Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Evidence based Medical Science used to end policy of fluoridation of drinking water in the Netherlands.
This is a
summary of information complied from public record and published peer reviewed
journals on the history of fluoridation in the Netherlands. It explains how
medical based science resulted in the termination of fluoridation in this
Country, thanks largely to Dr. Hans Moolenburgh, a Medical
Physician, Cancer Specialist, and Clinical Ecologist who with a team of medical
doctors and medical researchers conclusively demonstrated that fluoridation of
drinking water resulted in the population being subjected to low grade
poisoning by fluoride with wide ranging medical side effects.
Hans
C. Moolenburgh, M.D., graduated as a medical doctor from the University of Leyden in 1952. He was a
general practitioner in the city of Haarlem in the Netherlands since April
1953. Apart from being a G.P., his main interests were
clinical ecology and complementary forms of cancer treatment.
Dr. Moolenbuurgh wrote three
books on the subject of fluoridation. Two of these are in Dutch:
"Fluoridering van het leidingwater," 1973 and "Fluor Liever
niet" in 1990. The third book is in English: "Fluoride, the Freedom
Fight," 1987. Dr. Moolenburgh was actively involved in the campaign to end
fluoridation in the Netherlands and spent many years researching the science
surrounding fluoridation.
In 1952,
Dutch health authorities, following the lead of the United States, began
fluoridating the public water supply in the city of Tiel with Culemborg as the
control city.
In 1971, Dr. Moolenburgh documented the first fluoride victim in Holland
during the Haarlem hearings regarding fluoridation. The case involved a baby
boy from nearby fluoridated Velsen who had breathing troubles since birth. When
the child was 6 months old, he was brought to Dr. Moolenburgh for treatment and was completely cured in one week of
its ailment simply by removing exposure to fluoride in the drinking water.[1]
On March
20th, 1972, the city of Amsterdam began fluoridating its water supplies. This
had a widespread effect on surrounding communities who derived their drinking
water from the Amsterdam water suppliers, such as Heemstede, Bennebroek,
Hoofddorp, Haarlemmerliede and many others. Dr. Moolenburgh found himself in a
unique position to study the effects of fluoridation first hand, as half of his
practice lay in Heemstede (fluoridated) and the other half in Haarlem (non-fluoridated).
As he had already extensively studied the possible side-effects of fluoridated
water from the mainly American literature, Dr. Moolenburgh was
on the lookout for changes in the morbidity pattern in his practice. According
to Dr. Moolenburgh it soon became apparent that the extensive American
data showing adverse effects were accurate.
“The
adverse health effects began almost at once, with people, especially children,
developing colicky pains. The parents of these children often did not even know
that their water supplies were fluoridated. These sudden changes only took place
in fluoridated Heemstede, and the cure was easy: non-fluoridated water. This cure was shown repeatedly to be the correct one,
as parents made errors with the jerrycans of non-fluoridated water. As soon as
fluoridated water was given, be it only one cup, the sensitive children began
to yell again. This was particularly stressful in babies, who often yelled
through the whole night. Other
early symptoms were the small ulcers in the mouth called stomatitis aphtosa. I
also saw how children with a known allergic condition that had been under
control, such as children with atopic eczema, suddenly saw a return of their
complaints.”[2]
Based
upon this experience in his own practice, Dr. Moolenburgh organized a group of practitioners and
researchers to study the effects of fluoridation on health. All the doctors came from fluoridated communities and
many did not believe in the existence of the side-effects, as the health
authorities had emphatically denied their existence. In addition to the original 12 physicians practicing
in Haarlem and some of its surrounding fluoridated areas, various individuals
with training in biology, chemistry, and neurology also participated in the
above study.
After
un-blinded tests on skeptical General Practitioners which showed negative
health effects (similar to low-grade poisoning), to evaluate our initial findings they conducted a double-blind experiment:
"To
obtain unassailable proof that nothing but fluoride in the water was responsible and that the ill effects
were not imaginary, Dr. Moolenburgh's group turned to a double blind procedure.
A cooperating pharmacist prepared eight numbered bottles of drinking water,
some with fluoride, some without. Only the pharmacist knew which ones
contained fluoride. The numbers, placed in a sealed envelope, were sent
to the group's attorney. Patients who had recovered from side effects after
changing to non-fluoridated water drank daily, one liter of water from one of
the bottles given to them. If symptoms occurred, the number of the bottle was
sent to the attorney in a sealed envelope. Only after all the envelopes were
received were they opened in the presence of witnesses to avoid any possibility
of bias. These
tests proved that fluoridated water caused the side effects we had identified,
and the results have been published.[3]
After
several months of careful study, the group began to grasp the full importance
of the problem. The difficulty at first was that each symptom in itself could
be interpreted as a normal illness. Only a combination of symptoms (e.g.
colicky pains, small ulcers and blurred vision) pointed in the true direction. The list of the most common complaints we could
readily identify with the exposure to fluoridation includes;
- Stomach and intestinal pains
- Mouth ulcers
- Excessive thirst
- Skin irritation and eczema
- Migraine-like headaches
- Visual disturbances (blurred vision)
- Worsening of known allergic complaints
- Mental depression
- Stomatitis
- Joint pains
- Muscular weakness, and extreme tiredness.
The
clinical results observed by Dr Moolenburgh and his team confirmed the studies
undertaken by Dr. Waldbott and Dr. Petraborg and well as Dr. Ruben Feltman and
Kosel B.S., M.S, which also confirmed that fluoride in drinking water caused
medical ailments within the community [5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16],[17],[18]
According
to Dr. Moolenburgh “in each of the many cases of adverse fluoride reaction
identified, changing to non-fluoridated water cured the complaints. When
fluoridated water was returned, the complaints returned. After several months a new and disturbing complaint
was added to these: joint pains. While the other complaints could be cured in
two or three days with non-fluoridated water, the joint complaints took several
weeks to some months of non-fluoridated water to clear up.”
“Through
continued study and research”, Dr. Moolenburgh observed “we now understand that what we have been studying is
not an allergy for the fluoride ion as we had first thought, but an
intoxication from the highly toxic fluorides that had been added to the water
supplies. It is well known that sensitivity to poisons can vary from person to
person, and that this variation is quite extensive. In an allergy, an increased dose of the irritating
substance will still only give symptoms, perhaps increased in severity, in
those allergic to it. In a poison, a small dose will give complaints in the
more sensitive persons. In the case of fluoride, research shows that to include
about 5% of the population. With increasing doses more and more people will
fall ill, and when the dose is high enough everyone will be ill, with perhaps
the most sensitive persons already dead or dying. As a summary of our research,
we are now convinced that fluoridation of the water supplies causes a low grade
intoxication of the whole population, with only the approximately 5% most
sensitive persons showing acute symptoms. The
whole population being subjected to low grade poisoning means that their immune
systems are constantly overtaxed. With all the other poisonous influences in
our environment, this can hasten health calamities. It
is in the light of this constant low grade poisoning that the substantial
evidence of increased cancer death rate due to fluoridation needs to be
considered and understood.”
In
conclusion, Dr. Moolenburgh stated under oath that “It
is my considered scientific opinion, and I speak in the name of my colleagues
who joined in this research, that the fluoridation of water supplies gives a
significant immuno suppression of the whole population subject to it, and is
one of the important precursors of the civilization illnesses that are rampant
in modern industrialized society. It is my
best scientific judgement, made with a high degree of scientific certainty,
that fluoridated drinking water is very dangerous to the health of those who
drink it.” [19]
Following
publication of their research results water fluoridation in Holland was
discontinued in 1976.
In a
recent letter published in the journal ‘Fluoride’
Dr. Moolenburgh observed “as a 84-year-old physician with 54 years in
medical practice, who also lived through the German occupation of Holland
during WW II and saw what totalitarian thinking leads to in the end. When the
fluoridating authorities finally begin to realize that fluoridation was founded
on a hill of sand, they will behave like little children when the incoming tide
demolishes their seaside sand constructions. They will shut their eyes and
protest, “No, this cannot be!” Public health authorities should only be
interested in promoting good health and preventing human suffering. Yet, from
their actions, they appear more concerned with adhering to erroneous dogmatic
thinking and maintaining their own positions and power. Discussion and debate
with fluoride promoters is useless and a waste of time. Just as happened in Holland and throughout most of
Europe, authorities who try to suppress unwelcome facts about fluoridation will
be eventually be swept away in response to compelling evidence and massive
public indignation.”[20]
It is
lamentable that in 2013, as Ireland holds the presidency of the Council of the
European Union, that the Republic of Ireland, alone within Europe, continues to
support the mass medication of its population using untested industrial
chemicals that are known to cause harm to human health and the environment.
Given the
considerable amount of information available there is no doubt but that the
public health authorities as well as the political establishment in Ireland (as
well as in the other few remaining countries that still support fluoridation)
have utterly failed to undertake a proper medical or scientific due diligence
to protect their citizens from unnecessary harm, that may result from
supporting what can only be described as a ‘blunt totalitarian policy’
mandating the mass medication of entire populations with untested chemicals
being added to public drinking water.
Medical
policy should be based on medical facts, and the facts clearly show that
fluoridation of drinking water is neither safe nor sustainable.
46-7.
[2]
Affidavit Of Hans C.
Moolenburgh, M.D. Circuit Court of Wisconsin, Fond Du Lac County, Case No. 92
cv 579, March 1993
[3] Grimbergen GW. (1974).A
Double Blind Test for Determination of Intolerance to Fluoridated Water
(Preliminary Report). Fluoride 7:146-152.
[5]
Waldbott GL. Chronic fluorine intoxication from
drinking water. International Archives of Allergy and Applied
Immunology 7 70-74 1955.
[6]
Waldbott GL. Incipient fluorine intoxication from
drinking water. Acta Medica Scandinavica 156 157-168 I956.
[7]
Waldbott GL. Urinary fluoride and calcium excretion in
persons suspected of fluoride intolerance. Henry Ford Hospital
Medical Bulletin 5 259-268 December 1957.
[9]
WaIdbott GL. Fluoride in Clinical Medicine. International.
Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology 20 Suppl 1 1962.
[10]
Waldbott GL. Incipient chronic fluoride intoxication
from drinking water. II. Distinction between allergic reactions and drug
intolerance. International Archives of Allergy and Applied
Immunology 9:241-249 1956.
[11]
Waldbott GL, Cecilioni VA. "Neighborhood"
fluorosis. Clinical Toxicology 2 387-396 December
1969.
[12]
Shea JJ, Gillespie SM, Waldbott GL. Allergy to
fluoride. Annals of Allergy 25 388-391 July
1967.
[13]
Waldbott GL. Allergic reactions to fluoride. Journal of Asthma
Research 2 51-64 September I964.
[14]
Waldbott GL. Tetaniform convulsions precipitated by
fluoridated drinking water. Confinia Neurologica 17 339-347 1957.
[16]
Petraborg HT. Chronic fluoride intoxication from
drinking water (Preliminary Report). Fluoride 7 47-52 1974.
[18] Feltman and Kosel, Prenatal and Postnatal ingestion of
fluorides, Fourteen years of investigation, Final Report, Journal of Dental
Medicine, Vol 16. No 4, 1961
[19] Affidavit Of Hans C. Moolenburgh, M.D. Circuit Court of Wisconsin, Fond
Du Lac County, Case No. 92 cv 579, March 1993
No comments:
Post a Comment