Listen to The Perfect Scam Podcast and Nominate It for a People’s Choice Podcast Award! Find Out More

Gold Conversationalist

Re: Support for AARP to take action on Fluoridation

Message 1 of 3

Fluoride has no physiologic function in man or animals, and is a contaminant in the bloodstream, and yet people who oppose eating and drinking materials with intentionally added soluble fluorides are  labeled scaremongers? Wow. The Safe Drinking Water Act prohibits any requirerment to add any substance into public water supplies except for substances needed to sanitize it. If you can't follow the truth (that ingested fluoride causes formation of bone of poor quality when accumulated into bone at any level), then follow the law.
As Graham and Morin published, the SDWA was written specifically to halt the spread of water fluoridation in the U.S. The fact that courts do not support the law is not unusual and is no excuse to ignore the law.

R. Sauerheber, Ph.D.

Richard Sauerheber, Ph.D.
Report Inappropriate Content
Info Seeker

Re: Support for AARP to take action on Fluoridation

Message 2 of 3

DThank you for this support, Dr. Limeback, to cease Fluoridation in the USA.  I too have great concerns for my fellow seniors.   Fluoridation is a very serious issue from the cradle to the grave.


I am metabolically sensitive to the Fluoridation pesticides and the contaminated toxic waste additive to my drinking water.  I have been actively removing Fluoride contaminants from my ingestion for the last 10+ years.  It is a tedious process but I found it a good choice.  The value of my journey has proven to be profitable: every medication I was already taking dropped in dosage (1/4 to 2/3 lower dosage).  Two medications I have completely eliminated (anti-inflammatory and statin).  


The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) aggressively promotes fluoridation through the Centers for Disease Control and Oral Health Coalitions by representing fluoride as a mineral that is necessary for healthy teeth which should be optimized at 0.7 ppm in municipal water supplies. HHS together with its partners which include the American Dental Association (ADA) and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) receive considerable funding for fluoridation promotion.  Together these organizations claim fluoridation is a prophylactic measure to prevent cavities in the poor while claiming fluoridation is not a medical treatment but is the equivalent of ensuring a healthy diet. They do this despite two 21st century reviews that found inconsistent and unreliable evidence of any reduction in oral health disparity through fluoridation, as well as, questionable evidence of only small benefit (Iheozor-Ejiofor et al. 2015; McDonagh et al. 2000). 
Fluoride is a known developmental neurointoxicant (Mundy et al. 2009, 2015; Choi et al. 2012, 2015), endocrine disruptor (NRC 2006; Peckham et al. 2015; Singh et al. 2014; Ruiz-Payan 2006; Kheradpisheh et al. 2018; Rocha-Amador et al. 2014) and inflammatory drug (Butler et al. 1990; Loftenius et al. 1999; Kuang et al. 2017; Weia et al. 2016; Gandhi et al. 2017; Gutowskaa et al. 2015; Follin-Arbelet et al. 2016).  Fluoride is also a protoplasmic enzyme poison and consequently has an impact on immunity (Müller et al. 2010; Loskill et al. 2013; Schretter & Mazmanian 2017; Edelblum et al. 2017; Sharon et al. 2016; Khosravi & Mazmanian 2013).  And unfortunately, a fetus in the womb is heavily exposed to fluoride through their mother’s intake because it crosses the placenta (see compilation of scientific citations in “Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix” by MacArthur, 2017).
I do find young moms are beginning to question the water fluoridation practice.  Once seniors take notice of this ineffective, inefficient and unethical outdated policy, I believe policy will change. 
A Registered Nurse 
Report Inappropriate Content
Info Seeker

Support for AARP to take action on Fluoridation

Message 3 of 3

I was reading with interest the dozens of posts about fluoridation and the call for AARP to take action. 


I am a Canadian senior. I'm a retired professor of dentistry with years of funded research experience and publications on fluoride in teeth and bones. I served on the 2006 US National Academies of Sciences Fluoride in Drinking Water Committee, was head of Preventive Dentistry at the University of Toronto, worked as the fluoride expert of the Canadian Dental Association, was president of the Canadian Association for Dental Research and wrote the textbook "Comprehensive Preventive Dentistry".


I am worried about the health of my fellow seniors, both in my country and south of the border in yours. Readers of the AARP forum should be alerted to the health threat from fluoridation practice.


Fluoridation a serious issue. We in Canada are slowly weaning ourselves off of adding fluoride to the drinking water. It is a toxic waste product (not purified additive) with cancer causing contaminants. Fluoridation policy is unconscionable and immoral. When I discovered, through my own research and review of the literature, how much fluoride harms humans, I simply had to speak out. 


I have been attacked publicly by my profession (other dentists) and by members of the self-proclaimed America Fluoridation Society (AFS), who have recently joined AARP. They are relentless in making claims of 'safe and effective', shooting down every single post on fluoridation across Canada and the United States when it shines a bad light on the practice.


Proponents of fluoridation rarely if ever voiced their criticism of distinguished scientists overseas opposed to fluoridation in Europe, such as the Nobel Laureate Arvid Carlsson. (1923-2018)  


In his later years, Dr. Carlsson was an outspoken critic of fluoridating water supplies to prevent cavities. He said that fluoride produces side effects, such as mottled teeth, and that fluoridation was contrary to the principles of modern pharmacology because there was no way to regulate the amount of fluoride individuals received. 


Although there are pros and cons to the practice from a scientific viewpoint, in my estimation, the cons have it. Here are my top 10 cons. I can support all of these with science (don't worry, I won't cut and paste and throw reams of complex studies at you) 


  1. Human Rights Violation: In many states in the US, fluoridation is compulsory. When it's not mandatory, local city councils sometimes make the decision to fluoridate when grants are made available without consulting their communities. And when communities vote for it, the vote is often split, so half the community is forced to accept fluoridation whether they like it or not - a violation of individual informed consent to medical treatment, a human right.


  1. Medical Mandate: You cannot avoid fluoride once it is the water. You have to install expensive filtration equipment in the home, not eat processed foods, and never eat out at restaurants again. 


  1. Contamination of Water: Fluoridation is mass medication. Although proponents will say it's 'adjustment' of natural fluoride levels - that's incorrect. The fluoridation additives are industrial waste chemicals contaminated with cancer-causing elements. 


  1. No Dose Control: The dose of the drug cannot be controlled when it is in water supplies. Some people may take in very little, others way too much.


  1. Ineffective: If it works (it might save one filling per person over 40 years) it works topically, not by swallowing it. Rinse with fluoridated water then spit it out (of course you need to drink water for hydration so that's not practical). Well, you could buy bottled water to drink and use tap water to rinse if you think it works to reduce dental decay. There are no studies to show that fluoridation works in older adults. 


  1. Contraindications: People with extra sensitivities to fluoride cannot avoid fluoridated water. You develop more sensitivities as you get older because there is more fluoride in your body and bones as you age, mostly from drinking water.


  1. Unmonitored Effect: The side effects of administering this drug (fluoride) to the entire population are never monitored. Ask your MD next time you see him or her to do a fluoride analysis on you and you will likely get a blank stare. 


  1. Cumulative Damage: If you live in a fluoridated area your bones will accumulate more fluoride and as you get older fluoride accumulation is associated with arthritis and brittle bones. We all know what that means! 


  1. Neurotoxic: If you have grand-kids on the way, discourage expectant moms from drinking fluoridated tap water. Prenatal exposure to fluoride has been shown to be associated with lower IQs in the offspring in multiple studies over the past 25 years.


  1. Dental Damage: Fluoridated tap water added to infant formula has been shown to increase dental fluorosis in kids (white streaks and splotches), and this condition, which includes more severe dental fluorosis (brown staining an dental enamel flaking) is increasing in the US.


I refuse to engage with the members of the AFS in this thread or any other thread on this forum. They have been insulting and abusive here and in many other online venues.


I offer my advice as an expert, freely and without prejudice but I cannot give dental advice online. I have no financial interest whatsoever in this fluoridation 'fight'. I simply want the truth to come out and for people to not to be unduly influenced by self-proclaimed spokespersons for fluoridation. 


I will be informing the Canadian counterpart to the AARP that the AARP is being asked to look at the fluoridation in light of modern science. It will be a real service to seniors in both Canada and the United States if they both issue a condemnation of that practice.


In the meantime, I can be found on Twitter if anyone wants to message me.



Dr. Hardy Limeback BSc PhD (Biochem) DDS

Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto


Report Inappropriate Content