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

Reply
Frequent Social Butterfly
4
Kudos
1002
Views

Alzheimer's Association removes name from ADA list

1,002 Views
Message 251 of 1,248

“In large measure, those marred by dementia are showing the results of toxicity from mercury, aluminum, lead, cadmium, arsenic and other heavy metals. Their neurons have been poisoned. They are turned into Alzheimer’s victims directly through the efforts of dentists who blindly follow the party line of their trade union organization, the ADA.” - Dr. Morton Walker, DPM (1994)

 

Fluoride, too, Dr. Walker. This month, January 2019, the Alzheimer's Association had enough. They demanded its name be removed from the ADA & CDC lists of fluoridation supporters. 

 

Fluoridated water poisons from womb to tomb, with those on either end of that spectrum counting among the vulnerable sub-populations because of several factors, most notably their reduced kidney function to eliminate the toxin and increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier. 

 

Fluoridationists will continue to do their song and dance, but it's as futile as rearranging chairs on the Titantic. 

AlzheimersADA2019.jpgAlzheimer's Assoc off ADA list

Report Inappropriate Content
4
Kudos
1002
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
1086
Views

Can you trust the CDC & EPA?

1,086 Views
Message 252 of 1,248

“Official stories exist to protect officials.“ - Liam Scheff, investigative journalist and author of “Official Stories: Counter-Arguments for a Culture in Need” (2012)

 

Senator Ted Kennedy led the Congress in condemming the CDC, NMA & AMA sanctioned Tuskegee Syphillis Experiment that withheld diagnosis & treatment from infected men and their families 'in the interest of the greater good' which was to study the progression of untreated syphllis. 

 

The 1974 National Research Act and 1979 Belmont Report came out of that effort. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was also created in 1974. It would never occur to people in general to have to write laws saying that doctors and government agencies should behave ethically and not cause suffering and spread of an infectious disease by using self-serving and immoral justifications - but there we had it. The CDC, under the direction of the Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS) and with the support of independent associations of doctors, who also endorse fluoridation, perpetuated a fraud that did exactly that.

 

The only reason that three decade 'experiment' ended was a public health service employee got fed up with trying to get the public health service to act ethically since 1966 and leaked the story to the New York Times and Senator Kennedy in 1973. 

 

This month, Sen. Kennedy's nephew, human rights activist & environmental attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr, through the Children's Health Defense which he chairs has issued a condemnation of fluoridation as a human experiment that must end! RFK who recently won a case against Monsanto that included unearthing documents proving EPA & Monsanto collusion to hide evidence that RoundUp causes cancer has also filed fraud and obstruction of justice charges against the DHHS and its DOJ attorneys this month on another issue. 

 

Now tell me again how we should trust endorsements from the CDC, DHHS, AMA, etc. and how ethical these fluoridationist are. Also, explain how the authors of the SDWA didn't have ethics in mind when they inserted the language they did about not using water to dose people, albeit hampered by federal vs. state jurisdictional constraints. 

  • The question at hand is whether the AARP has the integirty & courage to do the right thing like the PHS employee who leaked the story to the NY Times?
Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
1086
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
1147
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,147 Views
Message 253 of 1,248

 

Ross, 

 

A good study supporting the consensus of other studies.  

My friends just put together a few more items on fluoride and the brain.

 

FLUORIDATION’S NEUROTOXICITY

There is no question that fluoride is neurotoxic, damaging the brain and central nervous system, as documented by hundreds of studies. Extensive scientific evidence, including studies at exposures caused by fluoridated water, show it can harm children. It can NOT be declared safe.

 

2006: The National Research Council published Fluoride in Drinking Water1, the most authoritative review of

fluoride’s toxicity. It stated unequivocally that “fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body” and “the chief endocrine effects of fluoride include decreased thyroid function.”

 

2012: A Harvard-funded meta-analysis2 found that children ingesting higher levels of fluoride tested an average 7 IQ points lower in 26 out of 27 studies. Most had higher fluoride concentrations than in U.S. water, but many had total exposures to fluoride no more than what millions of Americans receive.

 

“Fluoride seems to fit in with lead, mercury, and other poisons that cause chemical brain drain.”

Philippe Grandjean, MD, PhD, Harvard study co-author, Danish National Board of Health consultant, co-editor of Environmental Health, author of over 500 scientific papers.

 

2015: A study3 covering nearly all of England found that populations drinking fluoridated water had nearly twice as

high prevalence of hypothyroidism (low thyroid level), known to be linked to IQ deficits. The study’s authors concluded there is substantial cause for public health concern.”

 

2017: A petition to EPA4 to end fluoridation found fluoride caused neurotoxic harm in 57 out of 61 human studies (mainly lowered IQ), several at levels in fluoridated water, and 112 out of 115 animal studies. EPA denied the petition, triggering a lawsuit going to trial in federal court in 2019.

 

2017: A National Institutes of Health - funded longitudinal study5 in Mexico covering 13 years, one of the most robust ever done, found that every one part per million increase in fluoride in pregnant women’s urine – approximately the difference caused by ingestion of fluoridated water6 - was associated with a reduction of their children’s IQ by an average 5-6 points. Leonardo Trasande, a leading physician unaffiliated with the study, said it raises serious concerns about fluoride supplementation in water.” 7

 

2018: A Canadian study8 representing 6.9 million people found iodine-deficient adults (nearly 18% of the population) with higher fluoride levels had a greater risk of hypothyroidism. The study’s lead scientist, Ashley Malin, said “I have grave concerns about the health effects of fluoride exposure.” 9

  1. https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11571/fluoride-in-drinking-water-a-scientific-review-of-epas-standards),

  2. Choi et al https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/

  3. Peckham et al http://jech.bmj.com/content/69/7/619

  4. http://fluoridealert.org/content/content-bulletin_3-1-18/

  5. Bashash et al https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/ehp655/

  6. Till et al https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP3546

  7. Newsweek, Sept. 19, 2017, https://www.newsweek.com/childrens-iq-could-be-lowered-drinking-tap-water-while-pregnant-667660

  8. Malin et al https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=till+malin+fluoride+thyroid

  9. Environmental Health News, Oct. 10, 2018, https://www.ehn.org/we-add-it-to-

 

 
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
1147
Views
Moderator
2
Kudos
1135
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,135 Views
Message 254 of 1,248

Hello everyone,

Please remember to post according to the community guidelines, and refrain from insults and inflammatory comments.

Thank you for your cooperation in making the AARP Community a safe and welcoming place for all.
http://community.aarp.org/t5/custom/page/page-id/Guidelines

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
1135
Views
Conversationalist
2
Kudos
1132
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,132 Views
Message 255 of 1,248

Regarding the effect of fluoride on the brains of rodents, the abstract of a paper titled ‘Neurotoxicity of fluoride: Neurodegeneration in hippocampus of female mice’ (Bhatnagar et al., 2002) published in the Indian Journal of Experimental Biology reads:

“Light microscopic study of hippocampal sub-regions demonstrated significant number of degenerated nerve cell bodies in the CA3, CA4 and dentate gyrus(Dg) areas of sodium fluoride administered adult female mice. Ultrastructural studies revealed neurodegenrative characteristics like involution of cell membranes, swelling of mitochondria, clumping of chromatin material etc. can be observed in cell bodies of CA3, CA4 and dentate gyrus (Dg). Fluoride intoxicated animals also performed poorly in motor co-ordination tests and maze tests. Inability to perform well increased with higher fluoride concentration in drinking water.”

See full paper at IJEB 40(5) 546-554.pdf

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
1132
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
1136
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,136 Views
Message 256 of 1,248

No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” - Albert Einstein 

 

I got curious so went looking for that study on fluoride reducing brain size in rats that Chuck apparently sent Bill in error. I didn't find it, but I found two others that I found interesting given that I had been experiencing alarming liver problems between 2012-2014 that disappeared overnight without returning when I got very strict about avoiding fluoride, even using no-low fluoride water to brush my teeth. My gastrointestinal, kidney and arthritic symptoms that plagued me for decades also diappeared not to return. Ditto for my high cholesterol which began in my 20s concurrent with all those other symptoms and the fluoridation of my town. 

 

Fluoride messes with lipids which are the body's main energy store and associated with the liver as well as messes with the immune system. (Afolabi et al. 2013)

 

Low doses of fluoride damages good antioxidants that protects cells and increases lipid peroxidation which is damaging to cells, particularly the liver. (Yamaguti et al. 2013)

 

We don't need any more studies: Fluoride is poison in any dose, more dangerous to some people than others, but particularly dangerous to the bodies, bones and brains of senior citizens who have consumed it daily for decades. 

Report Inappropriate Content
Tags (1)
2
Kudos
1136
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
1111
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,111 Views
Message 257 of 1,248

Dr. Chuck,

 

I had a closer look and over 200 peer reviewed published studies reporting harm to the brain from fluoride exposure.

 

Simply made no sense that you would be sending me so many articles on harm to the brain from fluoride in an effort to convince us that fluoride is safe.

 

I thought, certainly Dr. Chuck has not read these studies and still supports fluoridation.

 

Studies through a number of years, smaller brains, with potential treatments such as vitamin therapy and other methods to try and ameliorate the brain damage.

 

Studies on learning diminished.  Studies on intelligence diminished.

 

And then I discovered the possible catch.  The link you sent took me to my Drop Box but must not be the references you intended.   Please send the references again.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
1111
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
1076
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,076 Views
Message 258 of 1,248

Dr. Chuck,

 

Thank you for sending references in the Drop Box, but it makes no sense.

 

Are we on the same page or did you not read the studies?  How am I misunderstanding you?

 

Lets discuss the first study in your list.  

 

Olusegun 2013 published in Toxicology.

 

Fluoride caused a diminished brain weight in rats compared to controls.  

 

Why do you consider smaller brains to be good or safe or effective?

 

Certainly the fluoride appears to have had an effect.  Would you consider lower brain weight to be a benefit?  Or safe?  Or effective?

 

Clearly, fluoride had an effect on the brain by reducing or stunting development.

 

A smaller brain is BAD.  Is HARM.   NOT GOOD.

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
1076
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
3
Kudos
1067
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,067 Views
Message 259 of 1,248

“In my book, ‘Health and Nutrition Secrets,’ I have a long chapter on the fluoridation issue in which I cite and discuss a great number of real scientific studies which show conclusively that the fluoridation of public drinking water to prevent cavities is not only a scam but that it is also quite harmful, especially being linked to significant brain pathology.” -  Russell L. Blaylock MD, board certified neurosurgeon and  Editor-in-chief of Neuroinflammation section of Surgical Neurology International  (8 Jan 2019)

 

One of the online strategies of the fluoridationists is to bury substantive comments with lots of rhetorical noise. Here are four major points with hyperlinks to supporting detail that they are trying to hide from AARP and seniors on this forum: 

 

  1. Many scientists, doctors, dentists and professionals have come to the conclusion based on the evidence that fluoridation provides little to no dental benefit, but harms bodies, brains and bones. Click here and here

  2. Groups particularly vulnerable to ill effects from fluoridated water include pregnant women, bottle fed babies, senior citizens and any with chronic health conditions. 

  3. Many plants and aquatic species have low tolerance for fluoride which builds up in the environment from waste water where it persists a millions years or more along with the tramp contaminants included in fluoridation chemicals which are the waste product of industry. Click here.

  4. Judges have determined that fluoridation is harmful but legal under US law and should be dealt with by the legislative branch of government or regulatory agencies, but the well-monied fluoride stakeholders who include Big Pharma & Big Sugar as well as the ADA and industrial fluoride interest, pay millions to lobbyists, (and even fund social media campaigns) in order to perpetuate the profitable deceit. Click here

 

Hence, the condemnation of fluoridation from organizations of integrity like the Chlldren's Health Defense, LULAC, IAOMT, and AARP is very important. Click here.

 

DentistsDoctors1.jpgDentistsDoctors2.jpg

 DFandBottleFedBabies.jpgBottle fed babies

Report Inappropriate Content
3
Kudos
1067
Views
Frequent Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
1072
Views

Re: Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

1,072 Views
Message 260 of 1,248

Dr. Chuck,

 

I wish I could share your confidence in tradition, marketing and money.

 

Science is not stagnant and anchored in stone and we do learn more with time, or at least we should learn more with time.  

 

Although I agree with the US FDA that the evidence of efficacy is incomplete, I will agree with you that some find the limited evidence adequate to claim benefit of tooth decay reduction with the ingestion of some fluoride.

 

What about dosage and safety?  

 

The same evidence suggesting benefit also suggests increasing caries with  an increase in fluoride exposure.  As I posted earlier, there maybe a "sweet" spot of caries reduction with some fluoride exposure and increased caries with less or more fluoride.  

 

In 2011-2012 NHANES the survey indicates 60% dental fluorosis, a biomarker of excess fluoride, 2% with moderate/severe fluorosis.  

 

Many are ingesting too much fluoride and the same research showing possible benefit shows possible increased caries with more fluoride.  

 

That raises the concern that excess fluoride is increasing dental caries (not to mention fractured teeth, bones, ADHD, lower IQ, etc.)

 

I'm not impressed with like minded believers having reviews of their beliefs.  I've  started to be a part of one of those sham reviews.  The parameters and limitations, restrictions and cherry picked members made me lose confidence.

 

The Chair of the NRC 2006 review (which didn't look at benefit) said his committee was unique in that it was the first review to include members who were not fully supportive of fluoride ingestion.  

 

My question to you is for hard evidence, not digested by cherry picked reviews, but hard evidence on efficacy and safety.  

 

As you know, there is no high quality evidence on efficacy, no prospective RCT.

 

As you know there are no quality reviews of safety of fluoride ingestion at ranges ingested in the USA.

 

I'm looking for facts, research, not tradition, marketing and money.

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
1072
Views