USA - Beware Fluoride! Coming to Long Island’s Water Supplies?

Beware Fluoride! Coming to Long Island’s Water Supplies? Get Informed
What you don’t know about fluoride can hurt you. The remedy: “The Case Against Fluoride” is must-see TV on Cable 115 every Tuesday

By nyscof (Open Post) - October 30, 2016 7:53 pm ET

According to the NYS Department of Health’s former Dental Director, Long Island is newly targeted (slide 5) for fluoridation – the addition of fluoride chemicals into public water supplies – a scientifically indefensible method to reduce tooth decay in tap water drinkers.

Even though some local legislators passed laws banning fluoridation, Long Islanders can’t be complacent. State laws were enacted to mandate fluoridation to nullify the power of local fluoridation-rejecting municipalities in both California and Arkansas.

Furthermore, the NYS Governor’s budget was recently used to create a new law, without going through normal legislative process, to protect fluoridation. Also buried in the budget is $10 million in fluoridation grants to preserve or instigate fluoridation.

Future budgets possibly may hide a fluoridation state mandate law overriding local fluoridation opposition, especially if residents don’t notify their state elected leaders of their opposition, many of whom don’t read all the details in the Governor’s proposed budgets before approving it.

A 2014 letter encouraging fluoridation was sent to all NYS Health Commissioners from the NYS Dept of Health indicating “…the expansion of water fluoridation [is] a priority…”

The NYS Dept of Health has already conducted fluoridation spokesperson training all over the state including SUNY- Farmingdale to teach attendees how to lobby in favor of fluoridation.

A Nassau/Suffolk oral health coalition member requirement was that any potential joiner had to take an oath to promote the NYS Dental Plan which includes fluoridation.

Hydrofluosilicic acid, the most-used fluoridation chemical, a lead- and arsenic-laced waste product of phosphate fertilizer manufacturing is never purified before injecting into the public’s water supplies.

Fluoridation began in 1945 with the mistaken belief that ingested fluoride is essential for healthy teeth. Science proved that theory is wrong.

“I never thought this out-dated concept would ever be started in modern times; but I was wrong,” says Carol Kopf who spearheaded the effort that stopped fluoridation in Levittown in 1983 and who now volunteers for both the Fluoride Action Network and the NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.

“I’ve learned that politics, not science, supports fluoridation," says Kopf.

Long Islanders need to know that consuming a fluoride-free diet does not cause tooth decay. But ingesting fluoride can have serious side effects.

Most alarming is the never-expected new evidence that fluoride gets into and alters the brain which is only now being studied by the US National Toxicology Program

Long Island’s water supplies already have some serious contamination issues as revealed in testimony presented to a NYS legislative meeting on September 12 in Smithtown.

“My testimony is here,” says Kopf

“Lobbied legislators shouldn’t prescribe medicine, deliver it by water engineer and dose it based on thirst and not age, weight, health and need and monitored for complications,” says Kopf.

Further, there is no knowledge about how fluoridation chemicals interact with any other water additives or contaminants.

Long Island has a history of rejecting fluoridation without consequence. Levittown, Carle Place and the towns bordering NYC stopped fluoridation. The Suffolk County legislature rejected their Health Commissioner’s attempt to mandate fluoridation in the 1990’s.

NYS’s own statistics show fluoridation has no relationship to more or less tooth decay and doesn’t close the income disparity gap.

While the nation, which is 2/3 fluoridated, is experiencing a tooth decay epidemic, non-fluoridated Nassau and Suffolk County’s tooth decay rates declined from 50% and 54% in 2004 to 41.9% and 48.7% in 2012, respectively.

"We hope Long Island groups and associations will join us in opposing fluoridation. Fluoride is readily available for anyone who believes they need it. Fluoride should be an individual's choice - not a legislator's choice," says Kopf

Maine Voices: A ‘no’ vote against fluoride in water is a vote for better health

A mounting body of evidence suggests that overexposure to fluoride carries health risks.

Norm Labbe is a professional engineer and superintendent of the Kennebunk, Kennebunkport & Wells Water District.

KENNEBUNK — Most of us are exhausted by this political season, but of all the issues facing voters on Nov. 8, I feel that one of the more important involves our drinking water.

The Kennebunk, Kennebunkport & Wells Water District has taken a position to stop its current practice of adding fluoride to the drinking water of its customers in the southern coastal communities of Kennebunk, Kennebunkport, Wells, Ogunquit and Arundel, as well as parts of Biddeford and York.The upcoming local referendum will give everyone living within the communities we serve – whether on a private well or on public water – an opportunity to end water fluoridation and regain control of what they ingest at home, at school or at work.

It should be made clear, however, that the state-mandated wording for the referendum question is a bit confusing. It is written as follows: “Shall fluoride be added to the public water supply for the intended purpose of reducing tooth decay?” In simple terms, the answer we at the water district support is “no.”

We have several reasons for our opposition to water fluoridation for our customers. In addition to the reasons and facts presented on our website at kkw.org and at rethinkingfluoride.com, we feel the following are important considerations:

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has clearly said that surface application of fluoride, not swallowing, is the way fluoride helps to protect teeth from cavities. The American Dental Association understands and agrees with this, as noted in an article by John D. Featherstone in the July 2000 Journal of the American Dental Association.

Some 70 years ago, when the push for water fluoridation began, we didn’t have the economical and convenient methods of applying fluoride topically to teeth – where it does the most good – like fluoridated toothpaste, fluoride rinses and fluoride applications by dentists. Back then, fluoridated water was thought to be the primary source of fluoride.

It is now known in all scientific circles that we are now ingesting fluoride from a variety of sources, to the point that dental fluorosis (white blotches on the teeth), an indicator of childhood overexposure to fluoride, has affected over 40 percent of American adolescents. We already have naturally occurring fluoride in our water supply, about one third of the optimal amount. With overexposure to fluoride being a proven fact, why add more?

A mounting body of evidence suggests that this overexposure to fluoride carries with it a variety of health-related consequences. More and more studies show fluoride as a concern in bone, endocrine, kidney and brain health.

In 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency listed fluoride as a neurotoxin, with “substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity,” which is their highest rating. This may be why on all over-the-counter fluoridated toothpaste and fluoride rinses, there are clear instructions to immediately call the Poison Control Center if swallowed.

And what about choice? Shouldn’t the public choose, on an individual basis, whether they want to ingest fluoride? With the many economical options available for topical application (toothpaste and rinses), why force everyone to ingest fluoride while drinking water – the most critically important substance they need in their diet to sustain life?

The vast majority of fluoridated water makes its way into the environment. On average, around 1 percent of the water we produce gets consumed. That means that over 1 billion gallons of fluoridated water enters the environment (lakes, streams, rivers and groundwater) on an annual basis.

As your drinking water provider, licensed by the Maine Department of Health and Human Services to operate your public water supply, and whose mission is to provide the safest possible drinking water to our customers, adding fluoride to your water seems to us to be unnecessary, unsafe and inappropriate.

Why? We are adding fluoride with an acute toxicity greater than lead and only slightly less than arsenic, which does nothing to improve the quality and safety of drinking water. Considering that our fluoridation chemical comes from the scrubbed smokestack residues of a phosphate fertilizer plant, we honestly believe we are negatively impacting the quality of our customers’ drinking water.

We are proud of our safety record and work hard to honor and maintain the trust our customers place in us. We cannot, in good conscience, stay silent on this issue any longer. For us, there’s obviously doubt in our minds as to the “safe and effective” dogma we have all been taught to believe.

If there’s any doubt, we say: Leave it out. Vote “no” on Nov. 8 and on the next day the fluoride – and the doubt – will be gone and everyone can have a choice.

UK - Fluoride in tap water divides city

Public Health England says fluoridation is safe, but opponents are fighting plans in HullANDRE CAMARA

A plan to extend the fluoridation of tap water for the first time in 30 years to combat tooth decay has provoked a backlash from those who deem it “mass medication”.

A battle is raging in Hull, where the scheme is being considered, as scientists and campaigners clash on the future of dental and public health, amid claims that more research is needed.

Public Health England (PHE) says that fluoridation is a “safe and effective” measure, but opponents claim there is no control over the dosage and allege that it may be linked to dental mottling, bone density problems, thyroid…..

I've emailed all the councillors in Hull showing how they can see the Hampshire Councils Health Panel posted  findings on fluoridation and subsequent rejection of fluoridation to Southampton's water. I hope they read it.

That was funny.

No idea if what he is saying is right or what the gadget is doing to the water.

Clean Water Portland won the election to keep fluoridation chemicals out of the drinking water, 2013

Dental disease is a common pet problem A vet cleans a dog s teeth.

SIMON CAPLE, ALNORTHUMBRIA VETS
Dental disease is one of the most common diseases seen by vets. It isn’t very nice for our pets, and they often don’t show any signs until it’s really severe. The main causes are plaque and tartar, which build up on teeth and make pets’ mouths very sore.
The bad news is that plaque and tartar isn’t easy to remove, but the good news is at Alnorthumbria Vets we can remove it by giving pets’ teeth a scale and polish. Pets are very good at hiding when they’re in pain so it’s important to check their teeth on a regular basis. You may notice their breath starts to smell or they’re showing one of the following signs: Tartar on teeth; dribbling or drooling; sore mouth or gums; reluctance or difficulty in eating; pawing or rubbing at the mouth/face; bleeding gums.
If you see any of these signs you should book an appointment to see your vet. If unhealthy teeth are left untreated they can cause a lot of pain. Build up of tartar can cause gums to become inflamed, red and sore. This can develop into more serious dental disease, resulting in tooth loss, abscesses or infection.
Some infections can affect other organs. These are often difficult to treat and may cause further complications. There are several ways you can help to reduce the chances of your pet developing dental disease. Try feeding a larger proportion of their diet as hard foods, or ask your vet about special diets that can help to clean their teeth. Tooth brushing is the best prevention, with pet specific toothpaste. Do not use human toothpaste as it contains levels of fluoride that is toxic to pets. You could also join the Healthy Pet Club and benefit from fixed price dentals. For more information speak to your vet or visit thehealthypetclub.co.uk

NO Fluoride Rap Song Speak Your Truth

Dentists issue 'Halloween horror' warning

Armfuls of confectionery are a delicious, sugary reward for dressing up as devils and witches to scare the wits out of the neighbours.

But trick-or-treating will become a "Halloween horror" for children unless parents take steps to protect their teeth, warn dentists.

The Royal College of Surgeons has issued tips to ensure rotten smiles are just for Halloween.

Prof Nigel Hunt said: "We don't want to spoil the fun."

But the dean of the faculty of dental surgery said the state of children's teeth was a "national scandal" and added: "We want to help parents make sensible decisions about letting their children eat sweets at Halloween and all year round."

His tips include:

• If children are given sweets on Halloween they shouldn't eat them straightaway, but save them to have with a meal at home to reduce the impact on their teeth.
• If trick-or-treaters visit you over Halloween, consider giving out alternative treats to sweets such as stickers or balloons.
• Limit the number of sweets you give out to each child - think about only giving one or two rather than a whole bag.
• If the child is thirsty, make sure they do not have sugary drinks, water is better.
• Even though they may be tired, make sure children brush their teeth with fluoride toothpaste before going to bed.

Prof Hunt said: "Celebrating Halloween by trick-or-treating has become very popular in the UK in recent years.

"As a parent myself, I know the delight children take in donning fancy dress and visiting the neighbours to collect as many sweet treats as they can carry.

"Unfortunately, those sweet treats can be a Halloween horror for kids' teeth, sugar is one of the biggest culprits for nasty tooth decay."

Children under the age of 10 have more than 179,000 teeth extracted each year and around a quarter of three-to-five year olds have tooth decay.

EPA Superfund Program: LOVE CANAL, NIAGARA FALLS, NY

The Love Canal site (Site) is located in Niagara Falls, New York. It was one of two initial excavations in what was to be a canal to provide inexpensive hydroelectric power for industrial development around the turn of the 20th century.  The abandoned excavation, partially filled with water, was used largely for recreational purposes.  The canal was about 9,750 feet long and ranged in depth from 10 to 25 feet. Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corporation (now Occidental Chemical Corporation, or OXY) disposed of over 21,000 tons of hazardous chemicals into the abandoned Love Canal between 1942 and 1953, contaminating soil and groundwater.  In 1953, the landfill was covered and leased to the Niagara Falls Board of Education (NFBE).  Afterwards, the area near the covered landfill was extensively developed, including construction of an elementary school, as well as many residential properties.

The fenced 70-acre Site includes the original 16-acre hazardous waste landfill and a 40-acre cap, as well as a drainage system and leachate collection and treatment system that are in place and operating.

Beginning in the 1970s, local residents noticed foul odors and chemical residues and experienced increased rates of cancer and other health problems.  In 1978 and 1980, President Carter declared two federal environmental emergencies for the Site, and about 950 families were evacuated from their homes within a 10-square-block area surrounding the landfill.  This area was eventually referred to as the Emergency Declaration Area (EDA) and was subsequently divided into seven areas as related to habitability concerns.

The severity of the Site’s contamination ultimately led to the creation of federal legislation to manage the disposal of hazardous waste.  This legislation was named the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Law) of 1980.

In September 1983, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) listed the Site on the Superfund program’s National Priorities List (NPL) and began to work with New York State (NYS) to clean up the Site.  In 1999, the EPA and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) completed remedy construction in 1999.  The EPA deleted the Site from the NPL in 2004.

As a result of the extent of the contamination at the Site, the response action was addressed in several stages focused on landfill containment with leachate collection; treatment and disposal; excavation and treatment of the sewer and creek sediment and other wastes; cleanup of the 93rd Street School soils; the purchase, maintenance and rehabilitation of properties; and, other short-term cleanup actions.

As a result of these cleanup actions, the Site no longer presents a threat to human health and the environment.  In September 2004, the EPA removed the Site from the Superfund program’s NPL.  As a result of the revitalization efforts of the Love Canal Area Revitalization Agency (LCARA), new homeowners have moved into the habitable areas of the Love Canal.  More than 260 formerly abandoned homes in the affected area were rehabilitated and sold to new residents, creating a viable new neighborhood.

Why do they swear sounds juvenile. Funny though.

Thyroid UK - Fluorinated drugs. To use or not to use?

Justiina
At first I want to say that I do not suggest anyone to quit their medication because it is fluorinated.

Reason why I am writing this is this quote :

"It is unclear to what extent, if any, the fluorinated drugs listed here may increase the body burden of inorganic fluoride. This uncertainty is amplified by the lack of available data from the pharmaceutical companies."

slweb.org/ftrcfluorinatedph...

They also provide a list of drugs that are fluorinated. I did some digging and most say fluorinated drugs are safe, except when used long term.

"The only thing that is bad for the Human Body is that if a drug is used year on year on year on year on year - way beyond its intended/prescribed usage, then there is going to be permanent damage somewhere in the body. Often damage is quite reversible after treatment cessation, however, not always. For example, long term usage of antidepressants has been shown to create the same level of damage in the pre-frontal cortex of the brain akin to that of having had a lobotomy"

They also explain why drugs are fluorinated , unfortunately some of it makes sense.
My question is, even if it would be perfectly safe to use fluorinated drugs short term, what happens when your health is already compromised? As far as I am concerned only ill people need medication! But as stated above, jury is still out there as we are lacking data which pharmaceutical companies obviously doesn't want to share! Unfortunately it seems to be somewhat legal for pharmaceutical companies to hide data that is possibly damaging them. I am not saying this is one of those cases, but what if it is? What if fluorinated drugs are one reason causing epidemic of autoimmune diseases?

In a perfect world this should be properly investigated. Until that we can either trust that there is no harm or try alternative medication that hopefully and possibly is less damaging.

FLUORIDE
Comment One
Thanks for your post pointing out the dangers.
As well as drugs what about toothpaste. It is very rare to find one without fluoride and particularly in children's toothpaste and considering their teeth are renewed around 7 years of age - has flouride damaged their thyroid gland in particular and also health in the future?.Children swallow their toothpaste whether or not you watch them? Thankfully in the UK we don't have much flouridated water at present.

I've never thought that medications might also contain flouride. Thanks for that info.

NZ - Community Water Fluoridation

Videos

Hear from trusted NZ health professionals and community leaders about community water fluoridation. They talk about the facts, the benefits and dispel some of the myths related to this critical health measure.

Are they implying all those professionals who speak against fluoride are not to be trusted? 

Yes they are. 

Are they saying there are no facts that point to contrary evidence as to fluoridation's effectiveness and safety. 

Yes they are.

Canada - Fluoride debate not expected in Sault

By Elaine Della-Mattia, Sault Star

A symbolic resolution passed by the Ontario government is giving notice to municipalities that it does not support removing fluoride from tap water.

The legislation, which was recently passed with the support of all parties, is not considered binding but designed to encourage and educate Ontarians about the health benefits of fluoride in tap water.

To have or remove fluoride in drinking water has been debated within communities across Ontario – and Canada – for decades.

Many health officials advocate for fluoride in tap water while opponents counter that too much fluoride can cause neurological damage.

As a result of the resolution, Health Minister Eric Hoskins has said he and Ontario's chief medical officer of health, will write to every municipal government and public health agency across Ontario in support of fluoridation.

Sault Ste. Marie CAO Al Horsman said he has not received that letter in his office yet.

However, Horsman said the city would look to the PUC to review and comment on the issue and from that, determine whether the matter should be brought before council.

A member of council can also choose to write a motion and seek the support of council for it.

Sault PUC communication supervisor Giordan Zin said the PUC has no plans to implement fluoride in tap water.

“We are working on our water quality issues first and we are seeking continued improvements in that area,” Zin said.

Sault Ste. Marie residents have rejected adding the fluoride chemical to the city drinking water on three occasions.

The last time was in 1985, by a margin of 63.5%, an even higher margin than the two previous referendums, in 1968 and 1970.

At that time, the city was said to be one of just four Ontario municipalities with populations over 80,000 that did not fluoridate. Wawa residents opted to add fluoride in the same municipal election and neighbours in the Michigan Sault drink fluoridated water.

In 2007, then-city councillor James Caicco attempted to bring the matter before the public again, but other councillors defeated a motion that requested a report, thus strangling the debate at an early stage.

Dentists and public health units have consistently advocated that adding fluoride to tap water is the most simple, cost-effective way to strengthen and develop children's teeth.

In recent years, some municipalities have shut off the tap, ending fluoride in municipal water. Statistics show that those communities have seen increases in dental decay.

Despite the new provincial legislation, the issue is not one that the Algoma Public Health will raise at this time.

Ann Cuzzolino, a registered dental hygienist with APH said it is the responsibility of the city to request that the health unit open the fluoride debate again.

“APH has always supported fluoride as one of the most important population-based health strategy measures for the community,” she said.

In addition, the World Health Organization also considers fluoride a best practice, she said.

Since Sault Ste. Marie currently doesn't have fluoride in its water, residents are encouraged to visit family dentists regularly for dental care and preventative fluoride treatment. Fluoridated toothpaste, brushing regularly and monitoring sugar intake are also other ways encourage healthy dental practices.

Fluoride has been added to tap water by municipalities since about 1945.

Fluoridation does not affect the appearance, taste or smell of drinking water. The controlled injection of the mineral to the public water supply is designed to reduce tooth decay.

There is some natural fluoride in drinking water but not enough to prevent tooth decay.

UK - Bradford children's oral health improving, says report

ORAL health of five-year-olds across the district is improving, according to a new report.

Figures show that the average number of decayed, missing and filled teeth in youngsters was 1.5 in 2014-15 – compared to 1.98 in 2011-12 and 2.42 in 2007-08.

Bradford Council's public health department is carrying out several measures to bring about improvement, including work by health visitors at six to 12 months for all infants and a community-based fluoride varnish programme for children aged two to four.

Councillor Val Slater (pictured), the Council's deputy leader and portfolio holder for health and wellbeing, said: "Giving children the best start in life is one reason why improving the oral health of our youngsters remains a key public health priority for the Bradford district.

"No child should suffer from tooth decay, but it's still a significant problem nationally and it remains one of the most common reasons for hospital admissions for children aged five to nine despite the fact it is almost entirely preventable.

"Early intervention with families is key to making sure parents and their children understand the importance of having good oral health. Learning to brush teeth properly with a family fluoride toothpaste as soon as they appear, reducing the amount of sugary food and drinks children consume and regular visits to a dentist are steps every parent can take to help ensure their children's teeth remain healthy."

Comment

TheMiller8:08am Thu 27 Oct 16

Hmmm - Just for Info - here is the full paragraph from the actual report - which can be found on the link below - Both the T&A and Ms Slater seem to have "accidentally" missed out the last sentence - IE the "bad news" bit !

"Update on the Oral Health of Children in Bradford District. The oral health of young children is monitored by a 3 yearly survey and the latest survey for 2014/15 shows a significant improvement for Bradford district; the average, (or mean), decayed missing and filled teeth (dmft) in 5 year old children was 1.5 in 2014/15 .
However, rates of decay and dmft in children remain above regional and national averages and hence, there still needs to be a major focus on prevention and early intervention work in this area. "

https://bradford.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s11059/Hlt6OctDocM.pdf

In fact if you read the report itself you will find that Bradford City still has some of the worst levels of child tooth decay in the country - and the situation in the City itself does not seem to be getting any better. In fact the only thing saving Bradford is the situation in Airedale & Wharfdale. The figure is 4.1 in Bowling and around 2.0 in almost every other city center ward in Bradford showing little or no improvement on the 2012 average.

Its funny how they can put a positive spin on this when only a fortnight ago they were reporting that people were generally unable to find an NHS dentist in Bradford and waiting 6 months+ for treatment or even being advised to take their children into A&E instead.

Anyway another bit of T&A/Council collaboration spin quashed...

Arsenic and Fluoride Toxicity to Human Umbilical Vein Cells

← Neurodevelopmental Effects of Saxitoxin Exposure
Arsenic and Fluoride Toxicity to Human Umbilical Vein Cells
Posted on October 26, 2016 | Leave a comment
Ma Y, Ma Z, Yin S, Yan X, Wang J. Arsenic and fluoride induce apoptosis, inflammation and oxidative stress in cultured human umbilical vein endothelial cells. Chemosphere. 2016 Oct 14;167:454-461. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.10.025.

Excessive amount of inorganic arsenic (iAs) and fluoride (F) coexist in drinking water in many regions, which is associated with high risk of vascular diseases. However, the underlying mechanisms are not well studied. The present study was to evaluate the effects of iAs and F individual or combined exposure on endothelial activation and apoptosis in vitro. Primary human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) were exposed to 5 μM As2O3 and/or 1 mM NaF. Changes in endothelial cell apoptosis, inflammation, oxidative stress and nitric oxide (NO) production were analyzed. The results showed that iAs and/or F induced significant increase in endothelial cell apoptosis and inflammation as indicated by the increase of mRNA and protein expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1, intercellular adhesion molecule-1, and pentraxin 3. Furthermore, iAs and/or F exposure induced intracellular reactive oxygen species and malondialdehyde generation. Results showed iAs and/or F exposure increased the activity of NADPH oxidase (NOX) and up-regulated the mRNA expression of NOX subunits p22phox. The results indicated that activation of NOX was related to oxidative stress induced by iAs and/or F. Also, iAs and/or F reduced NO production in HUVECs. The up-regulation of inflammation genes expression and oxidative stress in iAs and F co-exposed ECs were less pronounced as compared to single F-exposed cells, which showed an antagonistic effect between iAs and F. In conclusion, endothelial activation and apoptosis induced by iAs and/or F are potential mechanisms in their vascular toxicity. Oxidative stress and impaired NO production are involved in their pro-inflammatory and pro-apoptotic effects.

Anybody know what this is in simple terms, does it cause vascular disease? There is seemingly a huge rise in Alzheimer's. My neighbour has it several of my friends are suffering as well. 
Thankfully I've never used fluoride toothpaste or had it in my water and I only drink weak milky tea.

Very poor sound = can't make out what it's about for or against - strange class about fluoride

Fluoride Can Seriously Kill Your Thyroid Gland

The Berkey | Oct 14, 2016
© The Berkey
There is a discouraging extent of research studies showing that the widely lauded benefits of fluoride dental health are more imagined than real. The fallout of sustained fluoride intake on general health is the core concern. Again, there is a mass of research literature on this matter, freely available and even being talked about across the globe.

However, this effort of endeavor was not considered by the York Review when their proposition was changed from "Studies of the effects of fluoride on health" to "Studies on the effects of fluoridated water on health." It is clearly evident that it was not considered by the BMA (British Medical Association), British Dental Association (BDA), BFS (British Fluoridation Society) and FPHM, (Faculty of Public Health and Medicine) since they all insist, as in the briefing paper to Members of Parliament - that fluoridation is safe and non-injurious to health.

It is a shameful fact yet it is much fitting to discover the effects of fluoridation, specifically to the thyroid gland.
It has been acknowledged since the latter part of the 19th century that certain communities, notably in Argentina, India, and Turkey were chronically ill, with premature aging, arthritis, mental retardation, and infertility; and high levels of natural fluorides in the water were responsible. Not only was it clear that the fluoride was having a general outcome on the health of the community, but in the early 1920s Goldemberg, working in Argentina showed that fluoride was displacing iodine; thus associating the damage and rendering the community also hypothyroid from iodine deficiency.

Fluoride Was Once Prescribed as an Antithyroid Drug

Most of us think that fluoride is generally a good supplement to reduce tooth decay. Fluoride, however, has also been prescribed as a drug to reduce the activity of the thyroid gland. Up through the 1950s, doctors in Europe and South America prescribed fluoride to reduce thyroid function in patients with overactive thyroids (hyperthyroidism).

Doctors selected fluoride as a thyroid suppressant based on findings linking fluoride to goiter, and, as predicted, fluoride therapy did reduce thyroid activity in the treated patients.

Moreover, according to clinical research, the fluoride dose capable of reducing thyroid function was notably low — just 2 to 5 mg per day over several months. This dose is well within the range (1.6 to 6.6 mg/day) of what individuals living in fluoridated communities are now estimated to receive on a regular basis.
Eminently harmful to the thyroid gland

This was the basis of the research in the 1930s of May, Litzka, Gorlitzer von Mundy, who used fluoride preparations to treat overactive thyroid illness. Their patients either drank fluoridated water, swallowed fluoride pills or were bathed in fluoridated bath water; and their thyroid function was, as a result, greatly depressed.....................................

USA - Council hears arguments against fluoride in water supply

By Brad Kellar Herald-Banner Staff
Council hears arguments
Brad Kellar
Judy Woods was among the people addressing the Greenville City Council Tuesday about the recent decision to resume adding fluoride into the water supply.

The Greenville City Council may decide to reverse course on adding fluoride back into the local water supply, after several people have told the council Tuesday they were unhappy about the recent decision to resume the practice. A split council voted two weeks ago to resume adding fluoride, based on the recommendation of a local dentist, after having suspended the practice for three years.

Judy Woods was one of those who spoke up at the start of Tuesday’s meeting, claiming there are several studies which recommend against it. “When you put it in the city water, there is no way to control the dosage,” she said, warning that a person who drinks eight glasses of water a day will receive twice as much as a person who drinks four glasses. She also warned that long term exposure is also harmful. “It stays in the bones and it can lead to problems there,” she said.

At the Oct. 11 meeting, Dr. Jeffrey Nelson, D.D.S. said there was no scientific evidence which indicated there was any harm to the public by the move, which would help lead to healthier teeth for the city’s population, whereas there is 70 years of studies available, “that show nothing but positive benefits.” But Kory Watkins said fluoride can be considered as a medication. “You can’t control the dosage that way,” Watkins said, also referring to medical studies which were opposed to the idea. Watkins also believes the addition of fluoride to the water supply is unconstitutional. “It goes against the consent of a person you are forcing to drink this medication,” he said.

The City of Greenville ceased fluoridation of its drinking water in Sept. 2013, due to the effort causing too much wear and tear on equipment. Director of Public Works John Wright has said the current fluoride concentration found naturally in the city’s raw water supply averages one-third to one-half of the fluoride level recommended by the EPA. Wright said the addition of fluoride to the city’s treated drinking water would raise the natural concentration of about .3 parts per million (ppm) up to the recommended level of 0.7 ppm, with the initial estimated $50,000 in expenses covered in the city budget.

Wright said he had heard that extremely high concentrations of fluoride in the water supply, several times the amount to be added, might result in hurting the teeth of baby’s or making bones brittle. “But we are way away from that,” Wright said on Oct. 11

However Nancy Estrada said Tuesday that the city was intending to add fluorosalicylic acid, and not natural fluoride, into the water supply. “It is basically toxic waste,” she said, asking the council to reverse its decision. The council voted 4-2 Oct. 11 to proceed with the addition of fluoride.

At the conclusion of the regular session agenda Tuesday, the council approved a motion by Council member Holly Gotcher to bring the issue back for another vote at the Nov. 8 meeting.

Australia - Babinda meeting of Cairns Council turns on issue of fluoride in water

Jim Campbell, The Cairns Post
October 26, 2016
CAIRNS regional councillors have gone out of their way to dodge advice on the controversial fluoride issue despite an official request by the region’s health professionals.
The council held its ordinary meeting at Babinda RSL Memorial Hall yesterday before a sizeable public gallery.

Councillors were happy to discuss a number of local agenda items, including updates about the success of the Babinda Harvest Festival, Gordonvale’s Great Pyramid Race and new economic dev­elopment plans for the two towns. But the mood changed when the issue of fluoride was raised toward the end of the meeting.

The council was presented with a petition from the newly revived Cairns Local Medical Association in support of water fluoridation. It was signed by 134 health professionals, including about 80 doctors, who were imploring the councillors to listen to scientific evidence about fluoridation.

Upon receipt of a public petition the council has three options: to receive the petition, to receive it and request a rep­ort back from council officers, or to “not receive” the document. A resolution to receive the petition and request a report back from officers had been prepared before yesterday’s meeting.

But Division 2 Councillor John Schilling changed the resolution to strike out the request for a rep­ort by officers. His change was supported by his fellow councillors, except for councillors Richie Bates and Brett Moller and Mayor Bob Manning, who said the petition deserved a report back from officers. But the three were outvoted.

Minutes later councillors were presented with two more petitions concerning suburban road infrastructure changes. They were accepted and will be formally responded to by officers. Cr Bates said the move by Cr Schilling and the subsequent vote was a “slap in the face” for Cairns medical professionals. “The majority of councillors have voted to receive the petition and then throw it straight in the bin,” he said.

“The two other petitions tabled today had officer reports requested so their substance could be investigated and considered. It is dumbfounding that councillors could not apply the same standard to the petition from medical practitioners.”

I expect they have looked at the whole scientific evidence.

Old video but.............

USA - South Bay Activists Threaten to Sue over Water Fluoridation

South Bay Activists Threaten to Sue over Water Fluoridation

By Jennifer Wadsworth 

Plans to start fluoridating the South Bay's water supply has drawn some backlash. (Photo by Steve Johnson, via Flickr)

Plans to start fluoridating the South Bay's water supply has drawn some backlash. (Photo by Steve Johnson, via Flickr)

  

Seven decades since American cities began fluoridating public water supplies to prevent tooth decay, the South Bay remains something of a holdout. It’s the largest metropolitan region in the nation to not fluoridate its water.

That’s about to change, but not without some pushback. Activists have threatened to sue the Santa Clara Valley Water District to prevent it from adding the mineral, which it planned to start doing this December.

The plaintiffs, groups called Safe Pure Water and Healthy Alternatives to Pesticides, plan to protest fluoridation at a water district meeting Tuesday night.

“Water district officials should stick to the agency’s legal charter and not masquerade as dentists prescribing fluoride to patients they have never even met,” said Brandi Madison, the group’s spokeswoman.

 

Two-thirds of the country drinks tap water treated with the chemical, which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention call one of the top public health achievements of the 20th century.

Although fluoridation is common, it has never been universally accepted. Detractors criticize the practice of adding it to the public tap as mass medication. Others take issue with the chemical itself, which they see as an environmental pollutant. A 2015 study linked fluoride with the prevalence of attention deficit disorders in the U.S.

 

Public health officials, however, say fluoridation is a boon for low-income communities who are unable to afford regular dental care. Santa Clara Valley’s water district, which provides wholesale drinking water for 1.8 million people, debated the issue for years before deciding to jump on board with the other 75 percent of the country.

 

Marty Grimes, a spokesman for the district, said the agency has been raising money with help from local nonprofits. The Santa Clara County Health Trust donated $1 million for the cause, with another $900,000 coming from the First 5 California and $500,000 from the California Dental Association Foundation.

They can always find money for fluoridation. How much do they charge for veneers to cover the fluorosis?

Cairns doctors table petition in support of water fluoridation

Cairns doctors table petition in support of water fluoridation

Kimberley Vlasic, The Cairns Post

A  PETITION in support of water fluoridation and bearing the signatures of about 80 doctors will be presented to Cairns Regional Council today.
Spearheaded by the newly revived Cairns Local Medical Association, the 134-strong petition calls on councillors to listen to medical advice ­and reintroduce the tooth-strengthening chemical to the local water supply.
The council decided to stop fluoride flowing through the city’s taps in 2013.
CLMA spokeswoman and orthopedic surgeon Sarah Coll said she felt compelled to campaign on the issue because of the “overwhelming” scientific evidence supporting the use of fluoride and backing of peak medical bodies.

“We felt that Cairns residents deserved to have the same standard of living available to southeast Queenslanders and we felt the council should move forward with the decision to return fluoride to our water,” she said.

But the petition could fall on deaf ears, with a council spokeswoman reiterating that the standing resolution of the council was not to fluoridate water for two reasons: “Firstly, expressed consent of the community should be sought before entering into a process such as fluoridation,” she said. “The results of the Our Cairns survey clearly indicate that there is no overwhelming community support for fluoride. “Secondly, that oral health is a responsibility of the State Government.”

Last week Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk committed to reinstating a capped infrastructure grants program for councils wanting to introduce fluoride into their drinking water. Water and waste committee chairman Councillor Richie Bates believes fluoridation should be mandated across the state but admits that is unlikely to happen.

“In the absence of universal dental health care, the most important thing we can do to protect the most vulnerable in the community is to introduce fluoridation,” he said. “At the moment the responsibility rests with councils ... the current councillors aren’t interested in the matter at all.”

Dr Coll hopes the petition will be the first step in a consultation with local experts.

“I’m not saying fluoride is going to cure dental decay – but what if it helps one kid?” she said.

Pathetic last statement - but what if it gives fluorosis to lots of kids.

== FLUORIDEGATE BEDFORD == Poison, Lies and Videotape: from July 2015 to October 2016

Not sure if current but worth listening too if you never heard it before.

Australia - Dental experts renew calls for Cairns to fluoridate water supply

James Cook University Head of Dentistry Professor Neil Meredith has offered to present scientific evidence about water fluoridation to Cairns Regional Council.
James Cook University Head of Dentistry Professor Neil Meredith has offered to present scientific evidence about water fluoridation to Cairns Regional Council.
Health
Dental experts renew calls for Cairns to fluoridate water supply

Kimberley Vlasic, The Cairns Post
October 23, 2016 8:00pm

PRESSURE  is  mounting  for Cairns Regional Council to fluoridate the local water supply after calls for state funding were answered.

Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk last week committed to reinstating a capped infrastructure grants program for councils wanting to introduce the tooth strengthening chem­i­cal into their drinking water.

Speaking from James Cook University’s inaugural Dentistry Clinical Day on Saturday, Australian Dental Association spokesman Michael Foley des­cribed the funding announcement as a “small, positive step”.

Dr Foley has renewed calls for Cairns Regional Council to support water fluoridation, citing the Queensland Child Oral Health Survey 2010-12, which found children in Townsville, where fluoride was introduced in 1964, had the best dental health in the state.

“My message to Cairns Reg­ional Council is accept that dental health is a problem in Cairns,” he said.

“Dental health in Cairns is a far greater problem than it is in Townsville, just four hours down the road, and I would simply urge Cairns to listen to health experts rather than conspiracy theory fringe groups.

“Certainly the ADA, JCU and Queensland Health are very willing to help and advise council on major scientific and public health matters.”

The council decided to stop fluoride flowing through the city’s taps in 2013 but a recent community survey showed most residents wanted it back.

Mayor Bob Manning is also in favour of water fluoridation.

Dr Foley believes councillors’ reluctance is due to a lack of public health expertise and pressure from “superbly well-connected” but “completely unscientific” anti-fluoride cam­paigners.

Head of dentistry Professor Neil Meredith has once again offered to explain the scientific evidence behind fluoridation after councillors ignored a formal request by Councillor ­Richie Bates for a JCU presentation last month.

“Dental caries (cavities) is a major issue here in this area and fluoridation will access such a large part of the community that will benefit dir­ectly,” said Prof Meredith.

“It will reduce the incidence of pain and disease and it will also potentially save lives bec­ause we see patients up here who are dying of diseases, rheumatic fever, bacterial end­ocarditis, which are indirectly associated with dental decay.”


Comments

Jane
Jane 39 minutes ago
I grew up drinking fluoridated water in Melbourne. I don't have any cavities or fillings, however my teeth are brittle and pitted. I've had to have four caps and cosmetic work done. My thyroid is also diseased as are those of many of my Melburnian friends. Fluoride has been implicated by peer reviewed studies to result in both these things. The problem with it being in the water is that you don't know what dose you get. And everyone is a different age, height and weight so the negative effects of fluoridated water dosing is again unknown.

There is no safe amount for babies drinking formula milk mixed with fluoridated water.

I'd rather have cavities than a diseased thyroid and teeth so brittle that they chip when I bite into an apple.


Kelvin
Kelvin 2 hours ago
Cairns Post can't leave it alone; why is Cairns Post hell bent on publishing pro Fluoride articles? Seems a bit suss to me!

If you can't look after your teeth by brushing and flossing daily and eating a healthy diet then I don't think it is fair to impose fluoride in drinking water for those who don't want it.

If you wish to take fluoride then by all means get tablets or whatever else to add to your water; don't mess with mine thank you!! think of the money that could be saved and put to good use instead of costly mass meddling with our drinking water.



Lesley
Lesley 3 hours ago
Like Jane and her friends below, I was also diagnosed with low thyroid activity 9 yrs ago. I was lucky in that I found out it is caused by flouride in the water. 6 months after I stopped ingesting fluoridated water my TSH hormone levels returned to normal. It has taken 8 yrs for one of my anti-body counts to recover. We have had to install (at our own expense) our own water supply because 2 yrs into my fluoride free regime my health deteriorated. Once I began to avoid physical contact with fluoridated water I came right. Living in Melbourne it is a difficult regime to maintain, I have to carry our own water around where-ever we go and I cannot eat/drink anything from supermarkets where manufactured using fluoridated water. I have utmost respect for anyone who believes fluoride is good for their teeth, by all means take as much of these chemicals as you like but please don't force these poisons onto those of us who do not wish to consume them. So undemocratic and very un-Australian forcing a fellow Australian to consume toxic waste product containing arsenic, cadmium and lead (according to the Australian Drinking Water Standards). The standards used to say that the concentration on these impurities depended on the fertilizer industry but this statement has been removed in more recent editions. Everybody deserves the right to refuse these toxins - it is all about freedom of choice, regardless of whether fluoride is good for you or not.


Dan Germouse
Dan Germouse 4 hours ago
The dismal "experts" in question either don't know the difference between correlation and causation, or are playing dumb. There is no credible evidence that taking fluoride in water has ever prevented a single dental cavity. The forced-fluoridation fanatics often try to claim that the low rates of dental caries in western European countries which do not have artificially fluoridated public water supplies are due to naturally occurring fluoride in water, or some other kind of artificial fluoridation such as salt fluoridation. They are lying. They also rely on studies which do not measure individual fluoride exposure, are not randomised, are not blinded, do not properly account for confounding factors, are highly prone to systematic error, and are typically funded by corporations such as Colgate-Palmolive.


Admin 2 hours ago
@Dan Germouse spot on mate.

FlagShare1ZaneLikeReply
Law-Rae
Law-Rae 5 hours ago
Seriously? How many times do we have to say it? WE DO NOT WANT FLOURIDE IN OUR DRINKING WATER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!My teeth are fine withoutit thank you very much and I grew up in unflouridated areas.Just stop this nonsense about how it helps your teeth. Stop lying. Stop acting like you know stuff, when you know stuff all.JUST STOP!


Ged
Ged 6 hours ago
Anyone coming forward on the 2008 Harvard IQ studies other than a Dentist?

Colin
Colin 6 hours ago
Does this Dentist have a degree in Toxicology, Endocrinology, Neurology, or any other internal medicine speciality?

Dentists can only talk about teeth, but they want you to swallow fluoride for a lifetime without consent.

This is unethical hypocrisy, dentists can not force you to swallow anything, when you sit in a dentist's chair, but want to force fluoride into your water, food, beverages and bloodstreams.


Dan Germouse
Dan Germouse 4 hours ago
@Colin

They don't even understand the effect on teeth. In reality, fluoride is toxic to teeth, not God for teeth.


Ben
Ben 7 hours ago
I personally do not want fluoride in my drinking water. In saying that, I have no problem if other people DO want it in their water.

What I do have a problem with is being forced to consume a chemical that I do not wish to, to me it's like someone comes up to me in the street and says "Here's some vitamins you have to have" and jabs a needle into me. It's an invasion of a chemical into my body that I do not want there, and council wants to take away my choice as to what goes into my body.

By all means, offer fluoride supplements or soluble tablets that people can put into their water if they wish, but don't force everyone to accept a chemical into their body that they don't want.

Michael
Michael 7 hours ago
It's too hot, and you drink too much water for there to be fluoride in the water in Cairns, too much stress on the kidneys. I'm 38 and recently had my teeth Xray'd after not drinking fluoridated water for 8 years, and the dentist said I have perfect teeth. I brush once a day with fluoridated toothpaste and eat a reasonable diet, go figure.

Fluoride Free Australia

Like This Page · Yesterday · 

 

The ADA, Australian Dental Association, and the Fluoride Lobby are desperate to stop the QLD Councils leaving the Forced Fluoridation fold, and will say anything to spin away from the facts..
Worldwide about 7 Billion people, and not a "noisy minority", do not have Govt Fluoride added to their tap water, so they have a CHOICE.
http://www.govnews.com.au/water-fluoride-capital-costs-to-be-covered/
Even the State govt have believed their lies.

"Dr Rick Olive, President of the Australian Dental Association has said, “It’s unacceptable that local councils are giving in to the pressure of a small number of fanatics..." Spin and spin.

Not new but worth seeing again even if a wee bit over the top.

Cllr Chris Cooke's letter to Hull councillors

"Councillors,

It was disappointing to read in the Hull Mail that you have decided to proceed with the mass medication of Hull citizens that you call “water fluoridation”.

For 14 years I have tried to get our own politicians to research this subject. I am met by a wall of resistance and ridicule that I would expect will also apply to your council chambers. But I openly campaigned at elections on this fluoride issue – as an Independent – and have had 3 terms in Tamworth Council and am currently a Staffordshire councillor – serving on the health committees. The people clearly don’t like fluoridation. Unfortunately my area has had enforced fluoridation for over 30 years now and the skeletal fluorosis (Public Health England will always diagnose “arthritis”) has got to me and I cannot re-stand.

Public Health England adopts Nelson’s “I see no ships” policy when it comes to the long term harm fluoridation can do. Their support for fluoridation goes way beyond the boundaries of their cherry-picked observations for “evidence”. THAT is their science! There is no magic chemical reaction to harden teeth - and not touch the rest of the body!! Ask them to identify the science – they can’t – they will just woffle about “benefits”. I suppose it fills the surgeries and hospitals and keeps them all busy?

With toothpaste – yes, fluoride works – on contact with teeth - much more so because it POISONS the bacteria which feed on sugars, that produce the acid that makes the teeth decay. Common sense! Fluoride is a registered poison only a little less poisonous than arsenic! It might only be 1 part per million BUT it is accumulated in the body and WILL do long term harm – causing the symptoms of many of our “unexplained modern diseases”, disrupting the endocrine system, and even being an underlying cause of obesity. Check it out! 10% of England is fluoridated – yet 60% of the top 5 towns for obesity are also fluoridated! Coincidence? I don’t think so!

But those are only my words.

Southampton Council was threatened with fluoridation by Public Health England in recent years. Public opposition was so great Hampshire Council produced an extensive scrutiny – which gave a report of 47 pages. I have linked it here.

http://ffo-olf.org/files/fluoridationPanelHampshireUK.pdf

It does not go as far as I might – but even so it is a damning report.

Public Health England was, quite regardless of local opposition, going to steamroller this through. But they lost on time limits and legal technicalities there in the end. But they are fanatical in their promotion of this frankly medieval policy – and one that appears so plainly to breach the Nuremburg Codes on forced medications.

I offer this report link in hope that some of you may wish to see something other that a Public Health England whitewash by a PHE employee that would risk his employment if he dared to do anything except support fluoridation.

Thank you,"

COSMETIC SURGERY | Why? & Veeners Consultation

Dentists who dismiss fluorosis as cosmetic are quick to offer veneers at sky high prices.

9.29.16 Sacred Cow BBQ with Dr. James Beck, Fluoride Activist

First video I've seen with Dr J Beck. Shame many professionals come out against fluoridation only when they retire but understandable as he says it is a problem for many.

USA - Percent of Europe Doesn’t Put Hydrofluorosilicic Acid in Their Water – Why Do We?

For over 60 years, governments have been adding fluoride to drinking water supplies all over the world. Since then, we’ve seen a dramatic reduction over time as communities all over the world have come together to stop water fluoridation within their communities. Examples in Europe include Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, 90 percent of the UK, Spain, Scotland, Norway, Switzerland and many more. It’s become more obvious everyday that industrial byproducts do not belong in our water.Just to be clear, we’re not talking about the natural element of fluoride here. Over 90 percent of Europe doesn’t fluoridate their water. (4)(5) It’s not just Europe, other countries like Japan, and communities within Australia and Canada have followed suit as well.

It was thought that small amounts of natural fluoride in drinking water would help with tooth formation, but these claims were always referring to the naturally occurring fluoride, never industrial toxic waste.

Despite being dubbed “one of the top ten public health achievements of the twentieth century,” and praised by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, it’s clear that we’ve been subject to manipulation of truth yet again. The United States has more people drinking fluoridated water than the rest of the world combined. Most industrialized nations do not fluoridate their water.

Water fluoridation started many years ago, when asbestos, PCB’s and DDT were all deemed safe. These chemicals have been banned since, when the people woke up, and it seems that water fluoridation will follow the same route. Opposition to water fluoridation has existed since its inception.

“In point of fact, fluoride causes more human cancer deaths than any other chemical. When you have power you don’t have to tell the truth. That’s a rule that’s been working in this world for generations. There are a great many people who don’t tell the truth when they are in power in administrative positions. Fluoride amounts to public murder on a grand scale. It is some of the most conclusive scientific and biological evidence that I have come across in my 50 years in the field of cancer research.” (2) – Dr. Dean Burk, Biochemist, Founder of Biotin, and Former Chief Chemist at the National Cancer Institute of Health.

What Exactly Are We Drinking?

So what exactly are we drinking? The substance added to our drinking water is called hydrofluorosilicic acid. It is a toxic waste substance created from the creation processes of aluminum, fertilizer, steel and nuclear industries. It’s not the natural element of fluoride, again, it’s industrial toxic waste.

For example, in the Phosphate Mining & Production Industry, much of the hydrofluorosilicic acid occurs from strip-mined rock. The rock is broken up, placed in giant vats where sulfuric acid is also added to get rid of whatever phosphate (and other contaminants) are in the rock. While the phosphate is extracted, the contaminants used to be released into the atmosphere. This was creating more pollution, and killing animal and plant life.