Tell Congress to stop Rx greed and cut prices now! Here’s how. 

Reply
Frequent Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
989
Views

Re: Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

989 Views
Message 381 of 1,248

 “It is foolish to be convinced without evidence, but it is equally foolish to refuse to be convinced by real evidence." - Upton Sinclair

 

”It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

 

Because of the gross over-fluoridation of our society which involves essentially all packaged foods and even fresh or dried foods, the evidence of fluoride poisoning in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities is undeniable. However, despite wishful thinking from fluroidationists who do their best to manufacture scientifically invalid reports, there is more 'overdose' with corresponding damage in fluoridated communities. The only rational move is to immediately end fluoridation in order to stem the tide of dental damage, disease & disability.

 

Forgive me for repeating myself, but since fluoridationists are willfully blind to evidence and try to bury it with their comments, allow me again to address your attention to these recently published studies. 

 

OVERDOSED BABIES: Over one third of babies (37%) in fluoridated American communities consume amounts of fluoride in excess of the upper limits of fluoride considered safe per government regulations. Even 4% of babies in non-fluoridated communities are overdosed on fluoride due to consumption of products made with fluoridated water. At the very least, this puts these children at high risk for developing dental fluorosis, which is associated with increased incidence of learning disabilities, broken bones and kidney disease.
http://jocpd.org/doi/10.17796/1053-4625-43.1.7
 

  • Claudia X Harriehausen, Fehmida Z Dosani, Brett T Chiquet, Michelle S Barratt, and Ryan L Quock. Fluoride Intake of Infants from Formula. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. 2018. [Online Ahead of Print]

THYROID: 18% of people drinking 'optimally' fluoridated water in Canadian communities have a heightened risk of low thyroid function because fluoride interferes with iodine metabolism. Many of them will be sub-clinical and not know they are mildly hypothyroid, which nevertheless increases their risk for diabetes, high cholesterol, and other problems. Study excluded those already diagnosed with thyroid disease.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016041201830833X

  • Ashley J. Malin, Julia Riddell, Hugh McCague, Christine Till. Fluoride exposure and thyroid function among adults living in Canada: Effect modification by iodine status. Environment International. Volume 121, Part 1, December 2018, Pages 667-674. [Online Ahead of Print]

PREGNANT WOMEN: Pregnant Canadian women drinking  'optimally' fluoridated water had twice the fluoride exposure per individual testing as compared to pregnant women in non-fluoridated Canadian communities - and consistent with the range in the Mexican women whose children had up to 6 points lowered IQ based on prenatal exposure to fluoride (from salt). Excluded those with health conditions such as kidney disease as well as considered confounding factors such as tea consumption. 
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/pdf/10.1289/EHP3546
 

  • Christine Till, Rivka Green, John G. Grundy, Richard Hornung, Raichel Neufeld, E. Angeles Martinez-Mier, Pierre Ayotte, Gina Muckle, and Bruce Lanphear. Community Water Fluoridation and Urinary Fluoride Concentrations in a National Sample of Pregnant Women in Canada. Environmental Health Perspectives. October 2018.
Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
989
Views
Conversationalist
4
Kudos
996
Views

Re: Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

996 Views
Message 382 of 1,248

Hey Chuck - Thanks for the fact-check.  It's rare that Chuck and I agree on anything.  But clearly he admits that people can get way over recommended doses of fluoride simply from brushing their teeth and drinking their tea.  Logically, that means there is no need for water fluoridation.

Report Inappropriate Content
4
Kudos
996
Views
Silver Conversationalist
0
Kudos
1009
Views

Re: Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

1,009 Views
Message 383 of 1,248

This patient did not have a fluoridated public water system.  (first paragraph next to last sentence) This case, if indeed the symptoms were from fluoride in tea and toothpaste is consistent with recent data which shows that enamel fluorosis rates are the same in fluoridated and not fluoridated towns

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9608443

 

and from New Zealand

 

https://www.health.govt.nz/publication/our-oral-health-key-findings-2009-new-zealand-oral-health-sur... .. page 1 of summary, bullet point #10

 

The data is that community water fluoridation prevents cavities in both baby and adult teeth.  Further, the effects of too much fluoride come from the inappropriate use of fluoride containing products, toothpaste, mistakenly prescribed supplements and tea (especially green tea) being at usual sources.

696 New Zealand Oral Health Survey no difference in fluorosis v2.jpg

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
1009
Views
Conversationalist
4
Kudos
1013
Views

Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

1,013 Views
Message 384 of 1,248
A 79-year-old's joint pain markedly decreased after stopping fluoride ingestion from tea, fluoridated water & toothpaste and her mobility considerably improved enabling her to have a long-awaited trip overseas.
 
 
Report Inappropriate Content
4
Kudos
1013
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
1014
Views

Animal Study suggests ways Fluoridation contributes to Dementia

1,014 Views
Message 385 of 1,248

 “One usually expects at least a factor of 10 between a no-effect level and a maximum ‘safe for everyone’ level, yet here EPA seems to approve of less than a factor of 6 between ‘not safe’ and ‘recommended for everyone’ (including susceptible subpopulations).” -  Dr. Kathleen Thiessen, 2006 National Research Council panelist (2017)

 

This is an excellent animal experiment that finds there are observable differences in the brain tissue of rats who consumed relatively moderate amounts of fluoride 'long term' which for an experimental rat is 10 weeks. These changes were observed in the part of the brain having to do with memory and learning. 

 

The risk assessment rules for determining a 'safe reference dose' for human populations using a no observable effect level (NOEL) in an animal experiment is reducing the concentration by a factor of 100 for occassional exposure and by 1,000 for chronic exposure. So, for 50 ppm in an animal experiment, we could predict that any fluoride in drinking water above 0.05 ppm is harmful to senior citizens - except that this wasn't a NOEL. They did observe an ill effect at 50 ppm, so that concentration should be further reduced, cut in half or more... so any fluoride in drinking water concentration above 0.02 ppm consumed long term is  potentially damaging to brains

 

Chronic fluoride exposure induces neuronal apoptosis and impairs neurogenesis and synaptic plasticity: Role of GSK-3b/b-catenin pathway. Pei Jiang, Gongying Li, Xueyuan Zhou, Changshui Wang, Yi Qiao, Dehua Liao, Dongmei Shi.  Chemosphere. Volume 214, January 2019, Pages 430-435. [Online ahead of print]  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653518317508 

 

NINJA EDIT: I originally calculated an uncertainty factor of 100 to get 0.5 ppm, but that would be for occassional exposure. In drinking water, the reference dose would be 0.05 ppm for chronic exposure. 

Report Inappropriate Content
Tags (1)
2
Kudos
1014
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
1143
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,143 Views
Message 386 of 1,248

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.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
1143
Views
Gold Conversationalist
3
Kudos
1055
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,055 Views
Message 387 of 1,248

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.

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
1055
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
4
Kudos
1333
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,333 Views
Message 388 of 1,248

'If you can't explain something in an honest manner on one page, you don't understand it.' - Paraphrasing many scientists 

 

In reaction to Randy's 2,075 word comment in which he redirects readers to both his personal blog and other wordy combative posts he's made on this AARP site, I have two things to say. 

 

  • Fluoridation policy is an immoral medical mandate that benefits corporate players by forcing a contaminated product into the bodies of convenient consumers regardless of harm caused to either the environment or the millions with inflammatory, immune system, thyroid or kidney diseases for whom fluoride is medically contraindicated or to vulnerable populations such as pregnant women, bottle-fed babies and senior citizens for whom fluoride consumption can lead to neurological damage and chronic illness. 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
4
Kudos
1333
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
1325
Views

Re: The Scientific Consensus vs. Anti-Science Activists

1,325 Views
Message 389 of 1,248

Randy,

 

I'm beginning to understand more about your position on fluoride.  Tabloid items, not primary research.

 

Please provide one primary research study (US National Library of Medicine is a good example, https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/pmresources.html) and give a short summary of what you like about that research, what rings true to you, what the limitations you find in the research.  Lets talk research, not newspaper editorials and tabloid opinions.

 

Cybernook, Forbes, Science Based Medicine, Skeptical Raptor are tabloids, news, and not science research. 

 

Instead of long cut and paste, simply present ONE study, primary research, which you have read and why you agree with it.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
1325
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
5
Kudos
1312
Views

Re: The Scientific Consensus vs. Anti-Science Activists

1,312 Views
Message 390 of 1,248

I have never met a single person who is opposed to fluoridation who also supports smoking or opposes sterilization of water supplies. So the accusation that those opposed to fluoridation are "anti science" is simply false. 

I also know of no one opposed to fluoridation who argues that the WHO should not be trusted for health advice on other issues. Since when however is any organizaiton totally immune to any error whatsoever?  Everyone makes mistakes. And the WHO position that supports fluoridation is not accepted by most countries in Europe. Are those countries opposed to science? Of course not. These countires want the truth, like everyone should want the truth.

How long did it take for scientific evidence that smoking is harmful to be accepted? About 60 years, that's how long.  And the scientific method has existed since Isaac Newton in 1665, and yet this is how long it took to finally achieve a scientific conssensus that smoking is harmfl The reason this took so long, as is also true of fluoridation, is that adverse effects from a diluted, chronic, cumulative poison is difficult to prove beyond doubt in humans with scientific investigation.

The WHO, and other health agencies that typically do not do their own direct scientific experimentation and instead rely on others, will take a long time to come to the truth on the issue of fluoridation, but this does not change the truth.   

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
5
Kudos
1312
Views