Content starts here
CLOSE ×
Search
Reply
Bronze Conversationalist

Fluoride - Demand AARP Take Action

Read More
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Bronze Conversationalist

Read More
In This Topic
Periodic Contributor

Great idea!

I'm starting a coalition in NYC Against Artificial Fluoridation - Fluoride in not a nutrient, we shoudn't be exposing ourselves to neurotoxins by drinking the toxic waste product of the fertilizer industry. Please email nyc.caaf@gmail.com for more information.

Bronze Conversationalist

Industry has learned that debating the science is much easier and more effective than debating the policy. In field after field, year after year, conclusions that might support regulation are always disputed. Animal data are deemed not relevant, human data not representative, and exposure data not reliable.- David Michaels, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, in “Doubt Is Their Product” (2008)

 

Prof. Rita Barnett-Rose of Chapman University includes a nice mix of science and law in her 2014 legal analysis of the U.S. fluoridation policy. She concludes, "The evidence continues to suggest that compulsory water fluoridation is no longer justifiable as a public health benefit.... the cessation of all compulsory water fluoridation schemes should be the goal of all public health agencies, ethical lawmakers, and informed citizens."

 

See: http://works.bepress.com/rita_barnett/3/ 

 

Phone, email or write the AARP directly. Tell them they need to step up and write a position statement opposing fluoridation, for the sake of the elderly, those in fragile health, pregnant women and their fetuses, and the very young. 

Info Seeker +

Right on write on wil do!!!
Bronze Conversationalist

From: Moms Against Fluoridation 

Erin Brockovich and signers put the Health agencies on notice: April, 2015

Erin Brockovich has just put the government on big notice of their shortcomings in interpreting science and protecting the health of American citizens.  Please take time to read this document about fluoridation.  This is one of the very the best documents/ letters we have seen.  The references are great; the critical thinking is excellent, and the range and depth she covers are compelling.  And, it has some 'teeth'.  Just read the first 2 pages if you are short on time. Read Letter

 

 

I suggest the Signature page (p 16) and the Questions attachment (last page) provide the best summary of this 24 page document, but go ahead, read the whole thing. It's worth your time!   

Periodic Contributor

Adding additional contaminants to water is not required by law and should be seen as a hindrance in the goal to provide the cleanest most natural water to customers.

Regular Contributor

You are correct.  Contaminating water has strict laws and penalties.  Fluoridation is tradition, faith, speculation based rather than based on current science.

 

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

0 Kudos
12,793
0
Report
Regular Contributor

The addition of water additives is a standard, important and well accepted component of proper drinking water utilities. Fluoride is but one of the over 40 water additives available to utilities. By your standard all are "additional contaminants."
Regular Contributor

Hi Dr. Chuck,

 

Yes there are over 40 additives to water available to utilities to make the water safer, to treat water, none of them are approved with the intent to treat people.   

Perhaps you know how many of those 40 are classified by the EPA as contaminants and how many are classified as highly toxic.   

Bill Osmunson DDS MPH

0 Kudos
12,206
0
Report
Periodic Contributor

Thanks for the support!

 

Unfortuanately large cities such as NYC are mandated by Public Health programs to fluoridate the public water supply, even though the American Dental Association has not done it's homework: no large scale review of the scientific literature has shown that fluoride is safe and it also hasn't shown that it is effective: See the recent Cochrane Oral Health Review, National Academy of Science and The York Review for more details of studies showing adverse health effects.

Info Seeker +

Read More
Periodic Contributor

Sometimes, by the time you get to 50 or 60, people seem to think it is time to be in poor health, need a joint replacement, have thyroid dysfunction and diabetes.  With all the evidence of Fluoride being an endocrine dysrupter and known to Fluoride deposits in our bones, I imagine if AARP would take a long hard look at this topic, you would have numerous supporters from all walks of life.  The young people of the nation are beginning to see the illogical addition of Fluoride to our water supply and are shaking their heads at us older adults wondering why we let this continue for so long.

 

Regular Contributor

Read More
Bronze Conversationalist

 "The evidence against the safety of this public health policy will keep mounting and never disappear again. My ignorance of fluoride in the beginning was a matter of chance. If you ignore this evidence today, it will be a matter of choice.” - Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, Head Toxicologist at Forsyth Dental Center (1999) 

 

ON HYPERACTIVITY 

See TODAY's study published in Environmental Health that correlates ADHD (hyperactivity) in children with fluoridation. This is only the latest in 20 years of studies on animals and humans proving that fluoride in utero or youth not only permanently mottles the teeth of some children, but also permanently scrambles their brains:

  1. 2015 Ecologic study: http://www.ehjournal.net/content/14/1/17/abstract
  2. 1995 Animal study: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/mullenix-1995.pdf

I recommend this 1996 talk by Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, the author of the 1995 study: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hci7BnWydAo

 

Fluoridation is wrecking our health and the health of our grandkids! 

Phone and write AARP... tell them to take a stand against water fluoridation, now! 

 

Bronze Conversationalist

Read More
Newbie

If AARP has ever taken on a cuase that could have a great impact on the health of our community .... THIS IS IT!!!

Newbie

 
Contributor

Extremely important topic from my community and for those of us over 50 as well.  If you've ever gone to an orthopedic sturgeon and been told, you have arthritis, bone spurs, thickening and brittleness of the bones, osteosclerosis, then you most likely have damage from too much fluoride. It's called skeletal fluorosis in just about every other county.  It is a chronic crippling problem that by that point you are aware of it there isn't much you can do about it but suffer and bear the expense.  The mayo clinic did one study associating it with too much black tea, but they've pretty much been told to back off fluoride if they want to advance their careers.   the original studies in 1946 by the ADA also clearly demonstrated this problem in the lab rats. 

Newbie

Read More
Trusted Contributor

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.

Bronze Conversationalist

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.
Newbie

Thanks for your intelligent and educational posts.

 

If you look on the Periodic Table of Elements, you will see Fluorine, Chlorine and Bromine (a common baking additive) all displace Iodine ~ which is vital to healthy thyroid function. No wonder thyroid malfunction has become rampant! We once added iodine to our table salt to insure adequate levels. Now, that effort has been sabotaged.

 

And honestly, if fluoride worked in preventing cavities, wouldn't America be cavity-free by now?

Regular Contributor

No, America would not expected to be and is not cavity-free.

This is a classic example of the Straw Man logical fallacy.

Fluoridation is not a silver bullet cure but it does greatly decrease the cavity burden a population must bear. 2/3rd of the operations for mouth fulls of rotten teeth preschool children must have are avoided. The economic return on the fluoridation investment in lower dental bills varies between communities from 12% to over 13,000%.

References furnished if anyone desires.
Bronze Conversationalist

We are going around in circles. Water additives have already been discussed. All water additives that are legalas described in the SDWA are those that actually purify water (remove debris, prevent corrosion, and sanitize water, etc.). But the one substance that is not a legal additive is fluoride. Fluoride is the only chemical added into water for the purpose of treating humans. It does not purify water.  The NSF labels fluosilicic acid hazardous waste as a water purifying agent pass inspection and to gain favor with skeptics so that it appears legal to add into water. Fluoride has zero ability to purify water. It is added to elevate the blood concentration of the non-nutrient contaminant fluoride ion in consumers.

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Bronze Conversationalist

Read More
Regular Contributor

Fluoridation is an excellent issue for AARP to spearhead. This practice of adding toxic chemicals to raise the fluoride level to prevent tooth decay is NOT safe and is Not even effective!! And for seniors it jut adds more burden on our bodies especially our brains!! Fluoridation has become a political issue when  organizations like AARP need to look past the years of propaganda and endorsements and expose the harm out weieghs the supposed benefits! THANK you for opening up this topic ...AARP please take this on!!!

Bronze Conversationalist

Every city that discharges any contaminant into public water supplies,  regardless of state regulations, must  have an NPDES permit to do so. The problem for continuous discharging of fluoride, an EPA recognized contaminant in water,  Is that water districts do not regard fluoride when intentionally added, as a discharged item. So they don't think they need the permit for fluoride and no one  enforces the requirement for fluoride if the fluoride and its other contaminants was done intentionally (as mandated by CA law).

Again, why is it my fault that I cannot get calepa to forbid fluoridated water discharges into rivers (or water systems intended for consumption)? 

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Need to Know

"I downloaded AARP Perks to assist in staying connected and never missing out on a discount!" -LeeshaD341679

AARP Perks

More From AARP