Reply
Conversationalist

Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

“The evidence that fluoride is more harmful than beneficial is now overwhelming… fluoride may be destroying our bones, our teeth, and our overall health.” - Dr. Hardy Limeback,  former President of Canadian ADA, Head of Preventive Dentistry at Univ of Toronto, 2006 National Research Council Scientist (2007)

 

The 2006 National Research Council on Fluoride in Drinking Water commented to the EPA that fluoridation at 1 ppm can be anticipated to be harmful for those with reduced renal function and the elderly. The NRC confirmed that fluoride not excreted by kidneys builds up in bones, resulting in arthritic pain and increased brittleness. However, there were no EPA studies on the whole health impacts of fluoridated water on susceptible population such as kidney patients, children, those with prolonged disease or the elderly. There still aren’t. 

 

However, there is mounting science from other sources that “optimally fluoridated” water, which is known to cause varying degrees of dental fluorosis in 58% of Black American adolescents and 36% of White American adolescents, is causing subtle deficits in ability to remember or focus. That same “optimal level” has also been proved in a 2014 study as being nephrotoxic in rats with chronic kidney disease. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects approximately 15% of Americans, although CKD is quadruple the rate in Black Americans, and predictably worse in older Americans. 

 

Perhaps the most horrifying part of the story of fluoridation is that not only is at least 50% of every drop of fluoride that has passed the lips of a Baby Boomer permanently stored in bones, fluoride isn't the only poison in packages of fluoride that originate as the waste product of aluminum an phosphate industry. 100% of the fluoride sampled in a 2014 study was contaminated with aluminum; arsenic and lead were other common contaminants. In other words, fluoridated water serves as a delivery system for aluminum and lead into our bones and our brains. As we all know, aluminum is associated with Alzheimers in adults, and lead is associated with learning disabilities in children. Approximately 15% of the population who is sensitive to chemicals cite inability to think clearly and overwhelming fatigue as symptoms of exposure to fluoridated water. 

 

Our generation was part of a great human experiment. It may have had noble intentions based on the faulty hypothesis that  drinking fluoridated water prevented cavities. It is now known that any perceived benefits of fluoride are from tooth brushing.  Our grandchildren are the third generation in this travesty. I suggest we all DEMAND the AARP stand up for us and our grandchildren by issuing a strong position paper calling for the cessation of water fluoridation. 

 

SCIENCE REFERENCES

  1. 2014 in Toxicology. Effect of water fluoridation on the development of medial vascular calcification in uremic rats. (“Optimal levels” worsen kidney function😞 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24561004
     
  2. 2015  in Neurotoxicology and Teratology. Association of lifetime exposure to fluoride and cognitive functions in Chinese children: A pilot study.  (Children with visible dental fluorosis perform less well on memory tasks, correlating with the degree of severity of their fluorosis. One of a series of human and animal studies with the same consistent findings.😞 
    1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25446012  
    2. http://braindrain.dk/2014/12/mottled-fluoride-debate/ 

  3. 2014 in Physiology and Behavior. Fluoride exposure during development affects both cognition and emotion in mice. (Measurable behavioral changes😞 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24184405

  4. 2014 in International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. A new perspective on metals and other contaminants in fluoridation chemicals. (All samples of fluoride are contaminated with aluminum, plus other contaminants like arsenic, lead and barium); 
    1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24999851
    2. http://momsagainstfluoridation.org/sites/default/files/Mullenix%202014-2-2.pdf

  5. 2014 in Scientific World Journal. Water Fluoridation: A Critical Review of the Physiological Effects of Ingested Fluoride as a Public Health Intervention. (Health risks and cost don't justify minimal and questionable dental benefit.):  http://www.hindawi.com/journals/tswj/2014/293019/

 

RACIAL INEQUITY (FOIA)

Here are three Oct 2014 news articles on the content of the Freedom of Information Act documents. Rev. Andrew Young, former UN ambassador has pursued them with the CDC, but to little effect. Civil Rights leaders have been calling for an end to community water fluoridation (CWF) since 2011. 

 

2015 LEGAL ARGUMENT (GROSS DISPROPORTIONALITY) 

There is a legal initiative in Peel, Ontario (pop 1.3m) to remove fluoride from the water supply based on the principle of gross disproportionality, i.e. marginal benefit does not justify great risk of harm. There is also a political effort afoot in Canadian govt to mandate fluoridation and thereby make the legal argument moot. I suggest this document is well-worth printing.  http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/peel.june2014.pdf

  • a. The first 19 pages of this document is about the legal strategy. It includes summary of US legal cases that found water fluoridation harmful to the public, but legal under US "police power" mandate.
  • b. Starting on page 20 is a devastating affidavit by Dr. Kathleen Thiessen, NAS/NRC scientist and international expert in risk assessment. Very readable summary of science indicating harm to populations in “optimally” fluoridated communities. 

 

POPULATION WITH LOW CHEMICAL THRESHOLD

  1. In excess of 25% of previously healthy Gulf War Veterans have Multiple Chemical Sensitivities, which includes sensitivity to fluoride. See: http://www.va.gov/rac-gwvi/docs/committee_documents/gwiandhealthofgwveterans_rac-gwvireport_2008.pdf 
    1. EXCERPT: “It is well established that some people are more vulnerable to adverse effects of certain  chemicals than others, due to variability in biological processes that neutralize those chemicals, and clear them from the body.” - Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses 2008 
  2. Affidavit of Dr. Hans Moolenburgh: https://fluorideinformationaustralia.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/affidavit-moolenburgh.pdf
    1. Except: “As a summary of our research, we are now convinced that fluoridation of the water supplies causes a low grade intoxication of the whole population, with only the approximately 5% most sensitive persons showing acute symptoms.The whole population being subjected to low grade poisoning means that their immune systems are constantly overtaxed. With all the other poisonous influences in our environment, this can hasten health calamities.” 
  3. PubMed Listed Studies on immune system response: 
    1. a. Fluoride makes allergies worse, rats (1990): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1707853 
    2. b. Fluoride makes allergies worse, in vitro (1999): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9892783
    3. c. Immune system of the gut (2010): http://www.hindawi.com/journals/iji/2010/823710/ 
    4. d. ASIA Syndrome, adjuvant impact (2011): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20708902
    5. e. Gene predicts fluoride sensitivity (2015): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25556215
    6. f.  Brain has an immune system (2015): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26030524

 

AARP - STAND UP on our behalf! 

31,434 Views
1449
Report
Reply
Contributor

Extremely important topic from my community and for those of us over 50 as well.  If you've ever gone to an orthopedic sturgeon and been told, you have arthritis, bone spurs, thickening and brittleness of the bones, osteosclerosis, then you most likely have damage from too much fluoride. It's called skeletal fluorosis in just about every other county.  It is a chronic crippling problem that by that point you are aware of it there isn't much you can do about it but suffer and bear the expense.  The mayo clinic did one study associating it with too much black tea, but they've pretty much been told to back off fluoride if they want to advance their careers.   the original studies in 1946 by the ADA also clearly demonstrated this problem in the lab rats. 

13,065 Views
0
Report
Reply
Newbie

Yes!! FLUORIDE - I am 61 and my wife is 65. This is an extremely important topic! I am retired with a degree in Environmental Sciences including Biological Chemistry with added studies in Nutrition.
Seniors are more at risk for all kinds of health complications, because as we ingest Fluoride in the water, foods, and from other sources, it accumulates.

The CDC states that half of the Fluoride we ingest, accumulates in the body!!

Since (FLUORIDE) F- is the MOST REACTIVE ION of any other element, it can EASILY REACT with many of the body’s minerals and chemicals.

See what the CDC says...

CDC - BONES and JOINTS
“…exposure to higher levels of fluoride may harm your health. Skeletal fluorosis can be caused by eating, drinking or breathing very large amounts of fluorides. This disease only occurs after long term exposures (because Fluoride accumulates with the ongoing daily bone formations of every age group) and can cause denser bones,
joint pain,
and a limited range of joint movement.
…severe cases, the spine completely rigid…”

CDC
“…fluoride can result in denser bones…
...these bones are often
more brittle
or fragile
than normal bone
and there is an increased risk of older men and women breaking a bone.
Some studies have also found a higher risk of bone fractures in older men and women at fluoride levels typically found in fluoridated water….”

CDC
40% of children suffer “dental fluorosis"

CDC - TOPICAL ONLY is effective
The CDC (Center for Disease Control) states that: “(Fluoride’s) actions primarily are topical for both adults and children”.

CDC - teeth breaking
“…in severe cases, the teeth are pitted and are fragile, and sometimes the teeth can break.”

CDC – The CDC’s ATSDR warns about consuming large amounts of fluoride in that “…it can cause stomach aches, vomiting, and diarrhea. Extremely large amounts can cause death by affecting your heart.”

I WANT MORE ARTICLES AND SUPPORT from AARP about exposing Fluoride's adverse health affects to the elderly (and young children or infants).
13,191 Views
6
Report
Reply
Trusted Contributor

We must fight FLUORIDE, it's more than proven that it is toxic. We need to demand action.
Meantime, we must protect ourselves with installation of a REVERSE OSMOSIS system, and if you can afford it a Whole house system with an ALUMINA ( not just carbon) Filter. I was fortunate to get an Aqualistic system a few years ago. Even my showers are fluoride free.
You can also research other filter systems, like distillation systems.
You can also help your body detox it with good supplements. Chlorella and Fresh Cilantoro are good inexpensive options.

3,351 Views
1
Report
Reply
Bronze Conversationalist

In Southern California where our water is very alkaline (pH 8.3), aluminum filters do not function well since aluminum binds hydroxide ion more efficiently than it does fluoride under these conditions.. I am also concerned about aluminum leaching from such units, so having a reverse osmosis unit installed for drinking and cooking water is good. 

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
3,449 Views
0
Report
Reply
Newbie

Thanks for your intelligent and educational posts.

 

If you look on the Periodic Table of Elements, you will see Fluorine, Chlorine and Bromine (a common baking additive) all displace Iodine ~ which is vital to healthy thyroid function. No wonder thyroid malfunction has become rampant! We once added iodine to our table salt to insure adequate levels. Now, that effort has been sabotaged.

 

And honestly, if fluoride worked in preventing cavities, wouldn't America be cavity-free by now?

10,363 Views
3
Report
Reply
Regular Contributor

No, America would not expected to be and is not cavity-free.

This is a classic example of the Straw Man logical fallacy.

Fluoridation is not a silver bullet cure but it does greatly decrease the cavity burden a population must bear. 2/3rd of the operations for mouth fulls of rotten teeth preschool children must have are avoided. The economic return on the fluoridation investment in lower dental bills varies between communities from 12% to over 13,000%.

References furnished if anyone desires.
1,432 Views
2
Report
Reply
Bronze Conversationalist

We are going around in circles. Water additives have already been discussed. All water additives that are legalas described in the SDWA are those that actually purify water (remove debris, prevent corrosion, and sanitize water, etc.). But the one substance that is not a legal additive is fluoride. Fluoride is the only chemical added into water for the purpose of treating humans. It does not purify water.  The NSF labels fluosilicic acid hazardous waste as a water purifying agent pass inspection and to gain favor with skeptics so that it appears legal to add into water. Fluoride has zero ability to purify water. It is added to elevate the blood concentration of the non-nutrient contaminant fluoride ion in consumers.

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
1,386 Views
1
Report
Reply
Bronze Conversationalist

Richard, when you say things like this, I doubt you have ever read the SDWA.  Your quote:

 

"All water additives that are legalas described in the SDWA are those that actually purify water (remove debris, prevent corrosion, and sanitize water, etc.). "

 

It may surprise you, but there are very few additives which are described in the SDWA.  Did you know there is actually an additive which is NSF approved and is intended to treat Sodium Hypochlorite?  It neither sanatizes the water, removes debris, or prevents corrosion.  Nor is it described in the SDWA.  It is an additive to drinking water whose sole purpose is to prevent bleach from hardening up.  

 

So there is a phosphorous addive which treats bleach.  Show me that in the SDWA.

 

Your quote:  "The NSF labels fluosilicic acid hazardous waste . . "

 

That is a verifiable "untruth."  NSF says no such thing.  If so, please provide evidence of that.

 

Your quote from an earlier comment:  "And the suggestion is ridiculous that if one is opposed to fluoridation they should contact the "appropriate officials." There are no appropriate officials. The EPA  and the FDA both deny responsibility and liability for fluoridation and neither endorse it, but both do not oppose it."

 

We've been through this before.  EPA allows 4 parts per million of fluoride in drinking water.  That's a fact.  If someone were actually harmed by drinking water with 1 part per million of fluoride, that would be the fault of the EPA, because the EPA allows it.  And guess what.  People sue the EPA all the time.  

 

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus 

1,432 Views
0
Report
Reply
Periodic Contributor

Fluoridation is an excellent issue for AARP to spearhead. This practice of adding toxic chemicals to raise the fluoride level to prevent tooth decay is NOT safe and is Not even effective!! And for seniors it jut adds more burden on our bodies especially our brains!! Fluoridation has become a political issue when  organizations like AARP need to look past the years of propaganda and endorsements and expose the harm out weieghs the supposed benefits! THANK you for opening up this topic ...AARP please take this on!!!

13,082 Views
1
Report
Reply
Bronze Conversationalist

Every city that discharges any contaminant into public water supplies,  regardless of state regulations, must  have an NPDES permit to do so. The problem for continuous discharging of fluoride, an EPA recognized contaminant in water,  Is that water districts do not regard fluoride when intentionally added, as a discharged item. So they don't think they need the permit for fluoride and no one  enforces the requirement for fluoride if the fluoride and its other contaminants was done intentionally (as mandated by CA law).

Again, why is it my fault that I cannot get calepa to forbid fluoridated water discharges into rivers (or water systems intended for consumption)? 

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
868 Views
0
Report
Reply