Caring for a loved one? Find a part-time job that fits your schedule. Search the AARP Job Board.

Reply
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
22
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

22 Views
Message 1 of 871

Nonsense.  Without using fluoridated tea or fluoridated toothpaste and only consuming water with 0.7 ppm fluoride has zero chance of affecting a single dental cavity. The blood level of fluoride would be less than 0.1 ppm and the level in saliva bathing teeth topically would be less than 0.01 ppm.This is 150,000 times less concentrated than fluoride in toothpaste.

Good luck with that.

But meanwhile the fluoride wold accumulatein bone to about 1400  ppm in about 25 years.  Fluoridationists care less, but we opposed  to artificial fluoride water infusions certainly care.

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
22
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
67
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

67 Views
Message 2 of 871

"I was conned by a powerful lobby.” - Richard G. Foulkes, MD, Chief Medical Officer, Calgary, AB and former Canadian fluoridationist  (1992)

 

I do not drink tea or use fluoridated dental products and haven't done so for decades. Neither do I drink wine or cosume any grape products since I don't tolerate them. I used a high quality filter that reduced the fluoride in my 'optimally' fluoridated water. I had suffered from decades of arthritis and gastrointesintal issues (among other things).... 

 

Switching to bottled water in a desperate attempt to alleviate chronic pain, an attempt I thought was a waste of time, eliminated the debilitating arthritis in my foot in less than 2 weeks, as it did my IBS. My stiff neck and back quickly resolved, too. Now in my 60s, I no longer have arthritis and the only change was my water. 

 

Denying my testimony and the testimony of about 30 seniors on this forum, as well as the scientific studies documenting our experience, is bullying behavior. The risk of adverse health effects from 'optimal' doses was documented back in the 1950s by Public Health Service researchers, but the PHS didn't want to admit a mistake. They preferred condemming millions to decades of misery, just like fluoridationists in the 21st century. 

 

  1. Prenatal and postnatal ingestion of fluorides - A Progress Report. Reuben Feltman, D.D.S. Dental Digest. August 1956. pp 353-357.
    1. The best study done in that time period, the researchers determined a portion of the allergic population had a low tolerance that manifested as serious adverse effects in their test subjects. PHS researchers had to drop those test subjects and advised if in water, fluoride avoidance would be difficult. Researchers used controlled doses equivalent to fluoridated water and confirmed with placebo, it was the fluoride.
    2. I believe the allergic population was about 10% of Americans then, now it is closer to 50% of us. 

  2. Prenatal and postnatal ingestion of fluorides - Fourteen years of investigation - Final report. Reuben Feltman, D.D.S. & George Kosel, B.S., M.S. Journal of Dental Medicine. October 1961; 16(4):190-198.
    1. This final report noted that fetal fluoride levels were approximately twice, tripled and quadrupled the control group dependent on type of fluoride used in the controlled dose. Researchers had no idea what the long term implications could be in the children (12.9 mcg/L v. 26.85, 32.68, and 44.8 mcg/L).
    2. Feltman & Kosel also unexpectedly noted moderate-severe dental fluorosis in their child test subjects which is evidence of fluoride poisoning as well as delayed tooth eruption they suspected was due to thyroid suppression.
    3. The PHS pulled further research funding with the statement, they ‘considered fluoridation settled.’

A few case studies from 'optimaly' fluoridated communties:  http://www.fluoridation.com/waldbot.htm

A few more testimonies: https://momsagainstfluoridation.org/stories

 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
67
Views
Bronze Conversationalist
0
Kudos
80
Views

Re: Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

80 Views
Message 3 of 871

The danger from 0.7 ppm fluoride is zero.   Children improperly brushing and using toothpaste as candy and adults drinking large amounts of tea are those who are harmed by their mistaken and usually aberrant consumptions. 

 

Even this case illustrates that these conditions are not related to the tiny amount of fluoride in drinking water.   This person with arthritis water was not fluoridated. 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
80
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
130
Views

Re: Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

130 Views
Message 4 of 871

 “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 fluoridaed 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
1
Kudos
130
Views
Conversationalist
2
Kudos
141
Views

Re: Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

141 Views
Message 5 of 871

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
2
Kudos
141
Views
Bronze Conversationalist
0
Kudos
169
Views

Re: Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

169 Views
Message 6 of 871

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
169
Views
Conversationalist
2
Kudos
188
Views

Arthritis Reversed after Fluoride Avoided

188 Views
Message 7 of 871
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
2
Kudos
188
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
257
Views

Animal Study suggests ways Fluoridation contributes to Dementia

257 Views
Message 8 of 871

 “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)
1
Kudos
257
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
393
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

393 Views
Message 9 of 871

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
1
Kudos
393
Views
Gold Conversationalist
2
Kudos
400
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

400 Views
Message 10 of 871

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
2
Kudos
400
Views