Experts changing minds on fluoride
Experts changing minds on fluoride
Dr Hardy Limeback, associate professor and head of preventive dentistry, University of Toronto who was previously for water fluoridation in 1999 changed his views after reading the available scientific papers.
He gives a long list of reasons why he is now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water – and they are the very same reasons thousands of non-qualified opposers have been giving for many years, having read the scientific data for themselves.
There is an increasing number of highly–qualified experts who, after looking at the scientific information for themselves and questioning the "safe and effective" assurances given by a few governments, are now against water fluoridation.
The first reason Dr Limeback gives for his change of mind and opposition is the use of hydrofluosilicic acid. It is very costly to dispose of safely and is industrial toxic waste from smokestack scrubbers of the phosphate fertiliser industry being used to fluoridate water supplies.
This toxic waste has not been tested for safety for consumption as a medicine.
Dr Limeback also points out that there are so many exposures to fluoride-containing products nowadays through prescribed drugs, pesticides, soft drinks as well as tea, toothpaste, tobacco and countless other products most people will already now have too much exposure to fluoride without it being added to tap water.
My observations are fluoride is added to tap water for medical treatment only and is not to make water safer to drink as with chlorine, so it is a medication or drug.
I think it is still illegal to medicate anyone against their wishes which is what happens to many when fluoride is added to tap water.
Just about every open vote from the public on water fluoridation in the UK has ended with an overwhelming majority against, often over 75 per cent saying no.
Edward Priestley
Dr Hardy Limeback, associate professor and head of preventive dentistry, University of Toronto who was previously for water fluoridation in 1999 changed his views after reading the available scientific papers.
He gives a long list of reasons why he is now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water – and they are the very same reasons thousands of non-qualified opposers have been giving for many years, having read the scientific data for themselves.
There is an increasing number of highly–qualified experts who, after looking at the scientific information for themselves and questioning the "safe and effective" assurances given by a few governments, are now against water fluoridation.
The first reason Dr Limeback gives for his change of mind and opposition is the use of hydrofluosilicic acid. It is very costly to dispose of safely and is industrial toxic waste from smokestack scrubbers of the phosphate fertiliser industry being used to fluoridate water supplies.
This toxic waste has not been tested for safety for consumption as a medicine.
Dr Limeback also points out that there are so many exposures to fluoride-containing products nowadays through prescribed drugs, pesticides, soft drinks as well as tea, toothpaste, tobacco and countless other products most people will already now have too much exposure to fluoride without it being added to tap water.
My observations are fluoride is added to tap water for medical treatment only and is not to make water safer to drink as with chlorine, so it is a medication or drug.
I think it is still illegal to medicate anyone against their wishes which is what happens to many when fluoride is added to tap water.
Just about every open vote from the public on water fluoridation in the UK has ended with an overwhelming majority against, often over 75 per cent saying no.
Edward Priestley
posted by Bill at
9:46 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home