Eye scans and gene editing are among the new frontiers in Alzheimer’s research! Learn more in AARP’s report on medical breakthroughs.

Reply
Regular Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
563
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

563 Views
Message 101 of 1,448

And what pray tell happens to brain tissue after 22 years of ingesting F'd water? Humans do not have a fully grown and developed brain until they are in their 20's. Yiamouyiannis measured the F content in brain tissue for those in F'd areas and found that brain levels compare to levels in blood.  It is insane to force an industrial contaminant into the brain of man where it serves no purpose and does not belong.

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
563
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
553
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

553 Views
Message 102 of 1,448

Ok. So the drop in boys IQ of 1.53 points in fluoridated areas could be important. This is obvious because most people in areas with F'd water don't drink the water regularly and if they did the F content would be even higher.. Many drink bottled water or other water based beverages. Here this is reflected in the low urine F levels.  When consumers actually drink F'd water,  urine F levels match the water F level typically very closely. So unless there are people here with 1 ppm in urine, and in control urine where levels are low such as 0.1 ppm, no one has any rigjht to claim the data here prove water fluoridation has no effect whatsoever on IQ. Such a claim is preposterous. Again, these people were not placed in cages to control their drinking habits. They are humans, not controlled caged mammnals that already have produced definitive data proving fluoridation is useless and harmful, and that F is not a dietary ingredient, and is not a normal component in blood. This is why there is no listing in the Merck Manual or in Nursing sources that list all normal blood components from A to Z. F is a contaminant of human systemic fluids. Im sorry but sometimes the truth is simply too much for some..

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
553
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
525
Views

Re: My girw us the 3xact opposite. Only a fluoridation activist woRe: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Ac

525 Views
Message 103 of 1,448

Richard, you write:

"My view is the exact opposite of the claim, that only a fluoridation advocate would make, that the study somehow proves fluoride ingestion as from water fluoridation does not affect IQ."

Well, here is the data for IQ from Green et al (Their Table 1):

table IQ.png

That is, there is no significant difference in the mean IQ of offspring children with mothers from fluoridated or unfluoridated areas while pregnant.

Your "view" appears to ignore these facts.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
525
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
534
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

534 Views
Message 104 of 1,448

Bill, I have a PhD. My research experience over many years has required statistical analysis because of the biological systems involved. But I have had the advantage of working closely with biometricians in this research. I have found their experience and sophisticated experience invaluable and believe that many academics who use statistical analysis but do not have that long background can produce naive results.

The institutes I worked in (except foir university) generally required the presence of statisticians on pre-publication review boards. They would always ask to look at the data used.

You say "Green et al 2019 has several interesting points.  One is the fluoride/IQ connection." And refer to Table 1. Well the data in this table is from Table 1
table IQ.png

So, yes despite, as you say, Non-fluoridated moms had 0.40 mg/L fluoride in their urine compared to fluoridated moms with 0.69 mg/L.(SD 0.4 mg/L) this did not significantly influence the IQ of the offspring, all children, male or female.

Can you comment on that?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
534
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
513
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

513 Views
Message 105 of 1,448

And the fetus and newborns have no teeth, so treating them with exogenous industrial fluoride is not only unethical but is flat out illegal. The FDA has not only never approved any fluoride compound for ingestion but also banned the sale of any Fcompund intended to be ingested by pregnant women in the U.S. The FDA based this ban on the requested studies proving that ingesting fluoride during pregnancy produces no dental benefit in offspring.

This is very old news, but does the CDC take the time to investigate and find the truth? Do fluoridationists even care? Of course not. They are far beyond that.

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
513
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
508
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

508 Views
Message 106 of 1,448

Ken,

 

I have very little background in statistics, just my Masters program.  Dentistry did not have statistics.  So I need to consider those with more training and experience in statistics.  What is your statistical training?  MA?  PhD?  Have you had peer reviewed statistical publications?

 

Green et al 2019 has several interesting points.  One is the fluoride/IQ connection.  

 

Another is the urine fluoride concentraiton and fluoride intake per day. (See bottome of Table 1)

 

Non-fluoridated moms had 0.40 mg/L fluoride in their urine compared to fluoridated moms with 0.69 mg/L.(SD 0.4 mg/L)

 

Bashash et al 2017 also  reported lower IQ in children with mother's fluoride concentration above 0.4 mg/L and about the same 4 pt drop at 0.7 mg/L).

Ken, remember that there were no group of mother's without fluoride in their urine.   The question of interest would be whether urine fluoride levels even lower would result in even higher IQ for their children.   Is there a lower threshold where fluoride does not harm the infant, or like lead there is no known lower threshold, safe intake of lead.

 

Ken, what fluoride urine concentraiton is desireable for preventing dental caries and what concentration puts her child at risk?

 

Of course we want more research, but we do not need more research to stop adding fluoride to water.  Simply looking at dental fluorosis prevalence and we should stop adding fluoride to the water.

 

A crazy, crazy stupid public health myth to give everyone more fluoride when it probably hurts the unborn, infants should not have fluoridated water for making their formula, EPA agrees most children under 6 are ingesting too much for part of their life, and potential benefit from fluoride  is up to age 6.  

 

Fluoridation is an experiment on the public at large without their consent.

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

 

 

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
508
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
516
Views

My girw us the 3xact opposite. Only a fluoridation activist woRe: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

516 Views
Message 107 of 1,448

My view is the exact opposite of tbe claim that only fluoridation advocates would make, which is that the study somehow proves fluoride ingestion from water fluoridation does not affect IQ. That is deceived and beyond the pale. 

And only someone who is not an experimental biologist would dishonor the Mullenix study for not achieving the exact average midrange for F seen in human consumers of  F'd water. The technical difficulties with such adjustments are  not only extremely difficult  but are unbearably time consuming. She in fact lost her grant funds because fluoridation activists  could not stand obtaining more such data. The military officials desiring fluoridation laughed and began dumping their waste NaF into water supplies across the country without a second thought.

 

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
516
Views
Silver Conversationalist
0
Kudos
504
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

504 Views
Message 108 of 1,448

FAN response to the unfounded criticism of the Green et al. (2019) study:

 

NEW YORK, Aug. 21, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- A newly published carefully-researched and meticulously peer-reviewed US government-funded study published in JAMA Pediatrics reports maternal fluoride levels are linked to offspring's lower IQ. But the same day the study was released, many fluoridation proponents erroneously dismissed it, reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

 

Critics claim: "It is only one study." The truth is that over 50 studies have found a lowering of IQ associated with fluoride exposure including another high-quality US-government funded study (Bashash et al., 2017) using similar methodology as the JAMA study. (Also, Thomas et al. 2018 Occupational & Environmental MedicineValdez Jiménez et al. Neurotoxicology  2017 and Li et al Fluoride 2008)

 

Critics claim: "It doesn't prove cause and effect." No epidemiological study can. However, over 400 animal and cell studies underline the JAMA study's biological plausibility.

 

Critics claim: "A loss of 3-4 IQ points is not enough to be concerned."  This is a predicted average drop for the whole population – such a shift could dramatically reduce the percentage of very bright children and increase the number of mentally handicapped. 

 

Critics claim: "Loss of IQ cannot be sex-related." This claim ignores what the authors state about these sex differences. Christine Till the lead author responds to this and other criticisms in an interview on Canadian TV Contradicting other claims, the mothers were not exposed to high fluoride levels and the study did control for lead, mercury, manganese, perfluoro-octanoic acid, and urinary arsenic.

 

Claims that thousands of studies show fluoridation is safe are not true. In fact, public health has been negligent about examining  the health of people living in fluoridated communities. Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Director says, "It is sickening to hear promoters tout the benefits of swallowing fluoride when confronted with such serious evidence of harm. You can repair a child's tooth but you can't repair a child's brain if it is harmed during fetal development." "It is fine to ask for more studies. But, the only reasonable course of action is to place a moratorium on fluoridation until the matter has been resolved. Meanwhile, pregnant women should be warned to avoid fluoride as much as they can," says Connett.         

 

Connett's video response to criticisms of the JAMA/IQ study https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjKUqf85E6Q&feature=youtu.be 

 

SOURCE Fluoride Action Network

Related Links

http://FluorideAction.Net

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
504
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
496
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

496 Views
Message 109 of 1,448

Richard - You say:

"the fluoride systemic blood levels in the Mullenix studies matched that in humans who are unfortunate to have to live in an area with 1 ppm fluoridated water."

In fact, Mullenix cites plasma F levels in humans exposed to drinking water of 5-10, and 16 ppm F. Very far outside recommended concentrations.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
496
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
485
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

485 Views
Message 110 of 1,448

Richard. I think an apology from you is required. It was actually Bill who said this (https://community.aarp.org/t5/Brain-Health/Fluoride-Demand-AARP-Take-Action/m-p/2174982#M2232):

"The latest fluoride lowering IQ study by Green et al 2019, is rather powerful, with dosages of fluoride similar from all sources except fluoridated water."

I am confusing the two of you again.

But what is your view of the Green et al paper now that you have commented on it below:

https://community.aarp.org/t5/Brain-Health/Fluoride-Demand-AARP-Take-Action/m-p/2175262#M2251

Millunex's study used much higher concentrations of drinking water F. She cited a few levels for a few blood samples for humans receiving much higher than normal concentrations of F in drinking water. She did not make a proper evaluation of these and only opportunistic anti-fluoride activists make the argument you have.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
485
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Open Enrollment: Oct 15-Dec 7, 2019 Find resources to help you decide on the best healthcare insurance plans for you during Open Enrollment season

Top Authors