Fwd: Fluoride: The Hidden Health Hazard ( Cynthia Logan )
BPA awareness (PURE WATER)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: juma...@earthlink.net (-)
Date: Jul 25 2002, 1:13 am
Subject: Fluoride: The Hidden Health Hazard ( Cynthia Logan )
To: alt.politics.bush, alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.greens,
alt.politics.usa, alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.conspiracy
http://www.theecovisionjournal.com/fluoridebad.html
Fluoride: The HiddenHealthHazard
By Cynthia Logan
Pierce County, Washington is up in arms. City councils,water
districts and citizen advocacy groups have rallied against the
Tacoma-Pierce County Board ofHealth'srecent resolution to mandate
fluoridation of most of the county's municipalwatersupply. Some
communities have vowed to challenge the mandate in court. At least one
city council has initiated a protective ordinance that would prohibit
the addition of any substance intended to treat people rather
thanwater, unless it has FDA approval. One grassroots group, Citizens
Opposing Fluoridation in Pierce County, hired a law firm that
persuaded the county Board ofHealthto examine the potential
environmental impact before making a decision.
Are those objecting to fluoride radical activists? What's the big
deal-fluoride inwaterand toothpaste helps make our teeth healthy and
strong-doesn't it? These groups don't think so, and there's a lot of
information out there to support their concerns that: 1) even in
non-fluoridated communities, fluoride ingestion now exceeds the
original "optimal" dosage; 2) the chemicals used to fluoridatewater
are neither food nor pharmaceutical grade, but are more toxic than
lead and just slightly less toxic than arsenic.1
While calcium fluoride is a trace mineral that is sometimes found in
ground-water, the compounds used for fluoridation are industrial waste
products, over 90% of which are either fluorosilicic acid or its salt
form, sodium fluorosilicate, contaminated with toxic metals and trace
amounts of radioactive isotopes. Tom Reeves, fluoridation promoter
with the CDC (Centers for Disease Control), states that 95% of
fluoridation products come from the phosphate fertilizer industry in
central Florida.
Seattlewater, supplied by Seattle Public Utilities, comes from two
surfacewatersources, the Cedar and the S.F. Tolt watersheds. Both
systems use hydrofluorosilicic acid to fluoridate thewater. Buffering
chemicals-such as soda ash and lime-must also be added to counteract
the low pH and corrosive quality of the acid. On the Cedar
system,wateris disinfected with chlorine and fluoridated at the
Landsburg
Plant; thewateris disinfected again and lime is added at the Lake
Youngs Plant. On the Tolt system,wateris chlorinated and
fluoridated, and lime and soda ash are added for corrosion control.
More than 293,000 gallons of hydrofluorosilicic acid are added to
Seattle's twowatersupplies each year.
In fluoridated communities, people get about a milligram of fluoride
with every four cups ofwaterthey drink. How much are they getting
from other sources? Emily Kalweit, Director of Washington State's
Citizens for Safe DrinkingWater, points out, "Fluoride exposure is
already excessive-foods and beverages either processed with
fluoridatedwaterand/or contaminated with fluoride-based pesticides
often contain higher dosages than a doctor can legally prescribe.
Other sources of exposure include toothpaste, dental treatments,
pharmaceuticals and industrial emissions." She notes that, "Only about
half of the fluoride we ingest each day is excreted through the
kidneys. The rest accumulates in our bones, heart, brain, connective
tissues, and the pineal gland."2
Since fluoride is touted as the main reason Americans can flash
healthy smiles at Olympic games, it is fascinating that the cover
story in the July 2000 issue of the Journal of the American Dental
Association stated that current research shows no correlation between
ingesting fluoride and healthier teeth! Read the fine print on your
toothpaste tube lately? It says, "Warning: keep out of the reach of
children under six years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than
used for brushing, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison
Control Center immediately." Ever answered the phone while brushing
your teeth and swallowed in order to speak? Do your kids like the
"bubble gum" flavors some companies offer? The warning is on the
fluoride toothpaste tubes because the FDA determined that
seven-year-old children routinely swallow approximately half of what
they use for brushing, while younger children swallow even more. And,
despite oft-repeated assurances of safety, fluoride drops and tablets
prescribed for children by doctors have never been evaluated by the
FDA for safety or effectiveness.3
Does your dentist swab your child's teeth with fluoride to prevent
tooth decay? In 1970, a New York City four-year-old went into
convulsions and died directly after receiving topical fluoride
applications to his teeth. Dental personnel claimed he'd had a heart
attack, though neither he nor members of his family had a history of
cardiac abnormality. Interestingly, though, cardiologists recognize
that ingestion of even small amounts of fluoride can be a possible
cause of cardiac arrest.4
Writing in the Earth Island Journal, authors George Glasser and
Andreas Schuld bring up another concern: "The municipalwateryour
child drinks, bathes and plays in is a complex chemical mixture of
dissolved minerals, contaminants and chemical additives. Chemicals are
added to clarify thewater, remove solid particulates and to
disinfect. When fluoride is added towatersupplies, 80% of the
'compound' is hazardous waste. Not only that, but polymers are added
to inhibit corrosion of thewaterpipes. Since the skin is the largest
organ of the body, the average person absorbs more contaminants from
bathing and showering than from drinking pollutedwater." As one EPA
scientist put it, "a shower cubicle can be considered an 'exposure
chamber'."
Since children's bath times may range from 45 minutes to two hours,
they are most at risk. As the EPA acknowledged in a June 30, 1998
report, "Children have a greater surface-area-to-body-weight ratio
than adults, which may lead to increased dermal absorption."
Thehealththreat to both children and adults goes beyond bathing in and
drinking fluoridatedwater. Fluorosilicates do not magically vanish.
Pollution released from washing clothes, evaporation from clothes
dryers and dishwashers remains in the air, where exposure to volatile
contaminants absorbed via the lung would be about double the same
amount from drinkingwater.
Morton Walker, D.P.M. author of Elements of Danger, Protect Yourself
Against the Hazards of Modern Dentistry and a couple dozen
otherhealthrelated books, notes that the hazards of fluoride ingestion
are
listed in the US Pharmacopoeia. Those hazards were expounded upon by
Dr. John Yiamouyjiannis in his detailed and well-documented book,
Fluoride, The Aging Factor. "Fluoride ingestion causes increased
production of imperfect collagen not just in the teeth, but throughout
the body," he writes. "Cartilage, tendons and ligaments, which should
remain flexible structures in the body, become hardened and brittle
when fluoride is consumed." While fluoride can increase bone density,
the bone created is significantly weaker and of poor quality,
resulting in calcified joints, arthritis, fused vertebrae and an
increase in fractures.5 And, he notes, "at just one part per million
[the common dose inwatersupplies], fluoride in drinkingwateror in
diet drinks cuts the activity of the DNA repair enzyme by 50%!"
According to the Department ofHealthand Human Services, exposure in
fluoridated communities can range as high as 6.6 milligrams per day.
Just 2.3-4.5 mg/day has been shown to decrease the functioning of the
human thyroid.6 Could the practice ofwaterfluoridation have
contributed to the rise in hypothyroidism in this country over the
past fifty years? That department's 1991 review, Fluoride Benefits and
Risks, pointed out that fluoride penetrates the blood-brain barrier,
the brain's first line of defense against toxins. The peer-reviewed
journal Brain Research reveals that aluminum induced neural
degeneration in rats is greatly increased when the animals are fed low
doses of fluoride, which enhances the bio-availability of
aluminum-"conducting" it across the blood-brain barrier. The study's
authors state that, though they were surprised at the effects created
by a small amount of aluminum fluoride in the rats' drinkingwater,
they were alarmed at the neurotoxic results of sodium fluoride given
at the same levels found in 'optimally' fluoridated drinkingwater.7
Recently, the U.S. Army Medical Command, MEDCOM, examined
fluoridation. In charge of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in
Washington, D.C. and three other major installations, MEDCOM was
concerned about fluoridating thewatersupply of Fort Detrick,
Maryland. They contacted Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, an acknowledged
neurotoxicology expert, and requested her opinion. Her response (May
1999) cited data from 18 clinical studies. Dr. Mullenix's analysis
stated that "fluoride exposures today are out of control," and "there
are no advantages towaterfluoridation. The risks today far exceed
the hoped for benefit."
Even scientists within the EPA have challenged the safety of
fluoridation. Dr. J. William Hirzy, Senior Vice President of the union
that represents scientists and other professionals at Washington D.C.
EPA Headquarters, testified before the U.S. Senate in June 2000,
asserting that results from the 1990 National Toxicology Program
Cancer Study were fraudulently altered by EPA management. Dr. Hirzy
called for a national review of fluoridation by a Joint Select
Committee of Congress to address excessive fluoride exposure, to
re-examine the altered cancer study and to asses the implications of
recent brain studies and research linking fluoridation chemicals with
elevated blood-lead levels in children.8
The Children's EnvironmentalHealthNetwork (CEHN) reports that the
U.S. has seen "a worrisome increase" in childhood diseases that may be
linked to chemicals in the environment. According to the CEHN, "The
incidence of two types of childhood cancers has risen significantly
over the past 15 years. Acute lymphocytic leukemia is up 10 percent
and brain tumors are up more than 30 percent. Learning disabilities
and attention-deficit disorders also appear to be increasing." In May,
2000 the Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility published
In Harm's Way: Toxic Threats to Child Development. The report reveals
that the growing number of U.S. children with developmental
disabilities could be caused by widespread exposure to neurotoxic
substances. The report lists fluoride as a chemical that urgently
needs re-evaluation: "Studies in animal and human populations suggest
that fluoride exposure, at levels experienced by a significant
proportion of the population drinking fluoridatedwater, may have
adverse impacts on the developing brain."
The red flags associated with fluoridation go beyond the effects of
human exposure: numerous studies indicate that fluoride is toxic to
our already threatened salmon and trout species. One major field
study, conducted between 1982 and 1986 on the Columbia River,
demonstrated that relatively low levels of fluoride-just one-fifth of
what is found within fluoridation programs-can negatively affect
salmons' ability to migrate upstream. This same study demonstrated
thatwatertreated with half the dose that fluoridation provides (0.5
mg/L) resulted in a 55% loss of migrating salmon within a six-day
period.9
With so many studies pointing to possible, probable and proven
maladies resulting from an overabundance of fluoride-a
bio-accumulativetoxinknown to persist in the environment from one to
two million years-why is the American public "sold on it?"
Astonishingly, fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb
production.10 Whoa-who says? Du Pont and Manhattan Project executives,
that's who. The Freedom of Information Act resulted in the
declassification of a number of once secret documents-documents that
interested two reporters for the Christian Science Monitor.
Commissioned to write an article about the history ofwater
fluoridation in the United States, Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson
spent over a year researching just that. They found that shoddy
science and a deliberately deceptive PR campaign were "recruited" by
the 'Manhattan Project' to protect the U.S. Atomic bomb program from
litigation, because the first lawsuit against the program was not over
radiation, but over fluoride damage! In 1944, farms famous for their
produce and located downwind of the du Pont chemical factory in
Deepwater, New Jersey were victims of a "pollution incident." Crops
blighted, workers eating the produce vomited for days, while horses
and cattle looked sick and were too stiff to work-symptoms verified by
veterinarians as fluoride poisoning. After the War, the farmers sued
du Pont and the Manhattan Project. In a secret memo, "Manhattan"
stated that, "because of complaints that animals and humans have been
injured by hydrogen fluoride fumes in New Jersey, the University of
Rochester is conducting experiments to determine the toxic effect of
fluoride."
Now this is interesting, for two reasons. First, the University of
Rochester is infamous for its "studies" of radioactive plutonium, done
on patients at Strong Memorial hospital without their knowledge or
consent. Second, most of the "proof" that fluoride is not only safe,
but "beneficial in low doses" rests on work performed by the
University of Rochester, along with the "Newburgh Demonstration
Project." Newburgh, NY, was the site of one of the nation's earliest
fluoridation experiments. Begun in May of 1945, residents were studied
both by their StateHealthDepartment and, secretly, by Manhattan's
"Project F." The final report, written by Manhattan's chief
toxicologist, Harold Hodge and published in the Journal of the
American Dental Association in 1956, concluded that "small
concentrations" of fluoride were safe for U.S. citizens.
Today, Newburgh's Mayor, Audrey Carey expresses the shock and anger of
many city residents: "This reminds me of the Tuskegee experiment done
on syphilis patients down in Alabama." And, after comparing both the
secret and the published versions of the study, Dr. Mullenix, former
head of toxicology at The Forsyth Institute (a world renowned dental
research institution affiliated with the Harvard Medical School)
commented: "This makes me ashamed to be a scientist. Were all Cold
War-era fluoride studies done like this?" Subsequent studies done by
Dr. Mullenix and her colleagues in the 1990's (including the MEDCOM
report mentioned earlier in this article) showed fluoride to be a
powerful central nervous systemtoxinwhich could adversely affect
human brain functioning, even at low doses. This finding has been
corroborated by studies in China; much like effects from lead
exposure, children receiving low-dose fluoride also show diminished
IQ. Russian studies show that people displaying the well-known signs
of dental fluorosis-chalky-white, irregular patches on tooth enamel
(sometimes infiltrated with yellow or brown staining) also
"demonstrate dysfunction of sub-cortical axial structures of the
brain."11
One of the arguments by those advocating fluoridation is that it's
needed to help poor kids. But the latest report by the Surgeon
General, OralHealthin America (May 2000) stated: "Eighty percent of
Medicaid kids don't receive dental care, because few dentists take
Medicaid." While that's a decent 'Catch-22,' Delta Dental, the largest
dental insurance company in California, has it beat by a long shot.
Delta advocates fluoridation, and gives grants to cities that
fluoridate, but won't pay for any dental repair work caused by
fluorosis! Medically defined as "chronic fluorine poisoning," dental
fluorosis is a permanent condition that can be costly to repair, often
requiring repeated bleaching or expensive veneers. Not only can
fluoride damage tooth enamel (Canada currently markets a product that
claims to repair the damage done by fluoridated dental products), but
it can also activate "G proteins," promoting gingivitis and
periodontitis, as well as oral cancer.
While the American Dental Association is now advising its members to
lower the recommended dosage of fluoride prescribed to children,
apparently the organization is concerned that people will neglect
fluoride altogether. Why else would they have bought the domain names
"www.fluoridealert.com" and "www.fluoridealert.net?" Now, with the
slip of a "dot com," web-surfers find ADA pro-fluoridation sites
instead of their intended destination:http://www.fluoridealert.org.
Are all U.S. citywatersupplies destined for fluoridation? In 1997,
Natick, Massachusetts considered the issue. In order to sort out
conflicting claims, they commissioned a respected team of scientists
to analyze the data and make recommendations. The widely read
analysis, known as The Natick Report, "emphatically" recommended
thewatersupply "not be fluoridated," and warned that medical problems
could ensue if fluoridation was pursued. In March 2000, Wilmington,
Massachusetts also reviewed both sides of the issue and decided
against it, as did Auburndale, Florida. Natick, Wilmington and
Auburndale aren't alone. Over 80 U.S. cities have rejected fluoride
since 1996, including Modesto, Santa Barbara, and Santa Cruz,
California. Within the past ten years, Bellingham, Bremerton,
Kennewick, Goldendale, Olympia, Spokane, Wenatchee, and White Salmon
have turned down fluoridation. While approximately 67% of American
cities fluoridate municipalwater, Europe has almost unanimously
rejected it, with only 2% of the entire continent allowingwater
fluoridation.
Back at home, Newsweek has repeatedly advised the public that
"political decisions [about fluoridation] were at odds with expert
advice" and "fluoride from your tap may not do much good-and may cause
cancer." In 1992, Newsweek published another fluoride safety related
article, "Is Science Censored," which examines how political
considerations influence what scientific studies get published. Its
most recent article examines "The Fluoride Risk."
What can you do? Besides becoming active in Citizens for Safe
DrinkingWater, contact your city council and countyhealthboard and
state
legislators, and let them know you object to having fluoridation
chemicals added to your municipalwatersupply. Give them a copy of
this magazine and have them read this article. Consider awater
filtration system and ask specifically whether or not it can remove
fluoride, as most do not. Spend some time on the Internet, reviewing
the sites listed in the "resources" section below. There are many
excellent, documented articles that will give you the facts you need
to be an informed citizen. Remember the statement, "Knowledge is
Power?" With the facts in hand, we can discern the truth and demand
clean, safewaterfor ourselves, for our cities-and for our children.
Resources
Citizens for Safe DrinkingWater: Washington State,
Contact: Emily Kalweit - 360-459-9287 toxicf...@qwest.net
Citizens for Safe DrinkingWater: National,
Contact: Jeff Green 800-728-3833 greenj...@cox.net
http://www.Keepers-of-the-Well.org
Fluoride Action Network:http://www.fluoridealert.org
CustomPure-WaterFiltration System
Contact: Jim Fox 206.363.0039,http://www.custompure.com
Additional Articleshttp://www.salon.com/news/1999/02/17news.html;
A great overview from Salon Magazinehttp://www.earthisland.org/eijournal/fluoride/fluoride_index.html;
An overview of environmental informationhttp://www.nteu280.org;
EPA Union of scientists & professionals who oppose
fluoridationhttp://www.rachel.org/bulletin;bulletin.cfm?Issue_ID=2001
good overview article
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wastenot414.htm-
You have to read this one! This was written for the
Christian Science Monitor, but it was so powerful that
they could not run it.http://www.fluoridealert.org/f-teeth.htm-
fluoride alert overview - excellent references
Endnotes
1) Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products, 5th ed., 1984
2) SafeWaterCoalition of Washington State, "Fluoride Has Adverse
Effect on Central Nervous System," Townsend Letter for Doctors and
Patients 155 (June 1996):21.
?) Dr. Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry, St. Lawrence University,
NY 13617, from "50 Reasons Not To Fluoridate"http://
www.fluoridealter.org
3) A recent congressional investigation into fluoridation verified
this fact in a response received from the Food and Drug Administration
in December of 2000.
4) M. McIvor, "Hyperkalemia and Cardiac Arrest from Fluoride Exposure
During Hemodialysis" American Journal of Cardiology 51 (1983) 901-902
5) Danielson, Egger, Lyon and Goodenough, "Hip Fractures and
Fluoridation in Utah's Elderly Population" Journal of the American
Medical Association 258 (1992) 746-48
6) Galletti, P. & Joyet, G. "Effect on Fluorine on Thyroidal Iodine
Metabolism in Hyperthyroidism," Journal of Clinical Endocrinology;
18:1102-1110 (1958).
7) J.A. Varner, K.F. Jensen, W. Horvath and R.L. Isaacson, Brain
Research 784 (1998).
9) Damkaer DM, Dey DB. Evidence for fluoride effects on salmon
passage
at John Day Dam, Columbia River, 1982-1986. North American Journal of
Fisheries Management 9 154-162 1989.
10) See "Fluoride, Teeth and The Atomic Bomb" by Griffiths and Bryson,
summarized by Waste Not #414, available atwww.fluoridealert.org/
WN-414.htm. The entire article and links to
declassified documents should be available at this site.
11)http://www.fluoridealert.org/testimony.htm
-------------------------------------------------------------o