Friday, November 15, 2013
Dr Robert Grimes unscientific opinions are a threat to public health.
Letter sent to Oxford University regarding scientific misconduct and medical negligence
Dr Robert Grimes who self promotes his employment as a researcher
in Oxford University stated in the Irish Times (Anti-fluoride lobby can’t get
its teeth into the truth, Monday Sept 9th 2013) that the arguments
of anti-fluoridation campaigners are detrimental to the public understanding of
science and medicine.[i]
Dr Robert Grimes
yesterday stated on national radio in Ireland (George Hook, Newstalk Radio, 14th
November 2013) that fluoride is an essential micronutrient. This is
scientifically incorrect. The European Scientific Committee on Health and
Scientific risk stated in their 2010 report on Fluoridation of drinking water
that “Fluoride is not an essential element for human growth and development,
and for most organisms in the environment.”
This scientific
opinion is also supported by the European Food Safety Authority (2005).[ii] Furthermore the EFSA stated (2006) that “There is
no convincing evidence that health and development of humans depend on the
intake of fluoride” [iii]
Dr. Grimes further stated on Newstalk Radio that the source of
fluoride is irrelevant, a fluoride ion is a fluoride ion. This statement is
again factually and scientifically incorrect. The World Health Organisation
(WHO) has stated that naturally occurring calcium fluoride is 3000 times less
soluble in water than chemical compounds used for artificial water
fluoridation. [iv] The WHO noted that “Fluoride ions are readily
released from soluble fluoride compounds such as sodium fluoride, hydrogen
fluoride, and fluorosilicic acid” (EHC, 2002) [v]. These are the compounds used for artificial
water fluoridation.
The European Food
Safety Authority (EFSA Journal 2008)[vi] and the United States Agency for Toxic substances
and Disease Registry (ATSDR, 2003) [vii] have stated that “soluble forms of fluoride salts
have reported absorption efficiencies of between 80–100 %. Conversely,
insoluble sources of fluoride such as calcium fluoride, are much less well absorbed.”
The EFSA have stated
“the toxicity of fluoride is dependent upon the type or species of the compound
ingested, and therefore, the more soluble salts of inorganic fluorides are the
most toxic (EHC, 2002; ATSDR, 2003).”
[viii],[ix]
Scientific bodies in
the EU[x] and the US[xi] agree that no toxicity data is available on
hexafluorosilicic acid.
Hexafluorosilicic acid (also known as hydrofluosilicic acid or
hydrofluorosilicic acid) is
used as an active substance for water fluoridation throughout Ireland and in a
few other countries in the World where water fluoridation is practised.
Hexafluorsilicic acid
was placed on a list of prohibited substances by the European Commission and
was specifically banned in 2006 for use as a biocidal product due to a lack of
toxicological and epidemiological data to demonstrate it was safe for use for
consumers or the environment.
Dr. Grimes stated on national radio that with the concentrations
in fluoride in artificially fluoridated water even if one drank swimming pools
of water would cause no harm. This statement is not only shocking in its
scientific ignorance but extremely dangerous for public health and should not
be allowed to be broadcast on public radio. These statements were made by a
medical researcher employed by Oxford University, I would add that the
presenter of the national radio show noted repeatedly the prestigious record of
this university and stated that Dr. Grimes was an expert in fluoride.
The US National Academies have reported that fluoride intake of
between 0.7-3.5mg per day has been found to affect thyroid function. [xii]
That is the equivalent to drinking one litre of water. The maximum upper
tolerable level for fluoride is 4mg per day for men and 3mg per day for women
over 19 years of age. [xiii] For children aged 4-8 years the upper recommended
daily intake is 1mg day, for children 9-13 years 2mg/day and for age 14-18years
3mg/day. [xiv]
The EFSA have stated that the additional daily fluoride intake for
consumers living in fluoridated regions compared to individuals in
non-fluoridated countries is 3.5 - 4mg per day. [xv]
This was calculated based on consumption of fluoridated tap water, and
additional fluoride from using fluoridated water to cook with or process foods
or beverages in addition to an individual drinking 500ml of tea made with
fluoridated water. The EFSA concluded that the daily intake would exceed 6mg
fluoride per day without including fluoride from other sources such as
toothpaste or medications.
It is a scientific
fact that the upper safe tolerable levels of exposure to fluoride are vastly
exceeded by individuals living in
the Republic of Ireland.
Chan et al. (2013) published findings in the Journal of Food
Research International that a significant proportion of the population in the
UK are chronically exposed to fluoride at levels that can lead to detrimental
health effects from the consumption of tea alone.[xvi]
This finding was based on measurement of fluoride concentration in tea made
with non fluoridated deionised water. By making tea with fluoridated water the
risks and health effects are increased.
The consumption of tea in Ireland is greater than the UK and consumers
make tea with fluoridated water.
In 2010, Dr. Peter Mansfield published a study[xvii]
based on epidemiological data from adults living in England, Scotland, which
also included data from Republic of Ireland. The findings of this study,
independently verified and accepted by the UK Food Safety Authority as accurate
were published in a peer reviewed journal. The findings concluded that 73% of
the adults tested living in the fluoridated region of Ireland exceeded the safe
recommended maximum daily level of exposure to fluoride. The figure for adults
living in non-fluoridated areas of England was 25%.
The public statements by Dr. Grimes in support of mandatory
fluoridation are not only scientifically inaccurate but constitute a grave risk
to public safety in Ireland. They also discredit the scientific profession and
academic institutions that are promoted by reference to his place of employment.
The actions of Dr. Grimes and his public statements not only discredit the
distinguished and learned institution that is Oxford University, but he has
discredit the scientific profession with his ill-informed and scientifically
inaccurate public statements.
[i]
http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/anti-fluoride-lobby-can-t-get-its-teeth-into-the-truth-1.1520290
[ii] European Food Safety Authority, Opinion of the
Scientific Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies on a request
from the Commission related to the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of Fluoride, EFSA
Journal 2005 192,1-54
[iii] European Food Safety Authority, Opinion of the
Scientific Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies on a request
from the Commission related to the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of Fluoride, EFSA
Journal 2005 192,1-54, Page 9
[vi] European Food Safety Authority, Scientific Opinion,
Calcium fluoride as a source of fluoride added for nutritional purposes to food
supplements.
The EFSA Journal (2008) 882, 1-15
[vii] ATSDR, 2003. Toxicological profile for fluorides,
hydrogen fluoride, and fluorine. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Public Health Service. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
Division of Toxicology/Toxicology Information Branch. September 2003. Atlanta,
Georgie.
[ix] ATSDR, 2003. Toxicological profile for fluorides,
hydrogen fluoride, and fluorine. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Public Health Service. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
Division of Toxicology/Toxicology Information Branch. September 2003. Atlanta,
Georgie.
[x] EU Directorate General for Health and Consumers, Critical
review of any new evidence on the hazard profile, health effects, and human
exposure to fluoride and the fluoridating agents of drinking water, Scientific
Committee on Health and Environmental Risks, 2010
[xi] United
States, National Research Council of the National Academies, Fluoride in
Drinking Water, 2006
[xii] United
States, National Research Council of the National Academies, Fluoride in
Drinking Water, 2006, pages 263-264
[xiii] European Food Safety Authority, Opinion of the
Scientific Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies on a request
from the Commission related to the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of Fluoride, EFSA
Journal 2005 192,1-54, Page 9
[xiv] European Food Safety Authority, Opinion of the
Scientific Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies on a request
from the Commission related to the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of Fluoride, EFSA
Journal 2005 192,1-54, Page 9
[xv] European Food Safety Authority, Opinion of the
Scientific Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies on a request
from the Commission related to the Tolerable Upper Intake Level of Fluoride, EFSA
Journal 2005 192,1-54, Page 14
[xvi] Chan et al. Human exposure assessment of fluoride from tea
(Camellia sinensis L.): A UK based issue? Food
Research International 51 (2013) 564–570
[xvii] Mansfield,
Fluoride consumption: The effect of water fluoridation, Fluoride 43(4)223-231
Oct-December 2010,
No comments:
Post a Comment