Fluoridated Water Destroys Your Brain and Teeth
By Dr. Mercola
In the U.S., water fluoridation
has been widespread for the last 70 years. Despite the fact that
clear-cut evidence suggests consuming fluoride is dangerous to human
health and does little to protect teeth from cavities, it continues to
be supported and recommended by nearly all public health and academic
institutions.
This includes the American Dental Association (ADA), the American
Academy of Pediatrics, U.S. Public Health Service and the World Health
Organization (WHO). The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) even went so far as to name water fluoridation as one of the top
10 public health achievements of the 20th century.
Meanwhile, the evidence continues to stack up against this archaic
practice, with federal data now showing more than half of U.S. kids may
be suffering ill effects from consuming too much fluoride.
Most US Kids Have Fluoride-Damaged Teeth
According to research presented at the April 2017 National Oral
Health Conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico, 57 percent of youth
between the ages of 6 and 19 years have dental fluorosis, a condition in
which your tooth enamel becomes progressively discolored and mottled,
according to data from 2011 to 2012.1
The statistic represents an increase from 37 percent reported from
1999 to 2004. Further, the author stated, "There was a significant
increase in caries experience ..." When Fluoride Action Network (FAN)
researchers analyzed the same set of data, they found "The 2011 to 2012
NHANES survey found dental fluorosis in 58.3 percent of the surveyed
adolescents, including an astonishing 21.2 percent with moderate
fluorosis and 2 percent with severe."2
According to FAN, "The data suggests that up to 24 million
adolescents now have some form of dental fluorosis, with over 8 million
adolescents having moderate fluorosis, and 840,000 having severe
fluorosis."
In stark contrast, when fluoridation was first started in the U.S. in
1945, it was promised that only 10 percent of people would suffer from
mild dental fluorosis.3
Public health officials often brush off fluorosis as a purely aesthetic
issue, one they believe is a good trade-off for the supposed benefits
of fluoride but, in reality, fluorosis is an outward sign that fluoride
is damaging the body.
Research has found impairment in cognitive abilities among children
with fluorosis (even mild fluorosis) compared to children with no
fluorosis. And some studies have even found that children with higher
levels of fluorosis have increased rates of cavities.4,5
US Lowered Fluoride Levels in Drinking Water, but Risks Still Remain
With all the fanfare over water fluoridation, you may be surprised to
learn that in 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
announced plans to lower the recommended level of fluoride in drinking water
for the first time in 50 years. This meant the level of fluoride in
drinking water was reduced to 0.7 mg/L from a previously recommended
range of between 0.7 to 1.2 mg/L.
This was a significant reduction in fluoride exposure for some U.S.
communities, but it's important to understand that at doses ranging from
0.7 to 2.3 mg/L of fluoride per day, adverse effects including reduced
IQ, behavioral alterations, neurochemical changes, hypothyroidism and
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) have been demonstrated.
Also noteworthy, reduced IQ has been seen in study participants with
higher urinary fluoride concentrations, even when no dental fluorosis
was present, which suggests that the doses of fluoride that impair
cognitive ability are lower than those that cause severe dental
fluorosis.6
FAN is among a coalition of environmental, medical and health groups
urging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban the
addition of fluoride to public drinking water supplies.
In a petition toward this end, they highlighted several other studies
that also demonstrated "fluoride's ability to cause neurotoxic effects
at low levels," including one that found just 0.5 uM of fluoride (.009
mg/L) caused lipid peroxidation after 48 hours of exposure. "Most
individuals living in fluoridated areas in the United States have
fluoride levels in their blood that exceed this level," they wrote.
National Cancer Institute Researcher Warned Against Fluoride in the 1960s
Chemist Dean Burk, Ph.D.,
co-founded the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) in 1937 and headed
its cytochemistry department for over 30 years. In the taped interview,
he equates water fluoridation to "public murder,"7 referring to a study that had been done on the 10 largest U.S. cities with fluoridation compared to the 10 largest without it.
The study clearly demonstrated that deaths from cancer abruptly rose
in as little as a year or two after fluoridation began. This and other
studies linking fluoride to cancer were government-ordered but were
quickly buried once fluoride was found to be linked to dramatic
increases in cancer.
Since then, a 2012 study found a link between fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma, a rare type of bone cancer.8
A 2006 study also found a link between fluoride exposure in drinking
water during childhood and the incidence of osteosarcoma among men.9 Such a link is biologically plausible, according to FAN, because of the following:10
"The plausibility of a fluoride/osteosarcoma connection is grounded in the three considerations:
1. Bone is the principal site of fluoride accumulation, particularly during the growth spurts of childhood;
2. Fluoride is a mutagen when present at sufficient concentrations; and
3. Fluoride stimulates the
proliferation of bone-forming cells (osteoblasts), which may increase
the risk for some of the dividing cells to become malignant."
In addition, the inhalation of airborne fluoride has been found to be
a potential cause of bladder cancer and lung cancer among
fluoride-exposed workers.11
'If It's Not Effective, Why Do It?'
Retired journalist Jack Crowther of Rutland, Vermont, wrote an
opinion piece for news outlet VT Digger that brings up a very important
point: "Regardless of the other objections to fluoridation, if it's not
effective, why do it?"12
He presents graphs of data prepared by FAN showing that tooth decay
in countries that fluoridate most or some of their water (or salt) has
been on the decline from 1970 to 2010. Likewise, another graph shows
that tooth decay has also been on decline in countries with no water (or
salt) fluoridation during the same period, including Italy, Sweden,
Finland, Japan, Norway and Belgium.
If you're surprised that so many countries do not fluoridate their
water, you should know that the U.S. is in the minority when it comes to
water fluoridation. In fact, the vast majority (97 percent) of Western
Europe has rejected water fluoridation, whereas in the U.S. 200 million
Americans live in areas where water is fluoridated.
Tooth decay in 12-year-olds is coming down as fast, if not faster, in
nonfluoridated countries as it is in fluoridated countries. In one
Lithuanian study, for instance, it was shown that dental caries did not
vary according to the level of fluoride in the water.
"Regardless of the concentration of fluoride in the drinking water,
the prevalence of past and present caries was high," the researchers
noted,13
showing once again that subjecting entire populations to a form of mass
medication without informed consent is highly questionable and
dangerous, especially considering its unnecessary and ineffective.
Leading Fluoride Supporter Changed His Position When Confronted With the Evidence
Crowther also features data from
the late New Zealand dentist John Colquhoun, who was a leading
fluoridation supporter until he delved into the research in 1980.
His international tour showed no difference between rates of tooth
decay in the nonfluoridated versus fluoridated areas he visited, causing
him to change his position and become a fluoridation opponent. "For the
remainder of his life, Colquhoun sought to end fluoridation, a program
he had helped create," Crowther said.14 An interview with Colquhoun is above and well worth watching. FAN added:15
"The most obvious reason to end fluoridation is that it is now
known that fluoride's main benefit comes from topical contact with the
teeth, not from ingestion. Even the CDC's Oral Health Division now
acknowledges this.
There is simply no need, therefore, to swallow fluoride, whether
in the water, toothpaste or any other form. Further, despite early
claims that fluoridated water would reduce cavities by 65 percent,
modern large-scale studies show no consistent or meaningful difference
in the cavity rates of fluoridated and nonfluoridated areas."
Fortunately, the word that fluoridation is not a suitable means for
keeping teeth healthy is spreading, including in Meadville,
Pennsylvania. The city was considering adding fluoride to their water,
necessitating a fluoride forum held May 4, 2017.
Fourteen speakers spoke in opposition of fluoridation while 11 spoke
in favor of it, trying to sway the Meadville Area Water Authority
board's decision. Board member Hal Tubbs, who voted against
fluoridation, pointed out that most of those in favor were affiliated
with the pro-fluoridation Meadville Smiles group, leaving only perhaps
one independent voice.
"This tells me that actual customers are against fluoridated water by
a count of 14 to one," Tubbs wrote in an email to The Meadville
Tribune. "What I took away from the presentation is that our customers
want to decide and control what they put into their bodies … They don't
want a fluoride additive forced on them."16
Protecting Your Oral Health Has Nothing to Do With Fluoride
When it comes to good oral hygiene and preventing cavities, please remember, drinking fluoridated water
and brushing your teeth with fluoridated toothpaste is not the answer.
Rather, it's about your diet and proper dental care: brushing and
flossing. By avoiding sugars and processed foods, you prevent the
proliferation of the bacteria that cause decay in the first place.
Following up with proper brushing and flossing and getting regular
cleanings with a mercury-free biological dentist will ensure that your
teeth and gums stay healthy naturally.
Your toothbrush and natural fluoride-free toothpaste
are important, but don't be misled by thinking they're the only options
for sound dental health. Many natural substances, like the foods you
eat, also have the power to drastically improve the health of your teeth
and gums, and thereby the health of the rest of your body, too.
Recommendations released by The University of Calgary School of
Public Policy championed the use of prevention and education to prevent
early childhood cavities, noting water fluoridation wouldn't be needed
if such measures were effectively practiced.
The paper's authors even pointed out that water fluoridation is not
preventing tooth decay, as areas with water fluoridation still have a
high rate of early childhood cavities. The recommendations call for
increased education for parents on the importance of proper feeding and
dental hygiene for infants, as well as for health care professionals to
discuss these issues with patients.17
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 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:
- Like FAN on Facebook, follow on Twitter and sign up for campaign alerts.
- 10 Facts About Fluoride:
Attorney Michael Connett summarizes 10 basic facts about fluoride that
should be considered in any discussion about whether to fluoridate
water. Also see 10 Facts Handout (PDF).
- 50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation: Learn why fluoridation is a bad medical practice that is unnecessary and ineffective. Download PDF.
- Health Effects Database:
FAN's database sets forth the scientific basis for concerns regarding
the safety and effectiveness of ingesting fluorides. They also have a Study Tracker with the most up-to-date and comprehensive source for studies on fluoride's effects on human health.
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.
The study clearly demonstrated that deaths from cancer abruptly rose in as little as a year or two after fluoridation began. This and other studies linking fluoride to cancer were government-ordered but were quickly buried once fluoride was found to be linked to dramatic increases in cancer.
Since then, a 2012 study found a link between fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma, a rare type of bone cancer.8 A 2006 study also found a link between fluoride exposure in drinking water during childhood and the incidence of osteosarcoma among men.9 Such a link is biologically plausible, according to FAN, because of the following:10
"The plausibility of a fluoride/osteosarcoma connection is grounded in the three considerations:
In addition, the inhalation of airborne fluoride has been found to be a potential cause of bladder cancer and lung cancer among fluoride-exposed workers.111. Bone is the principal site of fluoride accumulation, particularly during the growth spurts of childhood;
2. Fluoride is a mutagen when present at sufficient concentrations; and
3. Fluoride stimulates the proliferation of bone-forming cells (osteoblasts), which may increase the risk for some of the dividing cells to become malignant."
'If It's Not Effective, Why Do It?'
Retired journalist Jack Crowther of Rutland, Vermont, wrote an opinion piece for news outlet VT Digger that brings up a very important point: "Regardless of the other objections to fluoridation, if it's not effective, why do it?"12He presents graphs of data prepared by FAN showing that tooth decay in countries that fluoridate most or some of their water (or salt) has been on the decline from 1970 to 2010. Likewise, another graph shows that tooth decay has also been on decline in countries with no water (or salt) fluoridation during the same period, including Italy, Sweden, Finland, Japan, Norway and Belgium.
If you're surprised that so many countries do not fluoridate their water, you should know that the U.S. is in the minority when it comes to water fluoridation. In fact, the vast majority (97 percent) of Western Europe has rejected water fluoridation, whereas in the U.S. 200 million Americans live in areas where water is fluoridated.
Tooth decay in 12-year-olds is coming down as fast, if not faster, in nonfluoridated countries as it is in fluoridated countries. In one Lithuanian study, for instance, it was shown that dental caries did not vary according to the level of fluoride in the water.
"Regardless of the concentration of fluoride in the drinking water, the prevalence of past and present caries was high," the researchers noted,13 showing once again that subjecting entire populations to a form of mass medication without informed consent is highly questionable and dangerous, especially considering its unnecessary and ineffective.
Fluoride is poison. Fluoride was poison yesterday. Fluoride is poison today. Fluoride will be poison tomorrow. We learned at annual town meeting that the experts at the Board of Health can put the poison fluoride in the water but they can not take it out. The reason for this is because the Corporation known as the United States of America Inc. profits by having this poison in the water and the franchise State of Massachusetts actually uses tax payer dollars to make sure this poison remains in our water supply. At one time fluoride was the most litigated pollutant of all time. The Board of Health puts the profits of the corporations over the health of the people in the town of Templeton. So long as we stay ignorant of who controls the fluoride in our water the corporation will continue to poison us. When in doubt get it out.
ReplyDelete