- a companion piece to Fluoride: America's Drug of Choice
" Fluoride is any combination of elements containing the fluoride ion. In its elemental form, fluorine is a pale yellow, highly toxic and corrosive gas. In nature, fluorine is found combined with minerals as fluorides. With hydrogen it forms hydrogen fluoride gas which, in a water solution, becomes hydrofluoric acid...Fluorine compounds or fluorides are listed by the US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) as among the top 20 of 275 substances that pose the most significant threat to human health." ~ Researcher Andreas Schuld
Sodium fluoride is often used to fluoridate the public water supplies, though hexafluorosilicic acid and sodium hexafluorosilicate are more commonly used additives in the US. A lethal dose of fluoride for a human being weighing about 154 lb is estimated at 5 to 10 grams. In high doses, it has been shown to affect the heart and circulatory system. That 154 lbs estimate poses a serious problem for children and a great number of adult women who are well under the weight estimate.
In the 1940s, the optimum level of fluoride to be added to the water supply was 1 ppm which is equal to 1 mg. It was based on assumptions that the total intake of fluoride would be 1 mg per day, assuming that 4 glasses of water were consumed per day. That's interesting since it's now recommended that humans drink at least 8 glasses of water per day for optimum health benefits. In addition, a study conducted by researchers at the University of Iowa (reported in the Journal of American Dental Association) found that 71% of more than 300 soft drinks contain .60 ppm fluoride. We now have fluoride being put into toothpaste, beverages, processed food, vitamins and mineral supplements. There is also some naturally occurring fluoride in fresh fruits and vegetables because of the fertilizer they are grown in. It is now estimated that the amount of fluoride being ingested is about 8 mg. That is 8 times the amount originally estimated to be the optimum dose.
Most studies have examined the addition of fluoride to water by use of sodium fluoride, rather than focusing on the less expensive forms of fluoride which are more widely used. They are silicofluoride, hydrofluosilic acid and sodium silicofluoride. A study completed in 1999, using 280,000 children from Massachusettes, showed levels of lead in the blood were significantly higher in communities using these cheaper compounds than in towns using the sodium fluoride or none at all.
There is a great concern about the interaction of fluoride compounds when added to water with other water additives. For instance, aluminum compounds are often added to water as clarifying agents. All by itself, aluminum isn't absorbed by the body, but when fluoride is present, they form aluminum-fluoride which is easily absorbed. A long term study published in 1988 showed that even low levels of the compound in drinking water delivered more aluminum to the brain than concentrated aluminum fluoride. It also found that low levels of both aluminum-fluoride and sodium fluoride cause severe kidney damage and lesions to the brain similar to the kind found in Alzheimer's and other types of dementia.
Then there's the thyroid connection. Fluoride has been used for many years to treat hyperthyroidism, but at levels below the present “optimal” intake of 1mg per day. Fluoride has the ability to mimic thyrotropin (TSH). There are over 150 symptoms and associations of hypothyroidism. Almost all of them are also symptoms of fluoride poisoning. There are quite a number of experts and researchers who feel that fluoride may be a part of the near epidemic levels of hypothyroidism.
During an interview in 2001, researcher Andreas Schuld stated, "In the liver, all fluorides interfere with the metabolism of thyroid hormones, creating thyroid disorders and associated diseases, such as muscle diseases, heart disease, etc."
Taking the raw data from a large study conducted by the National Institute for Dental Research (NIDR), Dr. John Yiamouyiannis concluded that fluoride didn't have any decay preventing success. There was very little difference in the DMFT values (the mean number of decayed, missing or filled teeth) of about 40,000 children. It also didn't matter whether they had grown up in fluoridated, non-fluoridated, or partially fluoridated areas. Up until he died in 2000, Dr. Yiamouyiannis was the world's leading authority on the biological effects of fluoride.
While there are many concerns associated with the ingestion of too much fluoride, the most recognized concern is that of dental fluorosis where tooth enamel fails to crystalize properly on permanent teeth. However, the other, less publicized concerns have been in relation to its effects on the human brain and other organs within the body. Based on her own research, Dr. Phyllis Mullenix believes that fluoride acts in a way that lowers the IQ of children. Studies conducted in the 1950s appear to support her research as they show a link between Down's Syndrome and natural fluoridation.
Toxic Water video
This is yet another example of information that has been removed from public view. There is wide-spread suppression of information that may be damaging to companies such as Monsanto. This video was removed from publication in order to protect the images of the very companies that are destroying our health.
During the latter half of the 1950s and into the earlier years of the 60's, French-trained endocrinologist, Ionel Rapaport presented evidence of a fluoride link to Down's Syndrome. His study showed how the age of women bearing Down's Syndrome children decreased in direct relation to the increase of fluoride in the water supply. As the level of fluoride in water increased, the age of the women giving birth to affected babies decreased.
For those who are die-hards, those who can't be convinced that fluoride is not a substance that should be ingested for ANY reason, consider the case of Dr. William Marcus, who up until 1991, was the chief toxicologist for the EPA's Office of Drinking Water. After examining a study conducted by Battelle for the National Toxicology Program on the toxicology of fluoride, he concluded that there were dose-related increases in bone cancer in male rats. He was especially concerned by the fact that the levels of fluoride which caused the cancers in rats were lower than those seen in humans who ingested lower amounts over a longer period of time. Such levels are generated because fluoride is not secreted from the body, but remains to accumulate to toxic levels.
He was fired in 1991 after he insisted that an unbiased evaluation of fluoride induced cancer potential be conducted. After a three year legal battle, he was reinstated and the truth behind one of the most sinister coverups was exposed. Secretary of Labor Robert B. Reich, who ordered the EPA to reinstate Dr. Marcus, stated, “the true reason for the discharge was retaliation", specifically because Dr. Marcus “authored and disseminated a memorandum criticizing a draft report concerning toxicology and carcinogenesis studies, which the EPA contemplated using in regulating fluoride levels."
One of the EPA investigators had been ordered by his superior to shred evidence gathered during the investigation. Robert Reich also noted that the EPA was guilty of withholding evidence that would have supported Dr. Marcus in court. And though the following information was not mentioned by Mr. Reich, it was recorded in the hearing before one Judge Clark: clear evidence that the EPA tampered with witnesses and threatened EPA employees with dismissal if they testified in favor of Dr. Marcus. EPA management forged his time cards in order to accuse him of misusing official time.
Why did the EPA take this action against Dr. Marcus? Because his valid concerns would eliminate the EPA's ability to make use of their fabricated study conclusions. They also wanted to punish him for criticizing the Public Health Service for misrepresenting the results of the Yiamouyiannis/Burk Study which showed an excess of 10,000 cancer deaths each year from fluoridation.
In addition, Dr. Marcus found problems with the designs of the study because animals used as controls are not supposed to receive any of the chemical given to the treated animals. In the study, control animals were given 6 to 7 times more fluoride than humans receive from fluoridated water, presumably in an effort to equalize the incidence rates of cancers.
Who is Battelle? On their website they make the claim, “Battelle Memorial Institute (Battelle) is a 501(c)(3) charitable trust headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. Our 22,000 employees in more than 130 locations worldwide are dedicated to scientific, educational, technology and community endeavors and investments for a safer, healthier, and more productive tomorrow.” 93% of their overall funding comes from the very industries seeking to have their products approved and the US Federal government.
This is also posted on their website: “National Security and Defense- Battelle is a valued industry and government collaborator in securing a safer future for all generations”as well as, “Health and Life Sciences- We're applying a robust science and technology foundation to help solve the most complex challenges in human health through advances in medicine, healthcare, and agriculture.”
Battelle Memorial Institute ranks 24th of the top 100 government contractors. Of the services they provide to the US government, the majority of work is done for the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Air Force, the Department of Defense, and Homeland Security. Contracts procured for 2011 equal a total of $1,330,333,000.
Interview with Christopher Bryson, investigative journalist and author of "The Fluoride Deception"
You might be wondering why I've included the information regarding Battelle Memorial Institute, and made special note of two of their listed areas of service. The fact that Battelle is the company which generated the initial study, the fact that it was commissioned by The National Toxicology Program (a government agency), and the fact that the Environmental Protection Agency (another government agency) attempted to commit fraud against the public with pro-fluoridation manufactured results is an indication that healthy teeth are not the real purpose behind the actions.
In a previous article titled “Fluoride - America's Drug of Choice” I presented information which may point to a government agenda for more nefarious purposes. None of the information contained is anything less than an easily proven fact. An internet search of any of the individuals presented will bring up numerous articles about their backgrounds as well as their areas of research or practice.
The final message I left was one that alluded to fluoridation being yet another weapon in an arsenal aimed at dumbing down America. Through her extensive research, Dr. Phyllis Mullenix discovered that among many things, fluoride actually lowers the IQ's of children, as well as causing hyperactivity. When she presented her findings to the NIDR (National Institute of Dental Research), a division of the National Institute of Health, she was severely punished. She lost her job, her personal research equipment and computers were destroyed, all grants and funding for research were vacated, and she was told her research was not “their kind of science,” though she had been given the task by the Director of the Forsythe Dental Institute for whom she researched. Immediately upon dismissal, Forsythe received a quarter million dollar grant from the Colgate company.
Her story can be read here: http://www.fluoridationfacts.com/education/propaganda/980100_mullenix.htm
To read about Charles Eliot Perkins (named in my first article) in an “Address in Reply to the Governor's speech in Parliament” by Harley Rivers Dickinson, an Australian Liberal MP.
“In my view the fluoridation establishment has been more influential and more misleading in the information it provides than the uranium/nuclear power industry.” ~ Dr. Mark Diesendorf, author of Fluoridation: Breaking the Silence Barrier
Flouridation & Down Syndrome, an exerpt from Fluoridation: The Great Dilemma by George Waldbott, Ph.D, in collaboration with Albert Burgstahler, Ph.D, and H. Lewis McKinney, Ph.D
There are many, many sources of information both for and against the use of fluorides in drinking water as well as numerous other products. What I've found quite interesting is the fact that I have not found much in the way of pro-fluoride articles that have different information or even approaches. In one example a commenter posted, the information to be found was posted on the website for the US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. The authors of the work cited were C. Parnell, H. Whelton, and D. O'Mullane, all of University College Cork, University Dental School in Ireland. Ireland has been fighting water fluoridation for years. Their struggles are identical to those found in the United States. They are the only country in the European Union which still has mandatory water fluoridation. Helen Whelton and Denis O'Mullane have not conducted any studies regarding fluoride's effects on anything outside of dentistry. They have no expertise in medicine or nutrition. They certainly are not fluoride experts beyond what it may or may not do for human teeth.
If you found this information helpful, please pass it on by clicking the Tweet, Like, or +1 button provided at the top of the page.
Fluoride and Professional Prospectives
There is far too much information about Whelton and O'Mullane to go into at this time. But O'Mullane has been associated with big business, having been the first chairman for the pro-fluoride website “Unilever Dental Faculty”. Unilever (click for info on the corporation) is a British-Dutch multinational corporation that owns many of the world's consumer product brands in foods, beverages, cleaning agents, and personal care products (toothpaste, mouthwashes, etc).
If you want a thorough understanding about Prof. O'Mullane and Helen Whelton, please go to this National Health Federation website page. They are a non-profit health organization.
"Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not of all time." ~ Dr Robert Carton, a scientist who spent 20 years working for the US Environmental Protection Agency.
Since 1990 over 45 US cities have rejected fluoridation. In 1990 forty US dentists brought a case against the American Dental Association contending that the Association purposefully shielded the public from data that links fluoride to genetic defects, cancer and other health problems. All US fluoride toothpaste must carry a poisons symbol, with a warning to contact the nearest poisons unit if more than a pea sized amount of toothpaste is swallowed.
In 1997 the Union of Government Scientists of the United States Environmental Protection Agency voted unanimously to co-sponsor a Californian initiative to ban fluoridation, stating "Our members' review of the body of evidence over the last 11 years, including animal and human epidemiology studies, indicates a causal [NB CAUSAL] link between fluoride/fluoridation and cancer, genetic damage, neurological impairment and bone pathology". Exerpt from Fluoridation: The Facts
Fluoride is poison. It is not beneficial to human beings in ANY way other than to line the pockets of the few.
"We've got a network of evil in this country that we can't hide from any longer."---Fluoride the Aging Factor by John Yiamouyiannis
- Fluoride: America's Drug of Choice
The heated debate over the alleged safety of fluoridated water has picked up steam over the last several decades. Released information brought about through the FOIA has unleashed an avalanche of criticism on those who maintain it is beneficial to th
- Killer Coffee - brought to you by Donald Rumsfeld
How did the manufacturers of NutraSweet manage to get approval of their compound if it's as dangerous as we are told? The story is a common one where greed and financial power are blended with that of political power.
- The Aging Factors In Our Food
Emerging studies are proving over and over again that Americans can't rely on the Federal Food and Drug Administration to protect our health from the greed of big business. There thousands of approved food additives and preservatives that have been l
- Are Hormones Contributing To The Obesity Epidemic?
Growing concerns over the issue of ever increasing obesity rates have experts urging Americans to eat healthy and utilize an exercise program. But how easy is it to eat healthy when harmful additives and hormones have become an unwanted but definite
RobSchneider on October 07, 2011:
Hi Terri, You might want to add this to your list of sources. Mosaic is a producer of fluoride. This is their warning label: http://www.mosaicco.com/images/Hydrofluosilicic_Ac...
Link courtesy of http://ppjg.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/how-to-make-y...
Pass it on to your "boyfriend" from Texas. I'd like to see his response. :)
Terri Meredith (author) from Pennsylvania on October 02, 2011:
Alastar: Several years ago, it was difficult to find a wealth of information on the real hazards of fluoride. Mostly what was found were only the bits that aligned with the "Conspiracy theories". That's one of the reasons that so many people don't pay attention to what has been happening over the last decade. They've made up their mind that it's all a conspiracy theory for nuts who apparently consume too much fluoride, among all the other chemicals we know our government endorses against warnings by prominent researchers.
I don't think I will ever be able to wrap my mind around the logic that dictates...if there's any hint of possible conspiracy involved, it can't be true. Perhaps all the chemicals being ingested by the general public have already done the work designed - people are no longer able to make connections between obvious points of interest. It's only been 20 years since Dr. Marcus was the victim of a conspiracy in the EPA. That he prevailed is amazing, but why have so many people forgotten the incident? Dumbed down? Docile? Accepting of authority?
Alastar Packer from North Carolina on October 02, 2011:
In my opinion one of the best info articles on this site written and reported on by the very best at this Terri Meredith. The evidence for everything you've written on about fluoride is over-whelming. Did I hear a few months ago the major media finally reporting, well, maybe it's not so great for our teeth and it may cause some problems. Whenever they admit something like that you can bet it's a lot worse than "may cause some problems." Same goes for Tuna fish as well. Thank you Terri for your guts, intelligence, research, and clarion call.
Terri Meredith (author) from Pennsylvania on October 02, 2011:
Rob, One of the reasons so many people don't know the truth is for the simple reason that in the beginning of the whole fluoride debate, the industries that stood to lose a lot of money did what they do best...spent millions on lobby efforts and paid PR specialists to put a positive spin on fluoride while using the age old techniques of ridiculing those who spoke out. Then there are instances like those that happened to Dr. Marcus and Dr. Mullenix. The government's hand in these things throws a dark shadow over it all. There is no valid reason for our government agencies to do what the EPA did. While Dr. Marcus was reinstated, those who were involved all kept their jobs. So who was really behind the corruption?
A lot of people think they've already been there/done that when it comes to the fluoride question and they don't realize they were only given a fraction of the picture. They have decided there's nothing wrong with fluoride having based their decision on lies and poor science.
People see that one agency is corrupt while another one, like the Department of Labor who reinstated Dr. Marcus, are doing the right thing. They take it to mean that the corrupt agency was a specialized incident. I'm of the mind that there are many corrupt people in our government who orchestrate much of what is going on with all aspects of the chemicals in our food and environment. Sometimes the corrupt come up against someone who can't be bought and they can't easily get rid of them without risking more unwanted attention on the issues.
RobSchneider on October 01, 2011:
Great article and thoroughly researched. It's not likely you'll get any intelligent rebuttals. Hopefully fluoride die-hards will wake up and learn from this. Voting up and sharing.