"It is crucial to note that this [NRC]
report is NOT about community water fluoridation."
- The American Dental Association
(caps theirs).
When is toxic sludge good for us?
When profit can be made by selling it. The truth, of
course, never really changes, nor can the truth be altered
by even the most corrupt and outdated of advertising
campaigns. No matter how frequently a white-coated promoter
presents himself as an "expert" or an "official" and repeats
the age-worn slogans and distinctions given to this toxic
sludge - i.e., that this product is good for us, that it is
"safe and effective," and that it is one of the top ten
public health wonders of the past century - toxic sludge
remains toxic sludge. It has not ever been "good for us."
According to the government's own databases it has not ever
been "safe and effective" despite their continued "official"
misleading claims. It is time to leave the last century
behind along with its deliberate lies and deceptions. It is
time to enter a new century and learn the truth about the
lies - primarily the truth about fluoride and what fluoride
has truly cost the citizens of the United States of
America: According to newly published reports, fluoridation
may have cost some of them their lives and others their
health.
Tens of millions of Americans throughout the US are now
spending an unprecedented amount of money each year
purchasing pharmaceutical products. These unprecedented
billions of US dollars (approximately $252 billion for
prescription drugs in 2005) are being spent because US
citizens are attempting to purchase relief from an
unprecedented array of mysterious, nationwide symptoms. If
one follows the money and looks at the top ranking
pharmaceutical sales, it quickly becomes apparent that
Americans appear to be collectively seeking relief from
similar symptoms. Three of the most common symptoms now
occurring in the US are thyroid malfunction, elevated
cholesterol and GI problems. (1, 2, 3)
The billions of US dollars spent in the search for relief
should be speaking loudly to us. The money alone should be
telling us that something affecting most of the nation is
affecting most of the nation rather profoundly. We now find
that it is certainly reasonable to suspect that this
"something" might well be the toxic sludge that has been
added to our drinking water for over 50 years. This
mass-medical treatment has been done under the promise that
it would guarantee the prevention of dental cavities, yet
the guarantee has never delivered its promised claim.
States with the highest percentage of water fluoridation -
such as Kentucky, which is just under 100% "optimally
fluoridated" - also have the highest percentage of caries
and dental problems. The CDC reports 42% of "optimally
fluoridated" Kentuckians had lost all of their teeth. (4)
As if this were not enough, we now learn that the substance
being used to medically "treat" two-thirds of the nation via
drinking water has never been tested, approved or found to
be safe for human consumption by any government agency,
including the FDA and the USDA. (5)
Forget the "official" advertising slogans for fluoride;
forget the invented titles of grandeur and the
emotion-charged suggestion that we "must do this for the
sake of the poor children." Forget the false news alerts
reassuring us that water fluoridation remains "safe and
effective" and forget the reminders that it has been called
one of the great wonders of the past century. Our focus
should now be upon the reports that surfaced just after the
Ides of March in 2006. After over 50 years of misleading
glorification, toxic sludge has been officially identified
by a blue ribbon researcher panel as toxic sludge. We now
know we must keep this sludge away from our children and out
of our water - because our lives and health depend upon it.
On March 22, 2006, the National Academies' National Research
Council (NRC) issued a 500-page report looking at
peer-reviewed studies on the side-effects of fluorides. The
importance of this report is profound not only in its
findings and recommendations, but also because the NRC
advises government agencies such as the CDC, EPA and others
as to what research evidence is appropriate, timely and
relevant to their work.
Despite the misleading comments now surfacing that the NRC
report dealt only with "naturally occurring fluoride," and
that the report was "NOT" about water fluoridation, etc.,
the NRC report clearly states that fluoride exposure from
all sources was considered. As stated on page 19 of the NRC
report, sources for internal fluoride exposure include
"food, water, beverages, dental products" and in addition to
ingestion, internal exposure to fluoride also occurs from
inhalation and dermal [skin] absorption. "Most fluorine
added to drinking water," the report states, "is in the form
of fluosilicic acid - or sodium fluosilicate - collectively
referred to as fluorosilicates." On page 20, the report
states, "The major dietary source of fluoride for most
people in the United States is fluoridated municipal
(community) drinking water." The NRC study then examined
numerous reports, showing an association between fluoride
ingestion and an appalling range of physical side effects,
disorders and diseases.
Shortly after the above NRC study was published, a
long-awaited Harvard study led by Dr. Elise Bassin also
surfaced after several years of being shelved rather than
released to the public. Dr. Bassin's dissertation was
completed in May of 2001. In her study she found that boys
who ingested fluoridated water between the ages of 6 to 8,
were significantly more likely to later develop a deadly
form of bone cancer, osteosarcoma, than boys who did not
drink fluoridated water. (6)
According to a letter from the Environmental Working Group (EWG)
to the National Toxicology Program, Report on Carcinogens,
dated June 9, 2005, Dr. Bassin's study first came to the
attention of the EWG "as a result of a failed attempt to
obtain the full doctoral thesis by the staff of the National
Research Council committee on fluoride safety. After being
repeatedly denied a copy of the thesis, the NRC committee
instead sent a committee member to the Harvard Countway
Library of Medicine to read the entire document and report
back to the committee. Environmental Working Group obtained
a copy of the results section of the document from the
Fluoride Action Network, who sent two researchers to the
library, each of whom were allowed to copy 10 percent of the
document." (7)
The knowledge that we have lost children, and children have
lost limbs as a result of mandated fluoride ingestion is
nothing short of a national disgrace. If there is anything
more appalling than learning this, it is perhaps in learning
about the deliberate, ongoing suppression of information
linking fluoride ingestion to adverse health effects, and
the deliberate disinformation being dispensed to the
unsuspecting public by promoters.
As stated earlier, three of the most common, major problems
currently plaguing US citizens are thyroid malfunction,
raised cholesterol levels, and GI problems. As of the
publication of the NRC report, it becomes apparent that
there are reports linking these major problems to fluoride
exposure.
On page 225, the NRC study states that when fluoride is
ingested it combines with hydrogen ions, forming hydrogen
fluoride (HF). "Upon entering the interstitial fluid in the
mucosa where the pH approaches neutrality, HF dissociates to
release fluoride and hydrogen ions which can cause tissue
damage." The last four words will perhaps be the most
relevant and clearly stated words for most, especially those
suffering from chronic GI problems. According to a March,
2005 News Release of the American Gastroenterological
Association, "Gastrointestinal disease is a growing U.S.
health problem, now affecting more than 65 million
Americans." (8, 9)
It is in the NRC chapter pertaining to fluoride's "Effects
on the Endocrine System," that we learn about thyroid
malfunction and its corresponding effect on cholesterol
levels. Many people do not yet realize that when the
thyroid is damaged, an extraordinarily wide range of
symptoms then occurs. In fact, one of the complaints that
fluoride promoters have had about fluoridation opponents, is
that the opponents have blamed fluoride for a "laundry list"
of ailments. It turns out that the laundry list was right
on target - damage the thyroid and the whole body and mind
are affected.
The NRC states, "Biondi et al. (2002) associate subclinical
thyroid dysfunction with changes in cardiac function and
corresponding increased risks of heart disease." Other
reports listed in the NRC show thyroid malfunction is
associated with "bone demineralization, increased
cholesterol, depression, cognitive dysfunction and reduced
IQ levels in offspring." On page 197, the NRC states,
"Thus, several lines of information indicate an effect of
fluoride exposure on thyroid function." The NRC went on to
state that because of the complexity of thyroid function and
other factors including nutrition, "it is difficult to
predict exactly what effects on thyroid function are likely
at what concentration of fluoride exposure and under what
circumstances." Fluoride levels associated with goiter
prevalence in some areas studied were less than "0.1 to 0.36
mg/L." According to the American Association of Clinical
Endocrinologists, approximately 27,000,000 Americans now
have thyroid disorders. (10)
In addition to all of this, we also have the numerous dental
problems clearly long-associated with fluoride. Because the
dental problems are so visible, they have been historically
the only problems acknowledged by the promoters as a link to
fluoride poisoning. Even in acknowledgement, however, these
problems have been downplayed. They are repeatedly referred
to as mere "cosmetic problems," and are therefore routinely
dismissed as unimportant. It would appear that in the
official minds of the promoters, these "cosmetic problems"
go no further than the surface of the tooth - as though the
head is attached to a set of wheels rather than a living
body. As though it will be only the tooth enamel that will
become etched and stained and destroyed when the entire body
is systemically fluorosed on a daily basis at unknowable
doses - and that the rest of the body will somehow be
miraculously spared.
As outlined in the NRC report, the type of fluoride
primarily used in water fluoridation was identified as
"fluorosilicates." Among the most insulting of facts
pertaining to fluorosilicates is their source. This toxic
sludge that is being disposed of in our drinking water is
nothing more than an unwanted waste product from the
phosphate fertilizer industry. (11)
Voices of reason seem to be much in need at this time of
many questions. Dr Bob Carton is an environmental scientist
who worked for over 30 years in the federal government.
From 1972-1992, Dr. Carton worked at the headquarters of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C.
writing regulations and managing risk assessments on high
priority toxic chemicals. In 1985, as a union official, he
became aware of the fraudulent nature of the EPA standard
for fluoride in drinking water, and fought to expose it. In
1987, he led the union attempt to file an amicus brief in a
court case brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council
against the EPA, challenging the standards for fluoride in
drinking water. His seems to be a voice of reason.
"The NRC called for testing of silicofluorides, the chemicals used to fluoridate water in
92% of fluoridated water supplies," Dr Carton stated. "This
is a shocking admission that the real chemicals used to
fluoridate water have never been tested by the government."
(12)
At this time, the voices of reason have spoken, and the
reports of March are now sitting upon the table before us.
Despite the contents of those reports, we hear the familiar,
perennial voices of the promoters - people known as
"officials" who are affiliated with collective bodies such
as the CDC and the American Dental Association, issuing
confusing statements about the NRC report, including as
already seen, "It is crucial to note that this report is NOT
about community water fluoridation." (Caps theirs.) And,
"This report deals only with naturally occurring levels of
fluoride in water." (Italics and boldface theirs.) And,
"This report in no way examines or calls into question the
safety of community water fluoridation."
It appears that "public health officials" from coast to
coast are coming forward now with similar statements and
misleading or false news, saying things such as, "This
report does not apply to communities that adjust the
fluoride in water supplies at the lower levels effective for
preventing tooth decay." And, "This report does not examine
the health risks or benefits associated with fluoridated
drinking water systems." And, "This report dealt only with
naturally-occurring levels of fluoride in water, and is not
about community water fluoridation." (13)
For those who might try to turn to the CDC for some decent,
sage advice, we find that the "official," statement on their
website incomprehensibly compares fluoride to "vitamins and
minerals," and that despite any findings to the contrary,
fluoridation continues to be "safe and effective" in their
opinion. Still not satisfied that they have fully
vindicated the toxin that is now affecting all of us, they
misleadingly state, "The findings of the NRC report are
consistent with CDC's assessment that water is safe and
healthy at the levels used for water fluoridation." (See 13
list.)
When it becomes clear that a great divide is appearing
between the voices of reason and the voices of the
promoters, and when it appears that the voices of the
promoters care more about their product rather than the
health and safety of the general public, then it becomes
imperative for each American who values life, limb and
health to stop relying upon the confusing "official"
statements, and do his or her own homework.
Visit the National Academies Press page, as listed below and
you will find an index of eleven chapters, summaries,
appendices, etc. Select the chapters that you feel might
pertain to the health and well-being of you, your family and
loved ones - i.e.,choose from teeth, musculoskeletal,
reproductive, developmental effects, neurotoxicity,
neurobehavioral effects, effects on the endocrine system,
effects on gastrointestinal, renal, hepatic and immune
system, genotoxicity, carcinogenic effects. Or perhaps you
might feel all of these chapters could, indeed, pertain to
you. Take the time to read the chapters for yourself so you
will see with your own eyes what the NRC report studied,
reviewed and is stating.
This might be the most important
reading you will ever do. It might save the lives, as well
as the health, of those you love.
Mary Sparrowdancer is the author of
The Love Song of the Universe, (2001, Hampton Roads),
and is a science and health writer with training in clinical
laboratory sciences, including bacteriology,
electroencephalography, hematology and microscopic
evaluation.
Mary co-authors a health newsletter
with Dr. Luise Light, author of "What to Eat," (2006,
McGraw-Hill). Luise is former USDA Director of Dietary
Guidance and Nutrition Education, and was the creator of the
real fruit and vegetable Food Pyramid. www.luiselight.com
5. "The dose recommended for water fluoridation when
adjusted for weight is the same dose recommended for
prescription supplements. However, no clinical trials have
been conducted and submitted to the FDA to demonstrate the
effectiveness of ingesting fluoride." - NJ Assemblyman John
Kelly. 8/14/2000. April 2006
http://www.fluoridealert.org/fda.htm
12. Dr. Robert Carton. Personal correspondence and
conversations. April, 2006.
See also Amicus Brief, of which Dr. Carton was manager for
the EPA professionals union. Among the arguments presented
in the Amicus are, "The EPA Failed to Properly Ascertain the
Acceptable Daily Dose of Fluoride." The statements in this
brief are still operable. April 2006.
http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/000052.htm
