US Government Admits Americans Have Been Overdosed on Fluoride
By Dr. Mercola
The US government has finally admitted they've overdosed Americans on
fluoride and, for first time since 1962, are lowering its recommended
level of fluoride in drinking water.1,2,3
About 40 percent of American teens have dental fluorosis,4
a condition referring to changes in the appearance of tooth enamel—from
chalky-looking lines and splotches to dark staining and pitting—caused
by long-term ingestion of fluoride during the time teeth are forming.
In some areas, fluorosis rates are as high as 70-80 percent, with some children suffering from advanced forms.
The former recommendation called for a fluoride level of 0.7 to 1.2
milligrams per liter (mg/L) of water. The new upper limit set by the US
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is 0.7 mg/L, to prevent
these visible signs of toxic overexposure.
Why Is a Drug Added to Water When the Dose Cannot Be Controlled?
It's quite clear that when you add fluoride to drinking water, you
cannot control the dose that people are getting, and fluoride is in fact
not only a non-essential mineral but a toxic drug. This alone is one of
the reasons why fluoride shouldn't be added to drinking water at any
level.
If a doctor somehow managed to force a patient to take a drug with
known toxic effects and failed to inform them of the dosage and
frequency, and never monitored their health outcome, they would be
medically negligent and liable to legal and medical board action.
Yet water utilities administer this drug without a prescription, at
the behest of the government, without any idea of who will get what dose
and for how long, and without monitoring for side effects.
Fluoride is added to drinking water to, in theory, prevent a disease
(tooth decay), and as such becomes a medicine by FDA definition. While
proponents claim this is no different than adding vitamin D to milk, fluoride is not an essential nutrient. Moreover, fluoride isn't even approved by the FDA for the prevention of cavities.
We now know that at a limit of 0.7-1.2 mg/L causes a great many
people to overdose on the drug. Will an upper limit of 0.7 mg/L protect
everyone forced to drink fluoridated water?
Considering the fact that people also get fluoride from toothpaste,
dental rinses, processed foods, and beverages, the chances of
overexposure are still present, even at this lowered level.
Many Will Still Be at Risk for Overexposure at Lowered Fluoride Level
At the previous level, 40 percent of US teens became "collateral
damage." What will the allowable damage be at the new level? The HHS
said it will evaluate dental fluorosis rates among children in 10 years
to assess whether they were correct about this new level.
Let's say dental fluorosis goes down to 20 percent. Is 20 percent an
acceptable level of harm? How about 10 percent? Who decides what the
acceptable level of collateral damage is?
Remarkably, the Sacramento Bee5 reports that: "Recent
unpublished federal research found there's no regional differences in
the amount of water kids drink. So it makes sense for the same levels to
be used everywhere, health officials said."
I'd be very curious to review that study, because I have a hard time
imagining that kids everywhere drink the same amount of water!
It's also a ludicrous assumption unless every single child is also
exposed to the same amount of fluoride from other sources besides
drinking water... and weighs the same... and has the same health
status... and we know that's simply not the case.
According to the HHS, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "uses
the 90th percentile of drinking water intake for all age groups to
calculate the relative contribution for each fluoride source."
What this means is that if you drink more water than the 90th
percentile, you are not protected by this reduced level. People most
likely to fall into that category include infants receiving formula
mixed with fluoridated water, people working outdoors (especially in hot
climates), athletes, and diabetics.
Dental Fluorosis Is NOT the Only Risk of Water Fluoridation
Barbara Gooch, a dentist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) told NPR6 that "The
only documented risk of water fluoridation is fluorosis, and it is
primarily a cosmetic risk. Fluorosis in the milder form is not a health
risk."
This hints at a really deficient understanding of the available
science on fluoride's health effects. Dental fluorosis is the most visible form of fluorosis, but it's far from being "just cosmetic" and of no further concern.
It can also be an indication that the rest of your body, such as your
bones and internal organs, including your brain, has been overexposed
to fluoride as well.
In other words, if fluoride is having a visually detrimental effect
on the surface of your teeth, you can be virtually guaranteed that it's
also damaging other parts of your body, such as your bones. Skeletal
fluorosis, which isn't visible, is very difficult to distinguish from
arthritis. Symptoms indicative of early clinical stage skeletal
fluorosis include:
- Burning, prickling, and tingling in your limbs
- Muscle weakness
- Chronic fatigue
- Gastrointestinal disorders
- Reduced appetite and weight loss
The second clinical stage of skeletal fluorosis is characterized by:
- Stiff joints and/or constant pain in your bones; brittle bones; and osteosclerosis
- Anemia
- Calcification of tendons, or ligaments of ribs and pelvis
- Osteoporosis in the long bones
- Bony spurs may also appear on your limb bones, especially around your knee, elbow, and on the surface of tibia and ulna
All of this has been known since the 1930s, so it's rather disingenuous to proclaim that dental fluorosis is the only documented risk of water fluoridation.
If 40 percent of American teens have dental fluorosis, how many people
suffer from skeletal fluorosis as a result of chronic fluoride
overexposure? In one previous study, bone fracture rates also rose
sharply with increasing severity of dental fluorosis. Studies have also demonstrated that fluoride toxicity, caused by overexposure, can lead to:
| Increased lead absorption |
Disrupted synthesis of collagen |
Hyperactivity and/or lethargy |
Muscle disorders |
| Bone cancer (osteosarcoma) |
Increased tumor and cancer rate |
Arthritis |
Skeletal fluorosis and bone fractures |
| Genetic damage and cell death |
Damaged sperm and increased infertility |
Inactivation of 62 enzymes and inhibition of more than 100 |
Inhibited formation of antibodies, and immune system disruptions |
Fluoride Has No Benefit for Teeth When Swallowed
You are beyond naïve if you believe that fluoride somehow selectively
goes to your teeth when you swallow it. Rather, it accumulates
throughout your body's bones and tissues. What little benefit fluoride
may have is achieved through topical application.
Both the CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO) have noted that
there is no discernible difference in tooth decay between developed
countries that fluoridate their water and those that do not.7
The decline in tooth decay the US has experienced over the last 60 years, which is often attributed to fluoridated water, has likewise occurred in all developed countries, most of which do not fluoridate
their water. So declining rates of dental decay is not in and of itself
proof that water fluoridation actually works. It's also worth noting
that well over 99 percent of the fluoride added to drinking water never
even touches a tooth; it simply runs down the drain, into the
environment, where you can be guaranteed it's doing nothing that is
beneficial...
Source: KK Cheng et al. BMJ 2007.8 Rates of cavities have declined by similar amounts in countries with and without fluoridation. |
HHS Still Ignores Major Safety Concerns
According to Fluoride Action Network9
(FAN), in finalizing its new fluoride recommendation, the HHS has
whitewashed a number of safety issues, failing to address recent
research showing adverse effects ranging from lowered IQ in children
(found in no less than 43 studies), underactive thyroid,10 and ADHD.11
For example, one recent study12
linking fluoridated water to higher prevalence of ADHD created a
predictive model showing that every one percent increase in the portion
of the US population drinking fluoridated water in 1992 was associated
with 67,000 additional cases of ADHD 11 years later, and an additional
131,000 cases 19 years later.
FAN points out that the HHS even "resorted to deceit" when it dismissed research showing reductions in IQ. The HHS stated that "A
recent meta-analysis of studies conducted in rural China... identified
an association between high fluoride exposure (i.e., drinking water
concentrations ranging up to 11.5 mg/L) and lower IQ scores..." First
of all, there are in all 43 studies reporting a relationship between
fluoride exposure and reduced IQ. The study mentioned by the HHS only
looked at 27 of them.
But more importantly, when you seek to protect an entire population you have to look at the lowest level at which harm becomes apparent, not the highest. By
noting only the upper level of the fluoride concentrations found in
this study, it appears the HHS was trying to offer misleading
reassurance that their recommended level is well beneath any level where
risk may be present. But the lowest level at which IQ reductions were
noted in that study was 0.88 mg/L, which isn't that far from the new recommended upper limit of 0.7 mg/L.
Add fluoride from other sources, and you may very well get into the range of hazard. Interestingly, a number of studies13,14,15,16
have specifically shown that children who have moderate or severe
dental fluorosis score lower on tests measuring cognitive skills and IQ,
suggesting that if 40 percent of our kids have fluorosis, the water
fluoridation scheme in the US is likely affecting our children's IQ as well. As noted by FAN:
"In addition, in toxicology, it is not the concentration of
fluoride (mg/liter) that is the relevant parameter but the dose in
mg/day (how much you drink), and such a dose has to be compiled from all
sources. In the case of the Chinese children in rural villages in these
studies, they did not have two sources that US children commonly have:
typically they are not bottle-fed and they do not use fluoridated
toothpaste.
So, it is likely that some American children are getting higher
doses than some of the Chinese children who had their IQ lowered...
Because fluoride is an endocrine disruptor and has the potential to
lower IQ in children, FAN urges HHS to adopt the Precautionary Principle
and end fluoridation now."
They Got It Wrong—HHS Does Not Consider the Fact That Fluoride Is an Endocrine Disruptor...
According to FAN:
"HHS also stated in its press release that a report on the
toxicology of fluoride by the National Research Council of the National
Academies (NRC, 200617) 'found no evidence substantial enough to support effects other than severe dental fluorosis at these levels.'
What HHS failed to state is that the NRC report of 2006 stated18 for the first time that fluoride is an 'endocrine disruptor,'
which means it has the potential to play havoc with the biology and
fate of humans and animals. This is far more significant than severe
dental fluorosis."
In 2011, FAN submitted a number of concerns to the HHS, and none of
them have been adequately addressed, FAN says. These concerns include:
| Mass medicating the population via the water supply is unethical |
The benefit and safety of ingested fluoride has never been proved by accepted medical standards |
| Any benefits of fluoride are primarily topical, not systemic |
Americans will still be over-exposed to fluoride at 0.7 ppm |
| Infants will not be protected. Babies who receive formula made with
fluoridated water will still receive 175 times more fluoride than
breast-fed infants |
African-American children and low-income children will not be protected |
| Fluoride as an endocrine disruptor, which the HHS still has not taken into consideration |
HHS has not considered or investigated rates of skeletal fluorosis in the US |
To Protect Your Health, Avoid Fluoride
No matter which scientific studies you examine or which population
trends you view, the rational conclusion is that fluoride's health
dangers far outweigh the marginal dental benefits it might offer. Dental caries can be effectively prevented with means other than fluoridation, thereby avoiding the adverse effects of fluoride.
It's important to realize that fluoride is a cumulative toxin, which
over time can lead to serious health concerns, from hypothyroidism to
skeletal fluorosis and much more. The neurological effects are
particularly disconcerting. Even scientists from the EPA's National
Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory have classified
fluoride as a "chemical having substantial evidence of developmental
neurotoxicity."
Water fluoridation needs to stop. The question is how.
Despite all the evidence, getting fluoride out of American water
supplies has been exceedingly difficult. After all, the US government
has promoted it for over half a century. Were it to admit that they were
wrong all along, and have in fact been poisoning everyone all this
time, the ramifications could be enormous. It's not impossible to
abolish water fluoridation, however, as evidenced in areas that have
successfully done it.
According to the late Jeff Green, national director of Citizens for
Safe Drinking Water, a repeated theme in the cases where communities
successfully removed fluoride from their water supply is the shifting of the burden of proof.
Rather than citizens taking on the burden of proving that fluoride is
harmful and shouldn't be added, a more successful strategy has been to
hold those making claims, and the elected officials who rely on them,
accountable for delivering proof that the specific fluoridation chemical
being used fulfills their health and safety claims, and is in
compliance with all regulations, laws, and risk assessments already required for safe drinking water. To learn more, please see this previous article, which discusses these strategies more in-depth.
The Fluoride Action Network has a game plan to end water fluoridation
not only in the US, but worldwide, but they need your support to
succeed. Clean pure water is a prerequisite to optimal health.
Industrial chemicals, drugs, and other toxic additives really have no
place in our water supplies. So, please, protect your drinking water and
support the fluoride-free movement by making a tax-deductible donation
to the Fluoride Action Network today.
Recent Victories in the Fight Against Water Fluoridation
There have been a number of recent victories in the fight against
water fluoridation that are worth celebrating, including the following:
- Clarksburg, West Virginia19—Water
Board members voted 2-1 in April to end fluoridation due to the growing
number of studies showing negative side effects. The decision by the
Clarksburg board end fluoridation for over 25,000 citizens, including
residents of Bridgeport and a number of other smaller communities20.
- Oneida, New York21—On
May 5th the Common Council voted 5-1 to reject fluoridation for the
third time since 2002. For months, the council has held public hearings
and debates on fluoridation, listening to an array of experts on both
sides of the issue, including FAN’s Dr. Paul Connett and NY Dept. of
Health’s Dental Representative Jay Kumar, who is a long-time promoter of
fluoridation. Despite an aggressive lobbying campaign by the
fluoride-lobby, the council and community couldn’t be tricked into
believing that the practice was safe, effective, or necessary. The
decision will protect the water for over 21,000 residents.
- Kingsville, Ontario22—This
Canadian City Council, representing over 20,000 citizens, passed a
motion in April reaffirming its stance in opposition to fluoridation.
The issue was raised by the former Deputy Mayor, who urged the council
to pass the motion to send a message to the provincial government, which
is considering mandating the practice. The community of Lakeshore,
Ontario23
also recently publicized their opposition to fluoridation, and will be
sending a letter to provincial officials opposing a mandate.
- Carl Junction, Missouri24—Councilors
voted to end fluoridation in April after considering a number of
concerns they had regarding the effectiveness and safety of the
practice. The community, which is home to approximately 8,000 residents,
started fluoridating the water supply in 2005 after voters approved the
use of the additive. Carl Junction isn’t alone in making this decision.
According to a recent article,25
“over the past five years, [at least] seven cities and towns in
Missouri have removed fluoride from their municipal water systems, and a
half-dozen more have put the matter to vote.”
- Bennington, Vermont26--Despite
aggressive campaigning by a well-organized and well-funded
pro-fluoridation coalition, in March residents of this community of
16,000 voted 1,539 to 1,117 in opposition to fluoridation in an advisory
referendum vote. This is at least the fifth time Bennington residents
have voted down fluoridation since the 1960s.
- Gilford, Pennsylvania27--Gilford
Water Authority officials have decided to end fluoridation after more
than 60 years of practicing it. The authority sent a letter to water
customers stating, “We believe we should not put anything into the water
that is not required by regulation to maintain the potability and pH
balance of your water.”
- Sonoma City, California28--In
March, City Councilors voted 3-2 to oppose a proposal by the County
government to add fluoride to the city’s drinking water. The council
will be sending a letter of opposition to the Sonoma County Board of
Supervisors.
Help End the Practice of Fluoridation
There's no doubt about it: fluoride should not be ingested.
Even scientists from the EPA's National Health and Environmental Effects
Research Laboratory have classified fluoride as a "chemical having
substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.” Furthermore,
according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 41
percent of American adolescents now have dental fluorosis—unattractive
discoloration and mottling of the teeth that indicate overexposure to
fluoride. Clearly, children are being overexposed, and their health and
development put in jeopardy. Why?
The only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of water
fluoridation in the first place. Fortunately, the Fluoride Action
Network has a game plan to END water fluoridation worldwide. Clean pure
water is a prerequisite to optimal health. Industrial chemicals, drugs,
and other toxic additives really have no place in our water supplies.
So, please, protect your drinking water and support the fluoride-free
movement by making a tax-deductible donation to the Fluoride Action
Network today.
Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More
I encourage you to visit the website of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and visit the links below:
Together, Let's Help FAN Get the Funding They Deserve
In my opinion, there are very few NGOs that are as effective and
efficient as FAN. Its small team has led the charge to end fluoridation
and will continue to do so with our help!
Please make a donation today to help FAN end the absurdity of fluoridation.
-
Spread the Word to
Friends And Family
By Sharing this Article.
-
-
-
66
inShare
-
-
-
Email
No comments:
Post a Comment