluoride science. Legislators assume organized dentistry does their fluoride homework; but they don't. Maybe legislators really don't care. All they see is someone who represents organizations with deep pockets,political clout and influential members and hear blah, blah, blah but say yes to anything they want.
A July 2008 New York Times editorial uncovered evidence that shows the New York State Dental Society gets virtually every law they want passed. Then legislators find big fat campaign donations in their mailboxes, according to the NY Times. Anyone who still believes that organized dentistry uses its political might and money on fluoridation for our benefit and not their own, needs to take politics 101.
Fluoride opposition is based on sound science – not back-door political activism. Unfortunately, we don’t have the money, influence and network they do. We only have the truth.
People who get paid to promote fluoridation:
-- Dental directors in almost every state with offices, budgets, staffs and traveling expenses, most of whom aren’t passionate about fluoridation – just doing their job.
-- An army of uniformed U.S. Centers for Disease Control dentists, based in Atlanta, Georgia, who took up the front row, at taxpayer expense, in a Suffolk County, New York, legislative fluoridation meeting. The Suffolk County legislature still voted down fluoridation in the 1990's.
-- National Institutes of Dental and Craniofacial Research (NIDCR) dentists. The NIDCR displays a magnified image of a fluoride crystal on their website’s logo as a reminder that this institute was born on the back of fluoridation. Millions of dollars are meted out to dental researchers to study fluoride’s tooth, not bodily, effects. These researchers depend upon and defend fluoridation even when they aren't asked.
-- Public-health-dentists and dental professors in Universities and dental schools who sometimes require entire classes of dental students take up space and alloted time before governing bodies in local fluoridation battles to essentially silence residents opposed to fluoridation.
-- The U.S. Surgeon General who reports a dental health epidemic in the U.S. despite almost five decades of water fluoridation reaching about 2/3 of Americans and virtually 100% through the food and beverage supply.
At their disposal is a web of dentists across the U.S. too willing to follow Organized Dentistry’s instructions to lobby their legislator-patients and instigate fluoridation whenever they can, making it appear to be a local initiative. They are offered strategy materials, videos, power point presentations and a half day continuing education program entitled “Get the Drop on Community Water Fluoridation!”
Don’t expect the research community to speak on your behalf. Some who did lost their jobs, grant money and reputations such as Phyllis Mullenix, PhD, once a rising star in the research community until she discovered fluoride could pass into the brain causing mental deficits.
Instead of ordering up more studies to prove or disprove her findings, organized dentistry destroyed the messenger and ignored her findings(9) which have never been successfully refuted scientifically. However, research from China and other countries bolster her findings.
Dr. William Marcus exposed the government’s downgrading of bone cancer in lab animals exposed to fluoride in a study by the National Toxicology Program (9a). Marcus was fired, then re-hired under the whistleblower's act with back pay; but the scientific research showing fluoride induces bone cancer in rats has never been corrected.(10)
Canadian researchers aren’t encouraged to speak out either when they disagree (11).
Timid, fearful or greedy dental researchers usually conclude "more study needed" when they unexpectedly find negative fluoride data.
The fluoridators still strategically avoid debates because they know their information doesn’t stand up to objective scrutiny. They like back door political wrangling instead.
Organized dentistry’s tactic now is to work behind the scenes forming “dental health committees” presenting one-sided, sometimes wrong, information, to local children’s, health and church groups, and the media, convincing them that fluoridation is safe, effective and cheap while insulting and denigrating those opposed or as Easley call us, “fluorophobes.” They effectively indoctrinate trusting people to love them and hate us. They are masters of manipulation.
Susan Allen, Florida's Fluoridation Coordinator wrote in a 1990 memo to St. Petersburg's Director of Inner City Governmental Relations, "There are several tactical strategies that seem to promote (fluoridation) success; the 1st being - Keep a low profile: the least amount of publicity the better.
2. Approach community officials individually. Better yet, convince someone they know and respect to convince them ...'
4. Avoid a referendum. The statistics are that 3 out of 4 fluoridation referenda fail."
It’s incredible that fluoridation opponents win any fluoridation battles against this huge fluoridating machine. But we do (8) because the evidence speaks for itself. We just present it. However, Californians never had a chance to defend themselves against the evil fluoridators.

Despite fluoridation since 1954, 2/3 of elementary schoolchildren and about 1/3 of San Francisco preschoolers, had cavities, according to a 1996/97 survey that also reveals cavity prevalence in fluoridated San Francisco is similar to the rest of California, mostly non-fluoridated at the time of the survey. (6)
Yet San Francisco reportedly spent $2,500,000 on a new or updated fluoridation facility
And that’s politics!

Australia - Fluoride in water

Fluoride in water
23/07/2008 10:56:00 AM
THE Health Depart-ment is seeking public comment on a plan to fluoridate the public water supply to Margaret River.
Chairman of the Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Advisory Committee Dr Richard Lugg said the proposal would bring the town into line with almost 98 per cent of the Western Australian public who received fluoridated drinking water.
“However, before we make any recommendation to the Minister for Health over the proposal, we are eager to seek community views and opinions,” he said.
Dr Lugg said that both local and international evidence showed the fluoridation of public drinking water supplies significantly reduced the incidence of dental decay.
Representatives from the Advisory Committee will be available to discuss the plan at a community meeting from noon to 3pm on Monday, August 4 at the Margaret River Cultural Centre.
In addition, formal submissions can be sent to the Secretary, Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Advisory Committee, PO Box 8172 Perth Business Centre, WA 6849 until September 5 2008.
For further information phone the Secretary, Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Advisory Committee Richard Theobald on 9388 4967.

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

UK - Something to get your teeth into

Something to get your teeth into
BURTON children have some of the healthiest teeth in England - thanks to fluoride in tap water, new figures show.
Research by the Association of Public Health Observatories (APHO) has shown that children living within the boundaries of East Staffordshire Borough Council have a lower risk of tooth decay than those from most other local authorities in the country.
A group of 10 East Staffordshire five-year-olds have just seven teeth decayed, missing or filled between them, while a similar group from non-fluoridated Blackburn have 32 teeth affected.
Only a dozen councils, including fluoridated Lichfield, Tamworth, Cannock Chase and South Staffordshire, have better children's dental health than East Staffordshire.
Most people in Burton drink tap water with its natural fluoride content topped up to the scientifically approved optimum of one part of fluoride per million parts of water with the aim of protecting teeth against decay.
Even fluoridated West Midlands local authorities with a high level of social deprivation - usually associated with above average tooth decay among children - are ranked in the top half of the league table, the APHO says.
They include Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Coventry, where a group of 10 children aged five have an average of 10 to 12 teeth affected between them compared with 25 to 30 teeth for an equivalent group of youngsters in non-fluoridated towns like Bolton, Bradford and Manchester.
According to a recent US scientific review of the evidence, adults who live all or most of their lives in fluoridated areas have between about 27 and 35 per cent less tooth decay than those in non-fluoridated areas, the APHO says.
South Staffordshire Primary Care Trust's consultant in dental public health, John Morris, said Burton's high ranking in the national teeth league table justified controversial decisions taken in the 1980s to extend the benefits of the "safe and effective public health measure".
He said: "It is comforting for East Staffordshire parents to know that their children have a lower risk of experiencing toothache and tooth decay than those from most other places in the country, and that they themselves are also benefiting from the protection offered by fluoridated water."
Former Burton MP Sir Ivan Lawrence was an outspoken opponent of the fluoridation, earning himself a place in the Guinness Book of Records as a result. The Tory MP made the longest Parliamentary speech of the 20th century in March, 1985, when he spoke for four hours, 23 minutes during the committee stage of the Fluoridation Bill in an effort to hamper its progress.

If this was true how was it that the York Review could find no such obvious differences between f and non f areas? Are there other reasons more dentists perhaps.
Teeth eruption is also delayed when fluoride is drunk. Strange too that it mentions a goup of 10 children that is a small study and the improvement for adults they quote a USA article. According to another USA report young boys are more likely to get a vicious bone cancer in fluoridated areas. Obesity is also a problem and statistically there is a higher
Mortality in infants
"Facts" taken from the (APHO)
West Midlands
On the indicators shown in this profile West Midlands
appears to be one of the least healthy regions.

Life expectancy for males is 8 months less than the
national average and that for females 6 months less.

Infant deaths are the highest of any region.

Hip fractures in the over 65 - the highest

The proportion of adults who are obese of all regions is the highest.
(Could it be that fluoride is affecting the thyroid - anybody looked for the connection?)

Monday, July 21, 2008

Mass Medication of Ireland

NZ - Anti-fluoride group denied referendum

Anti-fluoride group denied referendum
Home » News » Dunedin
By David Loughrey on Mon, 21 Jul 2008
News: Dunedin
Olive McRaeAnti-fluoride campaigners on Dunedin's northern coast look set to be denied the public referendum they want on the issue, despite a 222-signature petition they collected.
Instead, the Ministry of Health and Public Health South will be invited to brief elected officials on the public health reasons to fluoridate public water supplies and address arguments opposing the practice.
In March, Olive McRae presented the Dunedin City Council infrastructure services committee with a petition calling for consultation before fluoridated water was piped to townships along the Waikouaiti coast, from Waitati to Waikouaiti.
Ms McRae, of Waitati, said those who signed were not happy about the prospect of being supplied with "medicated" water.
Water from Dunedin city's fluoridated supply will be piped northwards in a new $9.3 million scheme that is replacing small, local, unfluoridated supplies.
Water from the scheme is expected to start flowing in September of August.
A report to today's infrastructure services committee said submissions opposing fluoridation were heard from a group of residents from the area at the city's annual plan, and again at the Waikouaiti Coast Community Board.
The board requested the council initiate a referendum.
However, a report by council water production manager Gerard McCombie said removing fluoride from the northern scheme, which takes water from the fluoridated city scheme, would be expensive.
Investigations indicated "that from a practical point of view, there are really only two viable options - citywide fluoridation, or citywide non-fluoridation".
Ms McRae yesterday criticised the report, and said the community had made it clear through the community board it wanted a referendum.
She said the Ministry of Health and Public Health South briefing would be flawed, because both sides of the argument would not be aired.
Infrastructure services committee chairman Cr Andrew Noone said yesterday he attended a meeting of about 40 people in March, but only heard the anti-fluoride argument.
Until councillors were briefed on the issue, they could not make a decision on the referendum.
"My personal view is any referendum should be citywide.
"We're not going to be able to please everyone."

Tooth Decay | KXNet.com North Dakota News

Tooth Decay | KXNet.com North Dakota News
North Dakota is 96% fluoridated:NYSCOF
"... more and more children throughout the United States are [getting cavities]..North Dakota is no exception.

(Dr. Bryce Goebel/Pediatric Dentist) 'A big part of the problem, why it's such a huge chronic problem affecting children is access to care. The kids that need to be seen and have things done and preventative measure instituted have a really hard time finding someone to provide that care for them."

Sounds familiar


By: Devvy
July 21, 2008
© 2008 - NewsWithViews.com
My column on the FDA produced more than 2500 emails this past week; the master list of diseases is now updated. The issue of a nation self medicating on dangerous drugs approved by the FDA really struck a chord. In that column, I pointed out two major factors why Americans are so apathetic and stumbling through life without a clue: fluoride and aspartame.

However, it goes even deeper. By reducing the population to little better than the level of cattle with only basic feelings like hunger, need for water and herding them with a prod (mother government), down goes self-reliance, self-determination and courage. Fed, watered and led to the slaughter house. How is this done? The master plans for inculcating the communist morality (communitarianism) into the American landscape has been underway for a century and that's exactly what it does to people: takes away their self-esteem, individualism, their drive for success and lumps them in with the "community." They are manipulated into believing that a Godless (secular) nation is good; what the Founding Fathers wanted! This is necessary for communism to exist and thrive..................
Very long article

Sunday, July 20, 2008

Dr. Carol Rossetti: Living the Natural Life: It’s easier than you think

........The evidence has been out for many years that fluoride suppresses the thyroid and is carcinogenic, but we keep on feeding it to babies and now there is a new “nursery water” containing fluoride so we can start them off at the earliest possible age – feeding their small body chemicals that could be potentially disastrous. This is a chemical folks, and our bodies are not deficient of chemicals.................

UK - IOM - DHSS officials won't be investigated

DHSS officials won't be investigated
19/07/2008 10:29:06
No charges will be brought against two senior officials at the DHSS, following a complaint relating to information in a government produced pro-fluoridation leaflet.Well-known campaigner on 'green' issues Graham Joughin called for action against the pair, claiming the leaflet contained 'misleading descriptions' under a section of the 2003 Medicines Act.Police referred his letter to the Attorney General, but the Chief Minister has now confirmed the Isle of Man Constabulary will not be investigating the matter. The information is in a written reply to a Tynwald question from Onchan MHK Peter Karran.A month ago the DHSS announced that, following public consultation, it would not be pursuing a policy of fluoridating the Island's water supply.

Shame as it would have made those who are still misleading the public more cautious.

Saturday, July 19, 2008

Bit depressing to see how they are spending £177,250 on brainwashing Southampton that fluoridation is effective and safe.
Go to Consultation paper

Connett response to Cooney part 1

Great video great Professor.

UK - Debate on fluoride is urged

Health bosses should have a "full, frank and transparent debate" before deciding whether to put fluoride in water supplies in South Ribble, a panel of councillors has said.
The Community Watchdog Scrutiny Committee of South Ribble Council has warned the Central Lancashire Primary Care Trust it must tell the public the pros and cons of adding fluoride to water.

The chemical has been added to water in some parts of the country since 1964 and it is proven to improve dental hygiene, but some people oppose the idea and fear it may have health implications.

Committee spokesman Linda Williams said: "They must present the public with an impartial account from both sides of the argument to have an informed debate about the issue."

The council passed the proposal unanimously at a meeting on Wednesday July 16 and a copy will now be sent to the PCT which is carrying out an Oral Health Strategy Consultation looking at a range of dental issues, including fluoridation.

USA - Seminole to stop putting fluoride in water

Seminole to stop putting fluoride in water
Adrian G. Uribarri | Sentinel Staff Writer
July 19, 2008
If you live in Seminole County and have been rushing through your toothbrushing routine, you might want to take an extra minute or two to scrub.
County officials said they will stop putting fluoride in the drinking-water supply in about three or four months, after the cavity-fighting chemical runs out at the county's water-treatment facilities.
Fluoridated drinking water reaches about 75 percent of homes served by the county utility, said Ruth Hazard, Seminole's assistant utilities manager. The county has been adding fluoride since the mid-1980s, she said.
Hazard said Seminole has been dealing with a nationwide shortage of fluoride, and that with budgets tightening, it made sense to eliminate what some view as an unnecessary and even harmful additive.
"We just could not get it anymore," Hazard said, and "at the same time, the budget cuts are coming along."
Officials had made the decision to stop fluoridating by last February, she said, but they planned to announce the change once the remaining supply runs out.
Kip Duchon, national fluoridation engineer at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, confirmed there had been a shortage around the time of the decision.
A possible cause of the shortage is increased demand for the chemical on the West Coast, where a major California utility began fluoridating water in October.
But since the beginning of the year, Duchon said, fluoride has become more readily available.
"Right now," Duchon said, "the supply's out there and you can purchase it if you want it."
Still, Hazard said county officials have no plans to restart fluoridation. She estimated that ending it will save the county about $100,000 annually.

Officials in nearby counties, including Orange, said they do not plan to end their fluoridation programs. Volusia officials said they have never added the chemical to the water supply.

Health advocates have argued for and against water fluoridation for years. While many dental professionals hail the chemical's tooth-strengthening properties, some scientists argue that adding the chemical to water is unnecessary because children receive enough of it from other sources such as toothpaste.

"We know from years of experience and scientific study that community water fluoridation benefits everyone," ADA President Mark Feldman said in a statement July 10. He called it "the single most effective public health measure to prevent tooth decay."

Others disagree, including Arvid Carlsson, who won the Nobel Prize for medicine in 2000.

"Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology," Carlsson said in a July 17 statement. "It's really obsolete."

Friday, July 18, 2008

Southampton Echo "In my View"

Click image to see larger picture

Southampton meeting

There is a meeting of the Hampshire Primary Care Trust at Colbury Hall (For the public input prior to the board meeting) at 1.00pm Thursday 24 July 2008 when the proposal to fluoridate Totton is discussed, so come and demonstrate in force that we don't want fluoridation in Totton.

The next meeting in public of the Board of the Hampshire Primary Care Trust will take place at the Colbury Memorial Hall, Main Road, Colbury, Hampshire SO40 7EL at 2.00pm on Thursday 24 July 2008.

The Board meeting will be preceded by a Public Seminar on a Developing Community Healthcare in Hampshire, to which members of the public are invited. This session will take place from 1.00pm at the same venue. There will be refreshments from 1.45pm and members of the Board will be available to take questions from the public.

Proposal to Adjust Levels of Fluoride in parts of Southampton and Surrounding Areas To note the content of the appended South Central Strategic Health Authority (SCSHA) Board paper (HA 08/046). To note that SCSHA is planning to proceed to public consultation in August 2008. note that the Hampshire PCT Board proposes to meet in public in October 2008 to consider the proposal in detail and to determine its formal position on the matter

Oh My! Three Fun Ways To Die

Oh My! Three Fun Ways To Die
Victoria Hardy
July 18, 2008
Some have said that we are undergoing a devious plan of depopulation in the world, in which the secret government and the elite have decided there are too many people on the earth and billions must die so they can continue with their plans of utopia. I´ve heard these ideas mentioned again and again in the last years, but truly never gave much credence to the idea, until now. In exploring the world, we all gather little truths, ideas that are not held by the masses, but we don´t always put those puzzle pieces together. Our society has done a fine job in teaching us to separate facts, to focus on the small pieces and not see the bigger picture. We like to categorize things and events, as though neatness and organization counts when attempting to understand reality and we cling to the structures around us, fearful of change. We keep our horror aimed at the movie screen, fearing deviant maniacs and monsters, perhaps subconsciously knowing that if we disconnect from that screen, we may encounter the real monsters, which look just like us.We are an odd lot these days; we trust our televisions and our leaders, but not our neighbors, families or faith. We dutifully follow the advice we are given by the elaborate boxes placed as decoration and information in most rooms and when we hear of another fabulous product we rarely consider if it is truly healthful. So we have learned that aspartame in over 6,000 products is safe for us, mercury in our teeth and injected into our blood is completely harmless and consuming quantities of fluoride have saved our children´s teeth for decades. But are these truths really true? Or are these poisons just another part of a fascinating deception we are too naïve and trusting to comprehend.In 1965, James M. Schlatter, while working as a chemist for G.D. Searle and Co., discovered aspartame (Nutrasweet). He was attempting to create an anti-ulcer drug when he found that the concoction was sweet. For years the FDA refused to approve aspartame for use in food due to concerns that it caused brain and other cancers. But upon taking office President Reagan appointed a new FDA commissioner and aspartame soon found it´s way into our food supply. There is now a list of 92 side effects associated with aspartame consumption. Sweet Poison The approval of aspartame is an interesting read, full of intrigue, politics and a predator like drive to achieve a goal, no matter the consequences. In a study performed by a Dr. Harry Waisman in 1970 to research the effects of aspartame on primates, seven infant monkeys were fed aspartame with their milk, one died and five suffered grand mal seizures. Dr. Waisman tragically passed away before the study could be completed and the results were not included in the initial application G.D. Searle submitted to the FDA. In 1971, another Searle researcher discovered aspartame´s toxicity in infant mice, but her results were also ignored. In 1974, Neuroscientist John W. Olney and others filed a formal objection stating their belief that aspartame caused brain damage, especially in children. Despite the tests and the objections, aspartame passed one hurdle after the other, ignoring science and the health of the consumer, almost as though there was a bigger picture, an insidious plan. Natural NewsIt´s a difficult undertaking to imagine that our own leaders would seek to do us harm, an idea that most would find illogical and unacceptable. But if we consider that G.D. Searle, which held the patent on aspartame for many years, was also a pharmaceutical company, it´s really win-win for them as we drink aspartame and then go to our doctors with new cancers and odd, unexplained illnesses. And if we remember that Donald Rumsfeld, former Chairman and CEO of GD Searle (between two stints as Secretary of Defense), was instrumental in passing this brew to the masses, we must begin questioning what it all means. To gain some perspective of what can happen to the human body regularly consuming aspartame Victoria Inness-Brown, M.A. conducted an independent experiment using 108 rats over a two-year, eight-month period. Ms. Inness-Brown discovered the same results as the earlier researchers discovered - cancers, tumors, brain damage and death in her test subjects. My Aspartame ExperimentYet, it seems most will not believe aspartame is bad for us until the television informs us, we seemingly can´t envision that we have been lied to by our corporate leaders. I´ve often heard the masses referred to as sheep, slowly being culled as we sleepily graze the fields and as I see children consuming their artificially sweetened goodies, while ADD, ADHD and behavioral altering meds become more and more popular, I think there is truth to the imagery. But wait, aspartame is not the only suspicious substance we are expected to consume these days, we have also been well taught that fluoride in our water is good for us. About 5% of the world´s water is fluoridated and 50% of those people consuming fluoridated water live in North America. Both China and Sweden have banned water fluoridation, while Japan, Austria, Norway, Denmark and Belgium have rejected the idea. Hungary, Germany and Finland have all stopped fluoridating their water systems. And they do not fluoridate their water due to environmental, health, legal and ethical concerns. Yet, we, here in America, believe that this waste product in good for us and good for our children. Fluoridation.comAs with aspartame, fluoridated water has a long and interesting past, in 1944 the American Dental Association warned, "even minuscule amounts of fluoride will cause osteosclerosis, spondylosis, osteopetrosis, and goiter, and we cannot afford to run the risk of producing such serious systemic disturbances in applying what is a doubtful procedure to prevent dental disfigurements among children. The potentialities for harm far outweigh those for good." Yet, months after the stringent warning the ADA began promoting and participating in the fluoridation project. Over the years tests were done in various cities, fluoridating one community and leaving another pure, in each study cavities among the residents declined in both the fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas, but only the fluoridated results were released to the public. During WWII a Major Racey Jordan noticed an inordinate amount of fluoride being shipped to the Soviet Union and it was explained to him that fluoride was used in the water in the prison camps to keep the prisoners lethagic and easy to control. And years ago, the Encyclopedia of Materia Medica clearly listed the mind altering and behavior changing effects of fluoride. Doctored Water
Fluorosilicic acid is the chemical used to fluoridate our water and it is a byproduct of the prosphate fertilizer and aluminum industries, it is also essential in the production of atomic bombs. It is an ingredient in rat poisons and pesticides and it is classified as a hazardous waste product. And according to a letter dated in 1965, Dr. Flanagan, Assistant Director of Environmental Health, American Medical Association stated, " The American Medical Association is NOT prepared to state that no harm will be done to any person by water fluoridation. The AMA has not carried out any research work, either long-term or short-term, regarding the possibility of any side effects." No FluorideStudies reported in The Journal of the American Medical Association and The New England Journal of Medicine have demonstrated higher incidences of hip fractures in fluoridated communities. The National Institute of Environmental and Health Sciences and scientists at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have reported that fluoridation causes cancer. And the 1984 issue of Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products lists fluoride as more poisonous than lead and just slightly less poisonous than arsenic. A seven-ounce tube of fluoride toothpaste is enough to kill a 25 lb. child. The Toxic Effects of FluorideIn 1945, according to the "Vital Statistics Of The United States", the cancer deaths in Grand Rapids, Michigan, were 245, this was the same year they became the first city to fluoridate the water. Four years later, the same sources show the cancer deaths at 349, an approximate 39% increase. Interestingly enough, in the five years before water fluoridation was introduced the cancer rates in the city were declining, down 6%. Doctor Yourself Fluoride is now also found in our foods, soft drinks and many pharmaceuticals and some of the effects of over-fluoridation are pitted, brown and stained teeth, otherwise known as dental fluorosis, bone disorders and arthritis. Many have stated it lowers the IQ by up to 15 points, causes sterility and reproduction disorders. Other studies have shown its connection to bone cancers and cancer of the uterus and other soft tissues. Still others state that fluoride depresses the immune system and causes early sexual maturation in females. And some see the surge of Alzheimer´s and other brain disorders as caused by fluoridated water. And the fluoride that we consume is said to collect in the pineal gland nestled deep in our brains. Rene Descartes referred to the pineal gland as The Seat of the Soul and many believe that is where we find our connection to the spiritual aspect of life. Others believe the pineal gland is where our third eye gains its sight and still others believe it is where original thought is birthed. And although countries across the globe look at fluoridated water suspiciously, we, here in America, still believe it is the best thing since apple pie. But we still aren´t done, we must add mercury to this toxic soup of "goodness" we are expected to ingest by our leaders.By now, we´ve all heard the concerns of rising Autism rates and the fact that many parents feel the change in their children occurred after they were injected with vaccines containing a mercury base, but what of the "silver" or amalgam fillings mixed with mercury and placed in our teeth? According to the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, the mercury, mixed with other metals, continues to leak out mercury vapor in our mouths for years. Smoking Teeth = Poison GasNorway recently became the first country to ban amalgam fillings due to health concerns and according to Erik Solheim, Norway´s Minister of Environment and Development, "Mercury is among the most dangerous environmental toxins. Satisfactory alternatives to mercury in products are available, and it is therefore fitting to introduce a ban." What Doctors Don´t Tell You And a little known fact is that amalgam fillings are considered a hazardous waste product and must be disposed of per a certified recycling company. Mercury is the most toxic of the toxic metals and it takes as little as ½ a gram to contaminate a ten acre lake enough for health officials to warn us not to eat the fish and ½ a gram of mercury is what it takes to fill a tooth. Among other things, mercury kills cells, accumulates in the brain and damages brain cells, weakens the immune system and is toxic to the kidneys. Some studies have shown that amalgam fillings may have played a role in the development of neurological and degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer´s ALS, MS and Parkinson's. Dental Amalgam Scientific FactsSo, there we have it, a short list of toxic brews our leaders have declared are good for us or, at least, safe and we believe because we have also been taught that evil intentions do not exist. We understand that our leaders mean us no harm and if they are causing harm by medicating our water, encouraging us to eat and drink dangerous chemicals and injecting or implanting damaging metals into our bodies, it is surely a mistake, there is no intent. All of the toxins I have listed affect our brains, our intelligence and our health and there are plenty of studies to confirm these findings, so perhaps our leaders know exactly what they are doing, perhaps it is simply about money or perhaps it is about creating a utopia absent of senseless eaters. Although I briefly touched on these products, there is enough information on each one to fill books, information that the average citizen needs to know, but perhaps after years of consuming these health stealing and behavior altering additions, we no longer care. It is a strange time to be alive when we believe, as a society, that consuming toxic materials and chemicals is good for us and I often feel as though I´ve stepped into a backwards world alive with bizarre contradictions. As I ponder the idea of depopulation and then look at the substances declared healthy, I have to agree that there is a plot and plan that, we the people, simply do not see.

Dental Fillings: Don’t have them, and don’t drink the water

Dental Fillings: Don’t have them, and don’t drink the water
17 July 2008
Just a month ago, the official line in the US was that amalgam dental fillings were perfectly safe. Since then, America’s chief health regulator has said they are dangerous for pregnant women and young children, and now it is may ask dentists to pay out $3,000 for filter systems to stop the mercury from the fillings getting into the water system.

The US Congress has been asking the American Dental Association to testify and explain its resistance to installing the filters, known as separators. ADA spokesman William J Walsh says his profession acknowledges that it is the biggest contributor to mercury getting into the water system, but says it does its best to reduce the exposure. However, that ‘best’ doesn’t include paying out for a separator, which Walsh says is too expensive for dental practices to buy.

Congressmen took the opportunity to berate the ADA about the dangers of mercury fillings. Republican Dan Burton from Indiana said his grandson became autistic after he received nine vaccinations, seven of which contained mercury.

A month is a very long time in politics.

(Source: USA Today, July 8, 2008).

Fluoride Still in the News: Risks Noted for Kidney Patients, Children, Seniors

Fluoride Still in the News: Risks Noted for Kidney Patients, Children, Seniors
By Lee Michaelson and Gail McDonald-Tune

The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) recently withdrew its longstanding support for fluoridation of public water supplies. Although scientists have long raised concerns about the risks of fluoridation to public health, especially in susceptible populations, including infants, seniors and those suffering from chronic renal diseases, the NKF had allied itself since at least 1981 with the American Dental Association (ADA), which listed the NKF on its website as an organization that "recognize[s] the Public Health Benefits of Community Water Fluoridation for Preventing Dental Decay." In a position paper issued in 1981, and relying on scientific data from the 1970s, the NFK also stated there was "insufficient evidence at this time" to recommend the use of fluoride-free water for those with kidney disease.

In a new position paper, dated April 15, 2008, the NKF reversed its previous stance, and the foundation's name has since been removed the list of fluoridation-endorsing organizations on the ADA website. However, the NKF issued no press release and its new position paper did not come to media attention until early June.

According to the new paper, the NKF was moved to reexamine its stance on fluoridation by a number of factors, among them a challenge by an attorney who intimated suit might be filed on behalf of renal patients who had relied on what he characterized as the foundation's "outmoded" advice that fluoridation was safe. But perhaps most compelling were the March 2006 report of the National Research Council (NRC) on fluoridation and a recently published review by Kidney Health Australia, strongly suggesting that NKF's position on fluoridation was obsolete.

The NKF's new position paper emphasizes the NRC's finding that "a potentially susceptible subpopulation comprises individuals with renal impairments who retain more fluoride than healthy people do." The NKF paper also takes note of the multiple vehicles, including foods, beverages, drugs, toothpastes (which contain 1,000-fold more fluoride than drinking water), as well as fluoridated drinking water, through which fluoride is ingested; the fact that many of these products are not labeled for fluoride content, making it impossible to monitor the fluoride dosage actually being received by renal patients and others; and the scientific research documenting the health risks of fluoride, among them, dental and skeletal fluorosis, weakening of the bones, and an increased rate of fractures. The NKF observes that the worst of these risks appears to be associated with intake of fluoride at levels as much as four times higher than those commonly used in the fluoridation of public drinking water. However, the NKF report notes that those in the advanced stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD)–stages 4, 5 and 5D–"retain more fluoride than healthy individuals,"; in fact, their "[f]luoride blood levels are approximately 4-fold higher" than those of the general populace. "

It has long been acknowledged that fluoridated water cannot be used in dialysis, which sustains the lives of patients in renal failure. However, the NKF paper reports instances of severe illnesses and even several deaths following water system and hospital equipment accidents which allowed the introduction of fluoridated water into the dialysis process–including one in Annapolis in 1979 in which "approximately 1,000 gallons of 22 percent hydrofluorosilic were accidentally added to the ... public water system."

As a result, the new position paper concludes, "The 1981 NKF position paper on fluoridation is outdated. The paper is withdrawn and will no longer be circulated...." The new paper also states definitively: "The NKF has no position on the optimal fluoridation of water. The oral health of people with CKD is certainly of interest to the NKF, but balancing the overall benefits and risks of fluoride exposure is the primary concern." The foundation goes on to recommend additional research on fluoride toxicity, and specifically advises: "Individuals with CKD should be notified of the potential risk of fluoride exposure by providing information on the NKF website including a link to the report in brief of the NRC and the Kidney Health Australia position paper."

Kidney patients are not the only ones at risk from fluoride exposure, say many scientists. Infants and young children are another susceptible population. "[H]uman breast milk has about 1/100th the level of fluoride that so-called optimally fluoridated water has.... [I]f Mother Nature had intended for human beings to get fluoride at that level, the human breast would have accommodated it," says J. William Hirzy, a chemist and fluoride expert at the American University in Washington, D.C.

"It is now the consensus view of the dental research community that fluoride's primary benefit to teeth comes from topical application to the exterior of teeth, not from ingestion through the water supply," adds Michael Connett, project director of the Fluoride Action Network. Connett continues, "Since … the risks are primarily from ingestion … adding fluoride to the nation's water–and thereby to the bulk of the nation's processed food–increases public ingestion of fluoride."

Phyllis Mullenix, Ph.D., a neurotoxicologist, former head of the toxicology department at the Forsyth Dental Center, a world renowned dental center associated with Harvard Medical School, and currently a research associate in psychiatry at the Children's Hospital Medical Center in Boston, reported impacts on the central nervous system that flagged fluoride as having the potential to cause motor dysfunction, IQ deficits, and learning disabilities in humans. In a study published in the Journal of Neurotoxicology and Teratology, Mullenix showed that fluoride crosses the blood-brain barrier in baby rats, which–depending on when they were exposed to fluoride dosages similar to what human children receive–exhibited hyper and hypo-activity.

In two other studies published in 1999, the same journal noted that some children exceed the total daily fluoride ingestion simply by using toothpaste alone. (Commercially packaged toothpastes contain warnings not to swallow.) The second study found that more than 50 percent of infants are currently formula-fed at one month of age, and, because of the fluoride in the formula, they "are likely to be continuously exposed to high intakes of it for nine or 10 months."

Fluoride is also contained in most of our nation's processed and packaged infant foods and beverages, including "healthy choices," such as many fruits and vegetables sprayed with pesticides containing fluoride. For example, non-organic grapes and raisins are among the highest fluoride-containing foods eaten by children. Some sodas are also made with fluoridated water. As early as 1996, the Journal of the American Dental Association presented data suggesting that young children who drink substantial quantities of juice "should not receive dietary fluoride supplements, since they might be at increased risk of developing dental fluorosis." Another ADA article from 1997, found high-fluoride-content chicken in infant food.

More recently, a 2001 study by Oregon State University showed that foods made with mechanically separated chicken contribute to fluoride intake, reporting that infant foods had the highest amounts of fluoride. The study concluded that "a single serving of chicken sticks alone provides roughly half of a child's upper limit of safety for fluoride."

Parents may be surprised to learn that the substances used to fluoridate their water is a waste material, hydroflusilic acid, taken from the smokestack pollution scrubbers used in the phosphate fertilizer industry. Hydrofluosilicic acid is classified as a hazardous industrial waste.

Those wishing to avoid the potential health risks associated with fluoride may want to consider feeding their children organic foods, including organic baby foods now carried by many markets. Filtering water is a bigger obstacle–most common household water filters do not screen out fluorides. Reverse osmosis water filters are required to remove or substantially reduce fluorides in the water supply, and such filters often waste as much as two-thirds of the water being processed. If choosing fluoridated tooth paste, be certain that your children use only small, pea-sized amounts and do not allow them to swallow it.

For more information, check out the following websites: Fluoride Action Network, www.fluoridealert.org; Citizens For Safe Drinking Water, www.keepers-of-the-well.org; Scientists, Doctors and Researchers Warn of Fluoride Dangers, www.nofluoride.com.