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

UK Against Fluoridation

Thursday, March 29, 2018

F.A.N.Newsletter

First, an update on our fundraiser. We have received $40,540 from 234 supporters since March 1st. This is simply a fabulous reaction to our goal of raising $75,000 by May 31st. Thank you to everyone who has donated.
We are hoping that we will get a total of 1,000 donors to be a part of “our” lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency. If you want to be part of this team effort to end the most misguided public health practice of the 20th century, you can do so with a donation of any amount. How to donate
You can donate either:
  • Online at our secure server.

  • Or by Check, payable to the Fluoride Action Network. Send your check to:
    Fluoride Action Network
    c/o Connett
    104 Walnut Street
    Binghamton NY 13905


Authors of US-funded fluoride-IQ study strengthen their landmark findings
Introduction.
From the day it was published (Sept 19, 2017) the Fluoride Action Network has been drawing attention to the US-government funded (National Institutes of Health) Bashash et al. study. This 12- year mother-child study found a strong correlation between the levels of fluoride exposure during pregnancy and lowered IQ in their offspring at 4 and 6-12 years of age.
Last week, at a conference on environmental epidemiology in Germany, members of this same research team announced additional findings that confirm and strengthen their original report (announced). Very young children, age 1-3 years, also show loss of IQ. In other words, their study now covers the ages of the offspring from one to twelve years. 
For the age of 1- 3 years, for every 1 mg/L increase in the urine fluoride level of their pregnant mothers, the children averaged 2.4 points lower IQ scores.  The finding was statistically significant and accounted for potential confounding factors.
Thomas et al., concluded “Our findings add to our team’s recently published report on prenatal fluoride and cognition at ages 4 and 6–12 years [the Bashash et al 2017 paper] by suggesting that higher in utero exposure to F has an adverse impact on offspring cognitive development that can be detected earlier, in the first three years of life.”
This finding adds strength to the rapidly accumulating evidence that a pregnant woman’s intake of fluoride similar to that from artificially fluoridated water can cause a large loss of IQ in the offspring.
The study was conducted in Mexico City and had over 400 mother-child pairs.  Fluoridated salt is the main source of fluoride exposure in Mexico City.  It is designed to give the same intake of fluoride as fluoridated water.  Mexico City drinking water fluoride is mostly low.  To get an estimate of total fluoride intake in the women and fluoride exposure to the fetus, the researchers measured the mother’s urine fluoride levels during pregnancy.  The levels were indeed in the same range as has been found in pregnant women in fluoridated New Zealand [Brough et al 2015] and in adults in other countries with fluoridated water.  There is no question that the intake of fluoride in this study is similar to and directly applicable to intakes in countries with artificial fluoridation.
Michael Connett, JD , who is heading up the Fluoride Action Network’s legal challenge calling on the EPA to ban the deliberate addition of fluoride to the drinking water under provisions in the Toxic Substance and Control Act (TSCA) said that,
This new finding from NIH's fluoride/IQ study further strengthens the evidence of fluoride’s neurotoxicity. The fluoride levels at issue in the study are within the range that pregnant women in the U.S. will receive, so the findings are clearly relevant to our ongoing case against the EPA.
Professor Paul Connett, re-appointed as director of the Fluoride Action Network,  hopes that this second paper will prompt the major media to cover this important landmark finding . According to Professor Connett,
"When you consider who funded this 12-year study (the NIH, the NIEHS and the EPA), the experience of the researchers,  the rigor with which study was conducted, and the seriousness of their findings, it is extraordinary that this study has yet to be covered by major news organizations like the NY Times, the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal."
According to Stuart Cooper, FAN’s campaign director, 
“If our political leaders are going to use the public's water supply to treat residents with fluoridation chemicals, than they have the responsibility to notify all citizens--especially pregnant women and parents--of known health risks and the necessary precautions to avoid harm.  When notified, the media also shares in this responsibility.  In this case, it has been left to not-for-profit watchdogs and whistleblowers like FAN."  
Thank you, 
Paul and Ellen Connett for the FAN fundraising Team

Additional Resources:
• The full TSCA petition submitted to EPA on Nov 22, 2016
• A shorter 8-page summary
• Follow the news reports here
• The Documents submitted into the court record
* The Timeline of the Lawsuit
See all FAN bulletins online

0 Comments:

Post a Comment



Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home