Rethink your job search with the AARP job board. Find opportunities for experienced workers today.

Reply
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
722
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

722 Views
Message 421 of 1,248

Richard Sauerheber, get some rest.  You are embarrassing yourself.  

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
722
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
718
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

718 Views
Message 422 of 1,248

Dr. Bill, your comment:  "And the next post was EPA legal counsel place responsibility for the addition of fluoride on the FDA."

 

Response:  I don't know what that means or how it is relevant.

 

Your comment:  "You don't acknowledge when you are wrong.  You have no intent to learn, just argue."

 

Response:  For some reason, you seem to believe you have a monopoly on knowledge.  You are condescending in your remarks.  You refuse to admit the reality that no Federal Agencey (and we know what this means) considers optimally fluoridated water a drug.  You are straining to make an argument against the face of reality.  Please, open your mind and get real.

 

Your comment:  "You were clear, Federal Agency and did not specify USA.  I'm not a mind reader.  Comments were specific and then you made a broad generalizing comment which was blatently wrong, and you know it.:

 

Response:  Dr. Bill, I have, in previous comments used the phrase "U.S. Federal Agency."  That is just a fact, and you are free to re-read my unedited comments to verify that fact.  You are harping on one instance in which I did not include the adjective "U.S."  That is pathetic, in the context of this discussion, in which no foreign entities have been mentioned, you are claiming that you believe the nation of Japan is a Federal Agency and that you are not a mind reader - How could you have known that I didn't mean "Japan" when I requested a Federal Agency that didn't consider optimally fluoridated water a "drug?"  

You accuse me of being "trump-like?"  There is no way, in the context of this discussion, that you could have interpreted my request for an example of a "Federal Agency" as meaning a foreign country.  And now, you are playing the victim who is "not a mind reader."  Pathetic.  Who are you trying to fool?

 

Your comment:  "Now, give me one agency which acknowledges they have responsibility for determining the dosage, safety at that dosage and efficacy at that dosage? None exist, so you will remain silent again."

 

Response:  Sure, I'll give you two.  1.)  The EPA has set the Maximum Contaminant Level for Fluoride in drinking water at 4 parts per million.  If any person were ever to have been harmed because they drank water with 0.7 ppm F (the optimal level - i.e., water fluoridation) the EPA itself would be responsible for that harm.  No question about it.  But there has never been even one authenticated, documented case of any human being who has ever been harmed by drinking water with 0.7 ppm F. 

 

2.)  States.  In my state, The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality oversees and enforces strict guidelines for Community Water Fluoridation.  If a local municipality were to "overdose" its citizens with fluoride, a few things would happen.  First, the MDEQ would have to be notified . . It then would oversee proceedures for informing citizens and flushing water mains.  It would be illegal, per the SDWA, for citizens not to be notified.  This is in the SDWA.  Don't you know that?  

 

If any person was harmed, that municipality would be liable.  If negligence was found to be the cause, the guilty party would be held accountable.

 

Do you imagine this is just a Helter Skelter setup with no one in charge?  Because that's the picture you're trying to paint.  That's why I say you are "deceptive," to say the least.

 

Your quote:  "Therefore, it is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence of safety, dosage, efficacy, not mine (the patient)"

Response:  Your comment implies that optimally fluoridated water is a "drug."  That's what you're saying.  You are being deceptive.  In fact you are lying.  In the United States of America, where this discussion is taking place, optimally fluoridated water is not considered a "drug," a "medicine" or anything that would prompt you to claim to be a "patient."  There is no reason for you to call yourself a "patient" because you drink optimally fluoridated water, other than your ambition to generate paranoia about safe tap water.  

 

I hope that clears things up for you.

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
718
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
726
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

726 Views
Message 423 of 1,248

And flujoridce ion is not a food. It has no digestible caloric content.

Fluoride is not a vitamin. There is no physiolgoic function or enzyme that fluoride modulates in a reversible dose dependent manner that all vitamins have.

Fluoride is not a mineral nutrient. There is no adverse pathology that develops in any human or animal birthed, developed, and grown lifetime in the complete absence of fluoride. 

Fluoride is not a water purifying agent. Fluoride in water does not kill microbes or decrease any known water contaminant or have any other desirable effect that water is required to have. . .

 

Fluoride is a toxic calcium chelator. Whether it is concentrated enough in the blood to lower the activity of ionized caclium, or whether it is so low a concentration in blood that its main effect is to attach to calcium in bone hydroxyapatite, it associates preferentially with calcium, causing adverse sequelea as a result.

Some claim it is a drug for valid reasons. Others argue it is a contaminant used as though it were a drug but without being an official drug. Who cares?  Its ingestion is useless, harmful, and is not endorsed or officially approved or required in water by the FDA or the EPA. The CDC requests it but knowws full well the SDWA prohibits them from requiring it. Any such Federal or State mandate requiring it is unlawful.   

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
726
Views
Regular Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
730
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

730 Views
Message 424 of 1,248

The insinuaiton is that somehow I'm not only guilty of making false claims but also a liar. I have the letter from the FDA head Edna Lovering in my posession. The reason her claim is important, that fluoride added into water is an "uncontrolled use of a drug" is because of the claim on this site that no Federal agency labels fluoride a drug, as though no one in the FDA or EPA argues that it is.

There are many people in the FDA and the EPA who define the use of toxic industrial fluorides for the treatment of caries as a drug. Just because there is no official announcmenet on their websites does not mean no one has made the statement.  

The insinuation that we have no right to make the statement that fluoride in water can be labeled a drug because there is no evidence for it from Federal agencies is false. The head of the FDA wrote it. But we are not allowed to write it? 

Preposterous.

And again, I don't care if fluoridation is labeled a drug or if it is labeled a toxic substance, or a contaminant, or a mineral used for some perceived benefit to tissue. What matters is that it is not a nutrient and in fact exerts chronic toxicity especially in bone.

No one has rights to make the claim that it is not a drug AND at the same time claim it is not a calcium chelator or a poisonous substance with longterm side effects. It cannot be said to have zero adverse side effects in the entire population who ingests it during their entire lifetime. 

Don't call it a drug, fine. Then call it a poisonous substance because it is a contaminant of the bloodstream, not a physiologic ingredient in normal blood.  You can't have it both ways.

Either state that it is a drug with side effects, or state that it is not a drug and instead is a calcium chelator with side effects. The idea of not calling it a drug so as to claim it is either a food or a nutrient or a vitamin, etc. is false. It is either a taxic contaminant used as a drug, or it is a contaminant used as a mineral for believed effects on teeth.  Either way it is not innocent from side effects though fluoridation promoters claim so.  Again, what are we supposed to tell elderly people who have consumed fluoridated water lifetime when their bones are painful? Lie and claim that fluoridated bone has no ability to cause or exacerbate that?  No way.  

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
730
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
585
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

585 Views
Message 425 of 1,248

David,

 

And the next post was EPA legal counsel place responsibility for the addition of fluoride on the FDA.

 

 

 

You were clear, Federal Agency and did not specify USA. 

 

Now, give me one agency which acknowledges they have responsibility for determining the dosage, safety at that dosage and efficacy at that dosage? None exist, so you will remain silent again.

 

You have fun picking other people apart, but refuse to answer which agency accepts jurisdiction.   Remember, you want everyone to be given extra fluoride regardless of their choice, how much they get from other sources, regardless of any government Federal agency accepting responsibility for determining dosage, efficacy and safety.  Therefore, it is YOUR responsibility to provide the evidence of safety, dosage, efficacy, not mine (the patient).

 

 

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
585
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
579
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

579 Views
Message 426 of 1,248

billo, your comment:  

 

"Well, read your statements.  You said there was no Federal Agency which called fluoridated water a drug.  So I gave you a list."

 

Response:  In the context of this discussion . . you guys are making up stuff about the EPA, the FDA, the CDC, NSF, even the USDPH . . in the context of this discussion, to respond with something like "Japan," is reaching for an answer.  I think you know that.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
579
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
582
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

582 Views
Message 427 of 1,248

Bill, really?

 

"You said there was no Federal Agency which called fluoridated water a drug.  So I gave you a list.

 

Then you change your statement and say "US Federal Agency. . . ." 

 

Response:  You gave me a list?  No you didn't.  Japan is not a federal agency.  The Netherlands is not a federal agency.  Isreal is not a federal agency.  Sweden is not a federal agency.  Finland, Austria, or Belgum are not federal agencies.  

 

By the way, I didn't edit my reply to cover up what I had originally said, and then attack someone. 

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
582
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
556
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

556 Views
Message 428 of 1,248

billo, your comment:

 

"You wrote,  "Your quote:  "the head of the FDA in 1983 wrote that fluoride added into water is an uncontrolled use of an unapproved drug,""

 

You responded, "Response:   Was he speaking on behalf of the FDA?  Are you saying this is the FDA's official position?  If so, show me the link.  If not, your comment is nothing short of deceptive".

 

Sorry.  I don't remember giving you a quote from the head of the FDA in 1983.  Other quotes, but I don't remember that one.  My memory is not good, but I don't hide my own Easter eggs. . . yet."

 

Response:  That was a response to Dr. Sauerheber.  Please look at the top of a comment, to whom it is addressed, if you feel confused.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
556
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
552
Views

Re: Fluoride is a drug when consumed for medical or dental purpose per FDA

552 Views
Message 429 of 1,248

Ah, no dr. bill, you have completely re-written history with your comment.

 

You originally said . . (you know, because you wanted to make the argument that optimally fluoridated water was a drug) . . you said, 

 

"In my last post I told you how Congress defines a drug.   One way is "INTENT" of use.  FDA considers a placebo a drug.  Makes no difference if it works or if it does not work, the INTENT is key to a drug."

 

That flawed statement is the only thing I was addressing in my comment.  

 

Now you say, "For one thing, a food is not a highly toxic substance defined in law as highly toxic or poison."

 

Irrelevant to your statement.  Toxicity was not part of your definition of the word "drug."

 

You now say, "And the FDA has determined fluoride is to be regulated as a drug, not a food or mineral.  Read the toothpaste labels."

 

Irrelevant.  Toothpaste is not optimally fluoridated water.

 

You say, "You call the FDA a joke, but you need to read and study how to indroduce a drug, the definitions of drugs and how the FDA regulates drugs vs foods."

 

No.  I called your argument a joke.  The FDA does not consider optimally fluoridated water - you know, what we are talking about here - to be a drug.

 

You say, "Several places I have pointed out you lack a full understanding, but I have not called you a liar."

 

Response:  You seem to have a problem with accepting reality.  It is you who lack understanding, and you have demonstrated it many times.  You don't understand the purpose of the FOIA, you don't understand clear statutes in the SDWA. And to this discussion, there is not one federal U.S. agency which considers optimally fluoridated water a drug - in any sense of the word, and you have not demonstrated anything to the contrary.

 

 

 

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
552
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
557
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

557 Views
Message 430 of 1,248

David, 

 

You wrote,  "Your quote:  "the head of the FDA in 1983 wrote that fluoride added into water is an uncontrolled use of an unapproved drug,""

 

You responded, "Response:   Was he speaking on behalf of the FDA?  Are you saying this is the FDA's official position?  If so, show me the link.  If not, your comment is nothing short of deceptive".

 

Sorry.  I don't remember giving you a quote from the head of the FDA in 1983.  Other quotes, but I don't remember that one.  My memory is not good, but I don't hide my own Easter eggs. . . yet.

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
557
Views