F.A.N. Newsletter
Yesterday Water Fluoridation received
three major body blows. The first was political; the second was professional and
the third was scientific.
Dr. David Bellinger is one of the world’s leading neuroscientists. He is recognized as the leading authority on lead’s neurotoxicity. This week in the important journal Pediatric Medicine he published a review (Environmental chemical exposures and neurodevelopmental impairments in children) of the chemicals known to, or suspected, of damaging the child’s developing brain. He included fluoride in that list. In his introduction he wrote:
1. The political body blow: Children's
health Defense Calls for End to Fluoridation
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s nonprofit team
published a must-read article yesterday condemning artificial water fluoridation
as "A Forced Experiment That Needs to End." While the Children's Health Defense
is primarily devoted to reducing exposure to mercury, part of its mission is to
demand scientific integrity and expose public health policies that are harming
children. Click below to read the
article:
Here is a
link
to the media release that FAN put out today on this major development.
Please forward this media release to your local media outlets.
2.
Professional body blow: A popular dental blog questions the need for fluoride in
dentistry.
While the
American Dental Association and the American Fluoridation Society claim there is
an absolute consensus amongst dentists that fluoride and fluoridation are "safe
and effective," we know this to be a myth. Hundreds of dentists have signed
FAN's professional statement calling for an end to fluoridation, and a week
doesn't go by without another dentist somewhere publicly questioning the safety
and benefits of the practice. In fact, I doubt the ADA has ever anonymously
polled its own membership on their support for fluoridation out of fear of what
might result.
This week, Dr. Mark Burhenne, DDS of Sunnyvale, California published a fairly comprehensive and well-researched article on his popular dental blog weighing the pros and cons of using both topical and non-topical fluoride, along with available alternatives.
In this major article, entitled “Ask the Dentist: Is Fluoride Safe?” he calls fluoride "a known toxin" that "most people don't truly need...especially when its ingested via the water supply," and concludes that "with safer alternatives available, it's just not worth the risk."
This week, Dr. Mark Burhenne, DDS of Sunnyvale, California published a fairly comprehensive and well-researched article on his popular dental blog weighing the pros and cons of using both topical and non-topical fluoride, along with available alternatives.
In this major article, entitled “Ask the Dentist: Is Fluoride Safe?” he calls fluoride "a known toxin" that "most people don't truly need...especially when its ingested via the water supply," and concludes that "with safer alternatives available, it's just not worth the risk."
3. The Scientific body
blow.
One of the world’s
leading neuroscientists reviews the neurotoxicity of fluoride and cities the
latest US government-funded studies
by Bashash et al, 2017 and 2018.
Dr. David Bellinger is one of the world’s leading neuroscientists. He is recognized as the leading authority on lead’s neurotoxicity. This week in the important journal Pediatric Medicine he published a review (Environmental chemical exposures and neurodevelopmental impairments in children) of the chemicals known to, or suspected, of damaging the child’s developing brain. He included fluoride in that list. In his introduction he wrote:
The
central nervous system (CNS) is especially vulnerable to perturbation by
environmental chemicals. Six of the 10 chemicals on the WHO’s list of chemicals
of greatest public health concern adversely affect the brain (air pollution,
arsenic, dioxin- and dioxin-like compounds, lead, mercury, and pesticides), with
some evidence suggesting that two of the remaining four might do so as well
(cadmium, fluoride) (http://www.who.int/ipcs/assessment/public_
health/chemicals_phc/en/). (our emphasis)
In the section devoted to fluoride he
cities the Chinese IQ studies and the US government-funded studies by Bashash et
al., 2017, 2018.
A review
of nearly three dozen studies conducted in China, mostly ecologic in design and
comparing children from a low-exposure village to a high-exposure village,
concluded that exposure to water with greater fluoride concentrations is
associated with lower IQ scores (66). Such studies provide only weak evidence,
however, lacking data on internal exposures (i.e., blood concentrations of
fluoride in individual participants or severity of dental fluorosis). Also the
villages compared likely differed not only in water fluoride concentrations, but
in also in terms of other factors that might affect the distributions of their
IQ scores (e.g., socioeconomic status, access to medical care, quality of
schools, etc.). Recently, studies that address these limitations have been
reported. In a relatively small pilot study in China, negative associations were
found between fluorosis severity, reflecting lifetime exposure, and children’s
scores on some neuropsychological tests (67). Similar findings were reported in
India (68), while in a Mexican study, children’s prenatal fluoride exposure
(concentration in maternal urine during pregnancy) were inversely associated
with IQ scores at ages 4 and 6–12 years (69). Increased exposure to fluoride has
also been linked, ecologically, to ADHD prevalence in the U.S. (70) and, in a
cohort study, to increased ADHD symptoms in Mexican children (71).
66. Choi
AL, Sun G, Zhang Y, et al. Developmental neurotoxicity of fluoride: a systematic
review and meta-analysis. Environ Health Perspect 2012;120:1362-8.
67. Choi
AL, Zhang Y, Sun G, et al. Association of lifetime exposure to fluoride and
cognitive functions in Chinese children: a pilot study. Neurotoxicol Teratol 80.
2015;47:96-101.
68. Khan
SA, Singh RK, Navit S, et al. Relationship between dental fluorosis and
intelligence quotient of school going children in and around Lucknow district: a
cross-sectional study. J Clin Diagn Res 2015;9:ZC10-5.
69. Bashash M, Thomas D, Hu H, et al.
Prenatal fluoride exposure and cognitive outcomes in children at 4 and 6-12
years of age in Mexico. Environ Health Perspect 2017;125:097017. 82.
70. Malin
AJ, Till C. Exposure to fluoridated water and attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD) prevalence among children and adolescents in the United States:
an ecological association. Environ Health 2015;14:17.
71. Bashash M, Marchand M, Hu H, et al.
Prenatal fluoride exposure and attention de cit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD.
symptoms in children at 6-12 years of age in Mexico City. Environ Int
2018;121:658-66.
According to FAN’s director, Paul
Connett, “What we have here is yet another leading neuroscientist acknowledging
what government authorities and the media in countries which practice
fluoridation are trying so hard to ignore or downplay, namely that fluoride – at
doses experienced in fluoridated communities - has the potential to lower the
intelligence of our children.”
Thank
you,
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home