F.A.N. Newsletter

GREAT NEWS!  The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California has ruled in our favor for the fifth time since the FAN-funded TSCA lawsuit was filed in November of 2016. 

On September 19^th, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) petitioned the court to delay the trial another 65 days after it had already been delayed six-months by the most recent shutdown of the federal government.  The EPA argued that a “new development,” along with their desire to add an additional expert witness required extending the discovery phase before the trial, which thankfully remains scheduled to start on February 3^rd. 

The new development EPA referenced is the completion of the National Toxicology Program’s draft review of fluoride’s neurodevelopmental effects on humans.  According to the EPA, the review “has been submitted to the National Academies of Sciences (NAS) for peer review," and is expected to be released to the public around the first week in November.  The NTP released their fluoride/neurotoxicity review on animals in 2016.

In response to the EPA’s request for a delay of the trial, FAN’s attorneys filed a reply brief arguing that the EPA had just agreed to the existing schedule one week prior to making the motion for delay.  They also argued that: 

EPA has been aware of the NTP’s … monograph for the entirety of this litigation. EPA is not only a member of NTP’s Executive Committee but provided comments to the NTP about the review prior to the review’s commencement in late 2016. At no point, however, during the 2+ years of this litigation has EPA expressed any concern that the NTP review could affect the scheduling of this case.

Additionally, they noted that the pending NTP monograph is only a draft, and “the release of a draft review provides no justification for derailing the entire schedule, including the trial date. Federal courts have long recognized the reduced trustworthiness of draft government reports, holding them inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 803.”

After consideration of these arguments, this week the Court made its decision, denying the EPA’s request, and maintaining the current trial timeline.  Not only does the victory keep the EPA from increasing the cost of the lawsuit by adding more evidence to examine and another expert witness to depose at the last minute, it also adds to the momentum our legal team has gained from four previous legal victories: 

• December 2017: The Court denied the EPA's motion to dismiss the case.

• February 2017: The Court denied a request by the EPA to prohibit our attorneys from obtaining internal documents and our experts from using recently published studies on prenatal fluoride and IQ.
  
• October 2018: The EPA objected to sharing internal documents — or allowing their employees to be deposed — about EPA's safety standards for fluoride. The Court ruled the EPA had to share this internal information.
  
• April 2019: The Court compelled EPA to both produce further documents and produce three more of its scientists for deposition.

Sincerely,

Stuart Cooper
Campaign Director
Fluoride Action Network

I suppose they could say it removed a lot of people.

Dire Fluoride/IQ Studies Must End Fluoridation in NYC

400+ Studies Show Fluoride is Toxic to the Brain

By Nys Cof, Neighbor

Maternal fluoride levels are linked to offspring's lower IQ, according to a carefully-researched and meticulously and extensively peer-reviewed US government-funded study published in the prestigious JAMA Pediatrics (August 2019).

Unnecessary fluoride chemicals are added to New York City's water supplies in a misguided attempt to reduce tooth decay in tap water drinkers.

After receiving widespread media attention, fluoridation proponents erroneously dismissed the JAMA study for invalid reasons including that it is "just one study" when it is actually one of multiple studies showing the same effect.

Critics claimed the study needs replication before it can be taken seriously. However, it already is a replication of another U.S. government-funded study published in 2017 (Bashash et al. ) which found similar effects. Both were mother-offspring studies that used urinary fluoride levels during pregnancy to assess cognition in the paired offspring. Both studies show a strong relationship between maternal exposure to fluoride and lowered IQ in offspring. Each revealed that the fetal stage appears to be the most vulnerable time period for fluoride's neurotoxicity.

In total, six studies report this mother-offspring relationship. Most alarming is that the JAMA study revealed IQ is lowered even by the small amounts of fluoride purposely added to public water supplies similar to that added to NYC's water supplies.

Pregnant women with higher urinary fluoride levels who had offspring with lower IQs were from the fluoridated cities. The JAMA researchers advise that pregnant women avoid ingesting fluoride as a precaution since the fetus derives no benefit from fluoride.

Biological plausibility of brain damage is supported by over 400 studies, 50 0f them human.

Fluoride is linked to other neurological disorders such as ADHD, poor memory, dementia, Alzheimer's Disease

More human-brain studies are here

It's not just brains that accumulate damaging fluoride levels, studies also link fluoride to arthritis, gastrointestinal effects, hypersensitivity, kidney disease, thyroid disease and more.

Fluoride is not a nutrient or essential for healthy teeth. Like all drugs, fluoride affects different people in differnt ways as drug package inserts, drug advertisements and TV commercials describe for most drugs.

Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director of the Fluoride Action Network says, "For decades fluoridation promoters argued that fluoridation causes no harm. These and other studies indicate that there is potential harm and it is serious. It is unconscionable to continue fluoridation until this is resolved. For those who doubt the current findings, more studies can be done once a moratorium on fluoridation is in place. To do otherwise is to condone a human experiment on millions of children."

Critics of the JAMA study claim: "it doesn't prove cause and effect." Connett says, "No epidemiological study can. However, over 400 animal and cell studies underline the JAMA study's biological plausibility."

Critics claim: "A loss of 3-4 IQ points is not enough to be concerned."

This is a predicted average drop for the whole population – such a shift could dramatically reduce the percentage of very bright children and increase the number of mentally handicapped, says Connett.

Critics claim: "Loss of IQ cannot be sex-related."

This claim ignores what the authors state about these sex differences. Christine Till the lead author responds to this and other criticisms in an interview on Canadian TV, says Connett

Contradicting other claims against the JAMA study, the mothers were not exposed to high fluoride levels and the study did control for lead, mercury, manganese, perfluoro-octanoic acid, and urinary arsenic.

Claims that thousands of studies show fluoridation is safe are not true. In fact, public health has been negligent about examining the health of people living in fluoridated communities.

Connett's video response to criticisms of the JAMA/IQ study https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjKUqf85E6Q&feature=youtu.be


Rivka Green, lead researcher for the JAMA study, explains the studies findings in this video interview on MedpageToday.com https://www.facebook.com/MedPageToday/videos/2396767130414029/

Quora

Julie Gates, former Worked as a Florist

Admin · Shared Sep 3

I have an intense interest in teeth! This answer is very informative.

As a dentist, what is one thing you think all people should know about dental hygiene that they might not know already?

James Stewart, DDS Dentistry & Microbiology/ Physics, University of Southern California (1972)

Updated Sep 4 · Upvoted by Poria Edalat, DDS Dentistry, USC School of Dentistry and Steven Edwards, DDS Dentistry, University of Southern California (1986)

Okay, you will love this one. There is no correlation between routine oral hygiene and the development of cavities. Go back and read that again.

Everyone “knows” that brushing and flossing prevents cavities, except when it doesn’t. I learned that in dental school in 1968, and told everyone the same thing for years. There are peoples throughout the world who have never brushed and flossed and never got a cavity.

The four factors are 1. saliva: do you have it, 2. pH or acidity of the areas in and around the teeth, 3. diet = sugar and carbohydrates, and 4. BACTERIA.

It has always seemed obvious that the removal of bacterial plaques/biofilms from tooth surfaces would remove bacteria, and bacteria cause cavities, right? True, but which bacteria? It is impossible to remove them all (1,500 different species) that grow right back.

If you don’t brush, your gums will bleed at the gum-line. If you don’t floss, you get bleeding between the teeth. But this has nothing to do with decay/cavities. This is gingivitis, the precursor of some types of periodontal disease.

The major culprit is Streptococcus mutans, which has 39 different strains at the last count, some worse than others. Some do nothing, and some cause rampant cavities. To stop cavities, you must change the bacterial population mix.

Fluoridated toothpastes have been shown in the last 65 years to reduce cavities in school-age children by 13.5%. This sounds good until you see what it means; in 1953 the average number in a child’s mouth was 3.7, now it’s 3.2. The old 1953 Crest TV add showed a child returning from the dentist yelling, “Look, Mom, no cavities!”, when what he meant was, “Look, Mom, only three cavities!”

So…what can you actually do? Fluoride treatments at the dentist last about three days. The dentist can apply fluoride varnish, which is better, but the results are not satisfying.

A dependents dental clinic at a Navy base in San Diego had no interest in replacing fillings over and over in the childrens’ mouths. They didn’t have enough dentists. Some kids never brushed and didn’t have cavities; some had immaculate mouths and they were out of control. They tried having them rinse with a prescription mouth rinse called Peridex (0.12% chlorhexidine) and it worked!!!, but only 2/3rds of the time. What was going on. Why didn’t it work all the time? Well it seems that it knocked out 34 out of the 39 strains of Staphylococcus mutans bacteria. Yeah!!! The other five strains happened to be the most aggressive of the lot. Boo! It made things worse for some kids. Also, Peridex stains the teeth brown, so, not so good.

Then they tried Betadine, an iodine containing disinfectant. It didn’t work. Then they tried laundry bleach, and they hit the jackpot.

For additional information and verification Google CAMBRA Caries Management By Risk Analysis. They will talk about testing the saliva and many other things. I tested saliva in 1970 and it didn’t always match what I saw in the mouths.

1. Keep brushing and flossing.

2. Have all of your cavities taken care of.

3. Mix two teaspoons of laundry bleach in one quart of water. Rinse with one ounce, once a week only, for one minute. Do this for 8 weeks after the last filling is placed. Start now. (tastes terrible, but it’s worth it).

4. Start chewing gum with xylitol sugar in it, three times a day (Orbit, Mentos, etc.) Any chewing gum that has xylitol listed as the first ingredient. Some will argue that the amount of xylitol is important, since this will determine whether it is bacteriostatic, or bacteriocidal. It turns out that it doesn’t matter since the outcome is the same; bacterial population mixture control.

If you have a WaterPik with a reservoir you can use the bleach solution in that once a week. This also provides great results if you have periodontitis (diseased gums). Do not substitute this for regular dental follow-ups.

Periodontal disease is not all the same. There are various forms of adult chronic periodontitis manifested by the types of calculus (tartar) that forms above and below the gum. Some are thin, some are thick, some are nodular, some are white, some are brown, some black, some are green, some are soft, some are hard. Some types are easy to remove, and others are tenacious. What this means is that they are all formed in different ways by different bacteria or combinations thereof.

The rate of destruction of bone also varies from individual to individual dependent on their health (diabetes especially) and unknown factors.

The treatment is periodic scaling under the gums, followed with 10 days of 20mg of doxycycline twice a day to knock down the inflammation that complicates healing.

Then rinse or irrigate with the dilute bleach solution (two tsp per quart of water) once a week. I first learned about this from…wait for it…a patient. I diagnosed possible surgery after deep scaling his sub-gingival calculus. He said, “Doc, let me show you something in a week”. He returned, and all of his sub-gingival calculus was now above the gum; his inflamed gum shrunk to a health level. He said an older dentist told him about this in 1970, who learned it from an even older dentist. He said he felt stupid for not continuing the bleach rinses. The did taste awful.

There is another type of gum disease that most dentists don’t know about that conventional treatment cannot treat. The patient just keeps getting worse and worse, loses teeth, and the dentist just scratches his head. Aggressive periodontitis is caused by one particular bacteria and occurs in about 4% to 7% of young adults. It is rapid, and I have seen 22 year olds with the back teeth very loose, called “floaters”, with no other treatment except the extraction of all the back teeth. Sometimes it’s also the front teeth. Another name for it is “poor man’s periodontitis”. It runs in families because of cross contamination; kissing is one way.

It is easily diagnosed by the distinctive smell. Regular periodontitis smells to me like mothballs and cedar. Aggressive periodontitis smells the same as the bottom of a dumpster in the produce portion of a market. The dentist has to take his mask off to do this.

The good news is that aggressive periodontitis is easily treated with the antibiotic doxycycline after scaling (higher dose, 5X, than mentioned before). And in many cases, the bone may grow back. Because it is fast, it has to be caught early.

It is also susceptible to control with the dilute bleach solution.

There, I bet you didn’t know that.

BY 2024, FLUOROSILICIC ACID MARKET IN EUROPE TO REGISTER SIGNIFICANT CAGR

.....North America fluorosilicic acid market demand driven by the U.S. and Canada may register gains close to 5.5% by 2025. Growing consumer consciousness towards water related diseases such as dental or skeletal fluorosis may boost the product demand. Dental fluorosis is most common in the region among children as they tend to swallow the toothpaste instead of spitting it out, which may increase fluoride levels in the body, therefore fluoride supplements are provided in right amounts to prevent these diseases............

Fluoride and Fluorinated Pesticides Market to Reach a ...

Weekly Columnist-19 hours ago

The market research report on the Global Fluoride and Fluorinated Pesticides Market presents a comprehensive assessment of the market. It does so through ...

NZ - Disappointment and concern over lack of progress passing fluoride bill

A move to give district health boards the power to decide whether to fluoridate drinking water has yet to pass into law.

More people will suffer from tooth decay because of a lack of progress passing a bill around fluoride decision-making, a former politician says.

The New Zealand Dental Association has also expressed concern at the lengthy process to pass the bill, which will empower district health boards (DHBs) to decide if fluoride should be added to drinking water. Territorial authorities currently make that decision.

The National-led Government introduced the bill in 2016. It passed its first reading that year with broad support, and the health committee produced its final report on the proposed law change in May, 2017. 

Asked why the bill had not progressed, Health Minister David Clark said the Government had a busy legislative agenda. "It's my intention to advance this legislation as the schedule of the House allows."


Former associate health minister Peter Dunne, who introduced the changes, said he was disappointed at the lack of progress. "I would have thought it would have been a relatively easy thing to progress fairly quickly.

"The longer it takes to bring this into effect the more people who will suffer bad oral health consequences through not having access to fluoridated water."

New Zealand First, part of the coalition Government, was the only party that opposed the bill at its first reading in 2016.

While it was just a suspicion, Dunne said if the party was holding up the process it was appalling. "Everyone else is in favour. There's a clear majority and the health benefits are obvious, so why it hasn't proceeded is a bit beyond me."

Health Minister David Clark says the Government has a busy legislative agenda, but he intends to advance the bill "as the schedule of the House allows".

Health Minister David Clark says the Government has a busy legislative agenda, but he intends to advance the bill "as the schedule of the House allows".
A New Zealand First spokesperson said the party retained its position that local governments should make the decision by referendum.

About 54 per cent of the New Zealand population receives fluoridated water, according to the 2017 health committee report. The Ministry of Health says water fluoridation is a proven public health measure to reduce tooth decay. Some groups, such as Fluoride Free NZ, are vehemently opposed.

Dental association spokesman Dr Rob Beaglehole said water fluoridation had a massive impact on reducing tooth decay. 

"It's horrendous, in terms of the unnecessary pain and suffering which is caused on a day-to-day basis because people, particularly children living in poverty, don't have access to fluoridated water.

"The number one reason children are admitted to hospitals in New Zealand is to have a general anesthetic to have their teeth taken out."

Beaglehole said the association was concerned at the length of time the bill was taking to pass, but was optimistic it would with broad support. While it did not mandate fluoridation, he said transferring the decision to DHBs would help extend protection to more communities.

"We want all the parties in the house to support this, to vote for this. Because it's not a National thing. It's not a Labour thing. What it is is a pain and suffering issue."

National health spokesman Michael Woodhouse said he strongly supported DHBs having the ability to decide on water fluoridation.

Canterbury District Health Board candidates are divided about whether Canterbury's drinking water should be fluoridated. 

Canterbury District Health Board candidates are divided about whether Canterbury's drinking water should be fluoridated.
It was customary for National to consider its position on bills when they came up, Woodhouse said. However, Clark could take a "very strong signal" about how National would vote on the bill at its second reading given its previous support.

"It's time that bill progressed. I don't accept that the Government is that busy that it can't do it. The order paper is the thinnest it's ever been," Woodhouse said.

Should Christchurch's water be fluoridated?

Wellington and Auckland both have it, but drinking water in Christchurch, New Zealand's second biggest city, isn't fluoridated. 

Canterbury medical officer of health Dr Alistair Humphrey said the benefits of fluoridating drinking water were clear. 

"If your grandmother can't get a hip operation it's in large part because of theatres being tied up by preventable problems. One of the most preventable and significant problems is dental caries in children.

"If you look at the science, science would suggest fluoridation is of great benefit, particularly for the poorest people in our society."
Instead of leaving the decision on whether to add fluoride to drinking water to DHBs or territorial authorities, Humphrey said there needed to be national leadership.
"If you leave it up to locally elected people, they are concerned about the views of their constituents and the effect of anti-fluoride people on their election prospects."
Stuff canvassed Canterbury District Health Board candidates to ask if they supported adding fluoride to drinking water in Canterbury.

Of the 15 who responded, five candidates were in favour, seven were against, and three were undecided or held nuanced views that could not easily be categorised. 

USA - Don’t drink Durango’s fluoridated water

A recent landmark study examines the association between fluoride exposure during pregnancy and IQ scores of children. In this study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics, the authors found higher levels of fluoride through water fluoridation during pregnancy is associated with lower IQ scores in children 3-4 years old.

The study showed that fluoride crosses the placenta and accumulates in the brain and alters proteins and neurotransmitters in the central nervous system. This is not the first study showing this kind of outcome. Actually, there are over 60 others from around the world, but this is the first one published in JAMA. It’s the kind of study proponents of fluoridation have said doesn’t exist. This should act as a warning that something is hazardous about water fluoridation.

The timing is significant. There is a federal lawsuit filed by a coalition of environmental and public health groups, including the Fluoride Action Network, which seeks a ban on water fluoridation. The suit is scheduled for hearing on Feb. 3, 2020. The EPA is being sued for failing to follow its own guidelines for Toxic Risk Assessment.

I encourage citizens of Durango not to drink our tap water. Filter it using fluoride filters available at cwrenviro.com or drink reverse osmosis water, both of which eliminate chlorine derivatives and 95% of the neurotoxin sodium fluoride.

I also encourage Durango citizens to contact the City Council and request it discontinue water fluoridation until it is declared totally safe for all. Take action now on behalf of our children’s future.

Jim Forleo

Durango

Cholesterol-lowering drugs may accelerate onset of Parkinson’s disease, according to researchers

I've reprinted this as I gave up all my tablets including statins because of the side affects. I had acid reflux and small bruises on the back of my hands both symptoms have now gone. OK I maybe wrong and I'll end up with another stroke but at 84 I can't say I want to live until I become too frail.

Kansas Bill Would Make Cities Warn Of Dangers Of Fluoride In Water | Talking Points Memo

Some Kansas lawmakers are worried about those precious bodily fluids.

The Kansas House’s Health and Human Services Committee has on its agenda Monday a bill that would require cities to warn citizens if fluoride is added to drinking water. The measure, which declares fluoride dangerous, has been criticized by public health officials and the Kansas Dental Association, according to The Associated Press.

The bill, known as “HB 2372,” mandates that all Kansas cities and other local government entities “providing water service that artificially fluoridate their community drinking water must notify the consumers of that treated water, that the latest science confirms that ingested fluoride lowers the I.Q. in children.”

The Kansas Dental Association has called the bill “simply a scare tactic designed to put unnecessary fear in the citizens of Kansas.”

“Water fluoridation has been proven for decades to be a safe, health and effective way to reduce tooth decay,” the association said in a statement earlier this month. “While fluoride opponents will declare water fluoridation to be harmful, science and the health profession say otherwise.”

But at least some of the bill’s supporters consider the matter life and death.

“I’m doing the most pro-life work I’ve ever done with this fluoride fight,” Mark Gietzen, a conservative anti-abortion activist who helped draft the fluoride bills, told the Associated Press earlier this month.

According to the Associated Press, the bill’s claims about fluoride and I.Q. comes from a 2012 Harvard study that focused on children in China, which unlike the U.S. has a high natural occurrence of fluoride in its water.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recognized water fluoridation as “one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century.”

Press Reader

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

• Windsor Star
• 21 Sep 2019

Caution dictates no to fluoridation

It would be wisest to exercise the precautionary principle when it comes to water fluoridation, and err on the side of caution. A new and reputable study out of Toronto, and published in Jama Pediatrics, demonstrated that pregnant women ingesting fluoridated water had children with lowered IQ scores.

This affected male children, who are already more prone to such things as autism. Also, it is a medically known fact that fluoride competes with iodine uptake by the thyroid gland, which can cause hypothyroidism, among other thyroid issues. In addition, fluorosis is known to cause brittle bones.

This study adds to the mounting evidence that this neurotoxin should not be forced upon the population against our free will.

Lynn Kummer, Lasalle

F.A.N. Newsletter

On Tuesday, Medpage Today held a live Facebook interview with the lead author of the recent U.S. government-funded JAMA Pediatrics Mother-Offspring study. The study linked prenatal exposure to fluoride with lower IQ for the offspring of women living in optimally fluoridated” Canadian cities.  Rivka Green, MA, a doctoral student in clinical developmental neuropsychology at York University in Canada, answered questions, clarified misconceptions, refuted criticisms, and provided an in-depth look at her research during this captivating 45-minute video interview.  

Critical statements from the interview included Ms. Green pointing out that the researchers found...

“...there was no safe level” of fluoride exposure during pregnancy.  

While the study looked at total fluoride intake from all sources, she revealed that for pregnant women, “60-80% of their fluoride consumption came from fluoridated water,” clearly implicating the practice as the primary contributor to the outcome.

Green also put the level of harm into perspective, drawing numerous parallels to lead and stating that 14% of the women in a fluoridated region have a urinary fluoride level of 1mg/liter or higher--the amount that reduced IQ by an average of 4.5 points--equating to tens-of-thousands of Canadians and hundreds-of-thousands of Americans. 

When asked about the differences found in boys versus girls when looking at urinary fluoride levels, Green pointed out that greater sensitivity to neurotoxins in males was a common - even expected - result found in neurotoxicity research on both humans and animals, but that the difference in IQ loss disappeared when looking at the mother’s accumulative fluid intake.  She suggested that this result was most likely due to post-natal exposure, primarily from consuming formula reconstituted with fluoridated water.  Such exposure spared no sex from cognitive impairment.  

Towards the end of the interview, a pro-fluoridation propagandist asked Green if she would recommend pregnant women to avoid fluoridated water.  Green responded, "we do recommend...the precautionary principle here..to reduce fluoride intake during pregnancy," adding that "While there is no potential benefit to the fetus, there is potential risk.”

WATCH THE INTERVIEW WITH RIVKA GREEN

We also recommend watching the study's lead author, Christine Till, PhD, respond to criticisms of the study in an interview on Canadian TV.

Experts Urge Pregnant Women to Avoid Fluoride

According to JAMA's Altmetric page on the Green et al. 2019 paper, it is now the second most discussed study ever to be published by JAMA Pediatrics, and is in the top 5% of all 13.5-million research articles tracked by Altmetric.  This widespread coverage has made it impossible for the dental-lobby to conceal it from public health world, resulting in a growing number of practitioners publicly warning pregnant women to protect themselves from fluoride exposure, including the physicians/editors of JAMA's Pediatric journal and entire JAMA network.  Below are some additional examples we'd like to share:

• Periodontist Joseph Nemeth, DDS
  
• Family Medicine Physician Ken Berry, MD
  
• Osteopathic Physician Joseph Mercola, MD
  
• Physician Mike Cirigliano, MD
  
• Green City Dental

A Wills via outbound.mailhop.org	18:03 (30 minutes ago)
to awills

I’ve received the following from George Pinnell. See below. Thank you George, that is very helpful for anti-fluoridationists. Ann

-

Many thanks for the reminder about this programme, which I did not watch at the time,made by Atlas Films, in association with Diamond Docs, for the BBC.

Perhaps people should be encouraged to circulate the link, and comments extracted from the programme to their local Councillors and MP?

Best wishes.

George

This 82 minute programme, first broadcast 19.11.18, was recently repeated on BBC4 and the link to BBC iPlayer should be available until 8.10.19.

Storyville - Poisoning America: The Devil we Know