What if I told you that I’d made up a solution composed of a chemical compound — clas-sified alternately as a toxic pesticide and hazardous industrial waste — and water, and had filled a tub with it, and now I wanted you to get in it and soak for about an hour. Not just once, but once a day, every day, for the rest of your life. Or you can just stand under a shower of it instead for thirty minutes or so, every day for the rest of your life, if that’s more to your liking.
Then what if I told you I wanted you to bathe your children in it too — every day.
Then what if I told you I wanted you to drink some — not just a few swallows, not even a glassful, but eight full glasses a day, every day, for the rest of your life. And that I wanted you to have your children do the same.
Would you do it? No?
What if I paid you to do it? Any amount of money. I’ll hand you a blank check and let you fill in the amount. Would you do it then? No?
Well then consider this:
What if I told you that you’ve already been doing it, every day, since the day you were born. That you’ve been forcing your children to do it too, from the day they were born. That not only haven’t any of you been getting paid to do it or been coerced in any way into doing it, but you’ve actually been doing it willingly, without forethought, and have even been paying for the priviledge to do so, without ever having had this proposal put to you or even being asked if you care.
Let me tell you something you may want to know: While the current life expectancy pro-jections for the poulation of this country are approximately 75 years for males and 80 for females, they only tell half the story, if that. As I see it, those are the estimates of how long you may possibly live on average. They don’t take into account the scads of individuals now dropping like flies in their 50s and even their 40s, the exponential rate of increase of every insidious variety of cancer, even in children, and the fact that there has been a horrific increase in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, (ADHD, or ADD) in the young; weight gain, depression and “couch-potato syndrome” in the mature; and Alzheimer’s, senility, dementia, and various bone disorders in the elderly. And throughout it all we’re witnessing an increase in domestic and urban violence, a decrease in test scores and attention spans, and a marked trend toward the general “dumbing down” of America.
If you are anything like me you were at least vaguely aware of all this, but with so many undesirable and seemingly random dots to connect, where to begin? Is there any way to make sense of it all? Does the possibility exist that so many diverse “dots” could be con-nected to a common focal point — a singular potential source that all of them share? I now believe that the possibility does exist, and that if you draw a line between all of these dots, they may just intersect at a point closer to home and closer at hand than you’d ever care to imagine: your faucet.
Now let me state for the record that I’m not trying to suggest that everything that ails both ourselves and our country is flowing out of our taps. But when I stopped taking the fluoridation of our community water supplies for granted and started doing a little armchair research, I was no less than shocked and amazed at what I found out. And that correla-tions between everything mentioned in the preceding paragraph — and more — and the toxic effects of industrial-grade fluoride have been well documented in numerous indepen-dent, peer-reviewed scientific studies. And that is something to consider — and consider seriously…
Beck v. City Council of Beverly Hills (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1973) : “Courts throughout the United States have uniformly held that fluoridation of water is a reasonable and proper exercise of the police power in the interest of public health. The matter is no longer an open question…”
“I do not advise you… what you should believe or not believe. But I do advise you, that we all need to learn as much as we can, about everything that we can, because one thing I have learned in my life: is that most of what we’ve ever been taught…has been a lie.”
WILLIAM “BILL” COOPER
The Union representing the scientists at US EPA headquarters in Washington DC is now on record as opposing water fluoridation. According to the Union’s Senior Vice President, Dr. William Hirzy: “In summary, we hold that fluoridation is an unreasonable risk. That is, the toxicity of fluoride is so great and the purported benefits associated with it are so small — if there are any at all — that requiring every man, woman and child in America to ingest it borders on criminal behavior on the part of governments.”
Fluoride, the active ingredient in many pesticides and rodenticides, is a powerful poison — more acutely poisonous than lead, and only slightly less poisonous than arsenic. Because of this, accidental over-ingestion of fluoride can cause serious toxic symptoms. Each year there are thousands of reports to Poison Control centers in the United States related to the excessive ingestion of fluoride. Water fluoridation accidents, resulting in excessive levels of fluoride in water, have been one of the leading sources of acute fluoride poisoning. Ap-proximately 70% of the available community drinking water supply in the US is intention-ally fluoridated by government mandate.
The US Public Health Service first endorsed fluoridation in 1950, before one single trial had been completed.
Since 1950, it has been found that fluorides do little to prevent pit and fissure tooth decay, a fact that even the dental community has acknowledged. This is significant because pit and fissure tooth decay represents up to 85% of the tooth decay experienced by children today.
Despite the fact that we are exposed to far more fluoride today than we were in 1945 when fluoridation began, the “optimal” fluoridation level is still 1 part per million, the same level deemed optimal in 1945.
Rats fed for one year with 1 ppm fluoride in their water (the minimal amount typically found in fluoridated community water supplies), had morphological changes to their kid-neys and brains, an increased uptake of aluminum in the brain, and the formation of beta amyloid deposits which are characteristic of Alzheimers disease.
Sodium fluoride is an extremely toxic substance — just 200 mg of fluoride ion is enough to kill a young child, and just 3-5 grams (e.g. a teaspoon) is enough to kill an adult. Both chil-dren (swallowing tablets/gels) and adults (accidents involving fluoridation equipment and filters on dialysis machines) have died from excess exposure.
Fluoride has been shown to be mutagenic (carcinogenic), causes chromosome damage and interferes with the enzymes involved with DNA repair in a variety of cell and tissue studies. Recent studies have also found a correlation between fluoride exposure and chromosome damage in humans.
A review of national cancer data in the US by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) revealed a significantly higher rate of bone cancer in young men in fluoridated versus unfluoridated areas, up to 6 times higher in young men living in fluoridated versus unfluoridated areas.
At least 24 separate, independent studies have determined that flouride, in the dosages typically associated with fluoridated community water supplies, acts as a neurotoxin contri-buting to lowered IQs and/or brain damage in children.
Fluoride administered to animals at high doses wreaks havoc on the male reproductive sys-tem. It damages sperm and increases the rate of infertility in a number of different species. An epidemiological study from the US has found increased rates of infertility among cou-ples living in areas with 3 or more ppm fluoride in the water.
Animal experiments show that fluoride accumulates in the brain and exposure alters mental behavior in a manner consistent with a neurotoxic agent. Rats dosed prenatally demonstra-ted hyperactive behavior. Those dosed postnatally demonstrated hypoactivity (i.e. under-activity or “couch potato” syndrome). More recent animal experiments have reported that fluoride can damage the brain.
In the first half of the 20th century, fluoride was prescribed by a number of European doctors to reduce the activity of the thyroid gland for those suffering from hyperthyroidism (over active thyroid) With water fluoridation, people are forced to ingest a thyroid-depress-ing medication which could, in turn, serve to promote higher levels of hypothyroidism (underactive thyroid) in the population, and all the subsequent problems related to this disorder. Such problems include depression, fatigue, weight gain, muscle and joint pains, increased cholesterol levels, and heart disease.
The chemicals used to fluoridate water in the US are not pharmaceutical grade. Instead, they come from the wet scrubbing systems of the superphosphate fertilizer industry, and much of it comes from China. These chemicals (90% of which are sodium fluorosilicate and fluorosilicic acid), are classified as toxic hazardous wastes and are contaminated with various impurities. Recent testing by the National Sanitation Foundation suggests that the levels of arsenic in these chemicals are relatively high (up to 1.6 ppb after dilution into public water) and of potential concern.
Some of the earliest opponents of fluoridation were biochemists and at least 14 Nobel Prize winners are among numerous scientists who have expressed their reservations about the practice of fluoridation. The recent Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology, Dr. Arvid Carlsson (2000), was one of the leading opponents of fluoridation in Sweden, and part of the panel that recommended that the Swedish government reject the practice, which they did in 1971.
Fluoridation is unethical because individuals are not being asked for their informed consent prior to medication. This is standard practice for all medication, and one of the key reasons why most of western Europe has ruled against fluoridation.
As one doctor aptly stated, “No physician in his right senses would prescribe for a person he has never met, whose medical history he does not know, a substance which is intended to create bodily change, with the advice: ‘Take as much as you like, but you will take it for the rest of your life because some children suffer from tooth decay.’ It is a preposterous notion.”
In a presentation to the California Assembly Committee of Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials, Richard Foulkes, M.D., former special consultant to the Minister of Health of Bri-tish Columbia, revealed: “The [water fluoridation] studies that were presented to me were selected and showed only positive results. Studies that were in existence at that time that did not fit the concept that they were “selling,” were either omitted or declared to be “bad science.” The endorsements had been won by coercion and the self-interest of professional elites. Some of the basic “facts” presented to me were, I found out later, of dubious valid-ity. We are brought up to respect these persons in whom we have placed our trust to safe-guard the public interest. It is difficult for each of us to accept that this trust may be mis-placed.”
Much of the material for this article was acquired from the Fluoride Action Network, located at: http://www.fluoridealert.org/ . You can find the citations for the statements and studies cataloged in this article — which were omitted for the purposes of brevity and “streamlin-ing” — on their website.