The emergence of Fluoridegate

“The illiterates of the 21st century will not be those who can’t read or write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn and relearn.”   –Alvin Toffler

As Americans, we have been taught from birth to love and respect our country. This is good. In America, many people have long-believed that the federal government was one their side. That view has eroded somewhat in previous decades and even more lately. What continues to amaze me is that so many citizens, while appropriately castigating a President and Congress, don’t seem to think the federal government itself (and in particular the agencies that formulate,  implement and enforce policy after Congress passes laws and the President signs them) plays any role in their discontent.

Also in America, as elsewhere, we tend to put out of our minds the things we believe we cannot change, the things over which we believe or are told we have no control. And like obedient little children we dutifully shrug our shoulders and go on to the next order of business as we live out our days. If all you know and believe about matters directly affecting your life and that of your family is contained in what the government agencies, corporate spokespersons, politicians, establishment academics and the mass media tell you, then you know precious little.

An issue facing us all is the longtime problem with the two sides of the coin called healthcare. On one side is the provision of healthcare bolstered by doctors, hospitals, insurance plans (public or private), pharma/chemical companies and medical device manufacturers. On the other side there is a question that few ask:  while proficient at treating (not curing) disease, why are we seeing a rise in so many diseases and medical conditions that now contribute to, for example, more than 25 percent of the children in this country being prescribed medications on a regular basis (Wall Street Journal 12/28/10)?

There are many reasons why a number of diseases and conditions continue to increase and many of them deal with the more than 80,000 industrial chemicals we drink, eat, breathe and absorb into our bodies every day (Presidents Cancer Panel report – April 2010). We wouldn’t need as much healthcare if we could keep the poisons out of our bodies.

For example, let’s pick an obvious and wide-ranging set of diseases: cancer. Beyond the complicity of the chemical/pharmaceutical industry and its Congressional and federal regulatory minions, I believe the reality is that cancer is too big to fail.

Yet we’ve raised money for years for the American Cancer Society, for example, to help fund “research” for the “war against cancer” through local Relay for Life efforts;  all for an organization that uses less than 10 percent (that’s right) of the money it raises for cancer research (Dr. Devra Davis, 2007, xv).

And in April 2010 when the President’s Cancer Panel essentially blasted the chemical industry for its links to numerous cancers via many of its industrial chemicals that we’re exposed to, guess who came out bad-mouthing the 150-page, heavily documented study. That’s right, the American Cancer Society that uses less than 10 percent of its money for cancer research (Dr. Devra Davis, 2007, xv).

Yet there is one chemical element that is exceedingly toxic that also ends up in hundreds of other compounds. That element is fluorine, and it has a special significance. And while it has been the darling of industry since the 1940s and is a killer whose nature has been denied by industry and government for six decades, it is also added to your drinking water. The reason is no mystery. This is the foundation of Fluoridegate.

Fluoride has been added to drinking water of increasing water systems in America since the late 1940s. And though the Center for Disease Control and the American Dental Association have long supported its use there are a growing number of scientists, physicians, dentists and attorneys who are speaking out against the practice due to the insidious nature of the fluorine atom and its remarkably devastating effect on so many organic and inorganic compounds, including those found in our bodies.

Fluoride in water is the very important tip of a huge iceberg, but one that should be addressed first because everyone has to drink water since it is essential to life itself.

There is much to be said about water fluoridation and the endless fluorine compounds present in the foods and drinks we consume and the medicines we take. And the number of scientific studies performed worldwide on fluorine is exhaustive. They are divided into two camps: those singing its praises and those concerned about its consequences.  To begin this abbreviated journey let’s start with a trip to the doctor.

Let’s say you have come down with some kind of illness. You visit your doctor, she confirms the illness and prescribes a medication. Already aware of the synergistic effects with any other drugs you make be taking, she hands you the script and you’re on your way to the pharmacist. Once there, you’re handed your meds along with a detailed print-out of information that you are responsible for reading so that you give “informed consent” by which you have been informed of the benefits and risks that may be associated with the medication and you consent to the treatment.

But what if your doctor tells you the medicine she wants to prescribe has never been through any random clinic trials, no double-blind studies and that neither she, nor the pharmacist, can provide you with information by which you can agree to informed consent . Would she prescribe it or would you take it. For most people the answer is ‘no.”

As a matter of disclosure, the American Dental Assocation and the CDC have, and continue to be, the main proponents of water fluoridation (to date 70 percent of the U.S. population is fluoridated, as is 98.5 percent of Georgia, according to CDC). And CDC has called water fluoridation one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century. Yet for some unknown reason CDC will not provide me with the names and job titles of its managers responsible for informing the public on matters pertaining to water fluoridation. You would think they would be proud of their claim.

The fluoride used in U.S. drinking water is often either sodium fluorosilicate or hydrofluorosilicic acid that come directly from the phosphate fertilizer industry (as a toxic waste byproduct) to your tap.

I think the reality is that CDC (along with growing number of government agencies, professional organizations and corporations) knows the days are numbered for dumping a neurotoxin in our drinking water (Mullenix in Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 1995, Murphy, 2008 and another 80 animal and biochemical studies cited in Connett, Beck and Micklem, 2010).

The following, from about a decade ago, is from the Union of Scientists at the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s headquarters in Washington, D.C.

This group of 1,500 scientists, engineers and lawyers came out in opposition to water fluoridation after they refused to parrot EPA’s official position brought on by “external political pressure” that EPA was “unable or unwilling to resist.” The scientists decided not to keep the issue “within the family.” Here’s what they said after several years of opposing EPA’s position (http://www.nteu280.org/Issues/Fluoride/NTEU280-Fluoride.htm). I hope you read this carefully:

“Since then our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposure to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion. These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic (low doses of fluoride ingested over a period of years, like with drinking water) toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis.”

“The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear,” the scientists concluded. “Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA’s standard method of controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry.”

Bottom line, you have been lied to for 60 years about a product said to be safe yet is insidious in its ability to cripple, maim and kill. Fluoridegate in years to come will be known not only for the cover-up that continued for decades, but for the disease, suffering and death that could have been prevented.

The handwriting is on the wall. The unwillingness of government, corporations and elected officials to stand with and for the people is legion. Juxtaposed to that unwillingness are 215 million plaintiffs (70 percent of the U.S. population) and counting.

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.  We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. ” – Edward Bernays, the “father of public relations” (the opening words in Propaganda, 1928)

If there’s no problem with fluoride then why is the warning label on you tube of toothpaste? Unless you use fluoride-free toothpaste you are supposed to call your doctor or poison control if you, or your child, swallows more than a pea-sized amount. The reason: fluoride is a poison.

The accepted level of daily fluoride intake was set by federal government agencies nearly a half-century ago at .7-1.2 parts per million (that’s about a milligram in 33 ounces of water). Meantime, the Maximum Contaminant Level is four parts per million (per EPA in April 2010). That means if you drink four liters of water or drinks made with fluoridated water (not to mention the many foods, medicines and consumer products containing it – like Teflon) you will have reached the MCL.

And let me get this straight. Whether the daily dosage or the MCL, the dosage is the same for a 50-pound little girl and a 250-pound man? That’s right, according to our “leaders” at the CDC, EPA and the American Dental Association.

And just last Friday (in early January 2011), many of you know that, for the first time in nearly a half-century, an agency of the federal government (EPA) recommended reducing the daily dosage of fluoride to the pre-established minimum of .7 ppm/day. It only took about 50 years.

Below are just a few of the problems with the fluoride compounds in drinking water and the fluorine in general.

-The U.S. is one of only 30 countries in the world that use any fluoridation and only one of eight where more than 50 percent of the population is fluoridated (Connett, et al, 2010). And while CDC and ADA say fluoridation has reduced the rate of tooth decay, the research says different, indicating that tooth decay is decreasing over time in fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries and with the most dramatic decreases coming in countries that do not fluoridate (Nature 322:125-129; World Health Organization, 2004 at http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/caries/who-dmft.html; Clinical Oral Investigations 11(3):189-93, etc.)

-Fluorine is highly toxic and it’s the most reactive element found in nature. As such it chemically binds with endless other elements to form new compounds that have delighted industry and consumers for decades (like Scotchguard and Stainmaster).

-The fluoride compound added to your water is a drug, according to the FDA (http://www.fluoridealert.org/re/fda.letter.to.calvert.dec.2000.pdf). This drug, which has never been subjected to clinical trials, is one for which you cannot give informed consent. Yet for decades the “leading authorities” have supported and promoted fluoridation in defiance of medical ethics.

-Due to its chemical nature, about 50 percent of the fluoride that enters your body stays there (bioaccumulates) and builds up in bone, bone marrow, the thyroid gland, the pineal gland in your brain and likely in other organs and brain centers (Murphy, 2008).

“Recent information on the role of the pineal gland in humans suggests that any agent that affects pineal function could affect human health in a variety of ways, including effects on sexual maturation, calcium metabolism, parathyroid function, post menopausal osteoporosis, cancer and psychiatric disease (National Research Council, 2006).

-There are concerns that fluoride is linked to some cancers, including bone cancer in young males (Bassin, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, 2001).

-The CDC in 1999 acknowledged that fluoride’s predominant mechanism of action is “topical,” not “systemic.” Hence, it may work on the surface of teeth but not from inside the body (Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Review 48, no. 41, Oct. 22, 1999). Yet, for some unacknowledged reason CDC and ADA continue to support adding fluoride to our waters supplies, even though such a route bypasses our teeth (topically) and goes straight into our bodies (systemically) where it can be absorbed into our bones, thyroid gland, brain and other areas.

-And perhaps as potentially devastating as any of the above are the studies show indicate a link to lowered IQ (brain damage) in children. There have been a number of studies in this area. One of the most recent “indicated that fluoride in drinking water was highly correlated with serum fluoride, and higher fluoride exposure may affect intelligence among children.” (Environmental Health Perspectives, Dec. 2010 and Zhang, et al, 2010)

Here are a few heavily documented resources for those who are interested in the fluoride topic: The Case Against Fluoride (2010-comprehensive and easy to read), The Fluoride Deception (2004-documents the government/industrial interests in fluoridation), The Devil’s Poison (2006-written by an Illinois orthodontist and, though heavy into biochemistry, it’s easily the most disturbing book I’ve ever read). Other resources include the exhaustive website Fluoride Action Network (www.fluoridealert.org), Daniel Stockin’s website http://spotsonmyteeth.com/ and the Parents of Fluoride Poisoned Children at http://www.poisonfluoride.com/pfpc/ that includes symptoms of fluoride poisoning, contents of fluoride in foods and medications.

Three huge questions, for which space does not permit adequate answers, are why was fluoride introduced, who benefitted and why do powerful groups like CDC and ADA continue to support it. The answer to all three is one word: the benefits to industry and profits, not to workers and citizens.

“Up until about 1940, fluorine’s effect on life was always deemed poisonous. It was determined to be altering enzymes used by a living organism to carry out a multitude of tasks. Around World War II, sporadic then increasingly more common articles were appearing that fluorine ‘might’ be good for teeth and even bones. The change in direction is profound and a researcher cannot miss the abrupt about-face.” (Murphy, p.8)

Decades ago, fluorine was a toxic byproduct of the aluminum industry (with lawsuits piling up beginning in the 1930s), then it was used to enrich uranium in the nuclear industry and now it’s a waste byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry. And from there is goes straight to public drinking water.

Bryson in The Fluoride Deception (p. 148) notes the work of the Paley Commission, set up by President Truman in 1950 (William Paley was head of CBS television.) Fluoride had been declared a strategic and critical material. The commission called fluoride “an essential component of enormously vital industries. Without this little known mineral … little or no aluminum could be produced; steel production would be reduced substantially; the output and quality of important chemical products such as refrigerants, propellants for insecticides and plastics would be significantly reduced.” Essentially, “We the People,” citizens and employees, were expendable.

And finally, there was (Forsyth Dental Center-Harvard University) toxicologist Phyllis Mullenix, the developer of the Computer Pattern Recognition System. She was the scientific sweetheart of giants like 3M, Exxon, Colgate-Palmolive, DuPont, NutraSweet and Procter & Gamble until she discovered the truth about fluorine’s effects on the  central nervous system, including cognitive problems leading to confusion and (does this ring a bell) indifference.

“I thought how odd,” Mullenix said of her presentation at the National Institutes of Health, one of her last acts before being dropped by academia and industry. “It’s 1990 and they’re talking about the miracle of fluoride, and now I’m going to tell them that their fluoride is causing neurotoxicity that’s worse than that induced by some cases of amphetamines or radiation.”

The “weight of evidence” principle that has long been used to condone the use of fluoride turned on its head many years ago. But it was federal agencies and professional organizations that would not budge. As a result lives were crippled, lives were lost. And average citizens across this land had no way to stand against those powers. But perhaps this time will be different.

The agencies supporting fluoridation were able to pull it off in the late 1940s and 1950s when we were busy with new jobs and making babies after the World War II. They were able to pull it off in the 1960s and 1970s when we were busy with the “cultural revolution,” Vietnam and aspiring to join that country club. They pulled it off in the 1980s and 1990s and since 2000 when we were busy making money, being “environmental,” buying more golf clubs, watching our favorite sitcom and “fighting terrorism.”

But all during those decades there were scientists researching the issues on fluoride, amassing what has now become a “weight of evidence” that has overwhelmed the myth of the safety and efficacy of fluoride. And it is that weight of evidence that the supporters of
fluoride know is out there. Some of the longtime supporters have already
started backing off. Others will likely soon follow, albeit incrementally.

And as for “We the People” or least some of us, if all you can do is parrot the diminishing number of government, academic and corporate supports of fluoridation then you have a lot less to bank on than you think.

Bottom line, your federal government has failed you miserably and knowingly for generations on this side of the healthcare issue. I think we’re so dumbed-down that we’re content to keep taking chemo and other meds for our ills without ever asking about the causes of those ills.

That said, the tide has turned on fluoride and what is soon coming will be the beginning of a series of events that will likely make the deleterious health issues involving tobacco, lead and asbestos combined pale in comparison. What is coming is Fluoridegate. If you’ve done the research you won’t be surprised. If you haven’t, you may laugh or you may mock, but just make sure you remember where you heard it.

3 Responses to “The emergence of Fluoridegate”

  • Mr.C:

    Good job,very well done. May I recommend the book MURDER by INJECTION,
    written by Eustace Mullins.(read fluoride chapter)also look at the respected work of Morris A Belle. Learn about THE DRUG STORY and the DRUG TRUST. Learn about the Rockefeller Syndicate and follow the money.

  • Thank you for your excellent synopsis on fluoride. I’m currently leading an effort to remove it from my town’s drinking water in Mt. Horeb, WI.

    Hopefully, the current political unrest and protests around the country are finally waking the American people to see ‘conspiracy theories’ such as fluoride, are real and as with all the current environmental threats we face, tied to industrial profit.

    As a nurse, I see young people everyday on tons of prescription medications. It’s unusual if someone is NOT taking an psychotropic med for depression, narcotics for back pain, levothyroxine for hypothyroidism, or omeprezole for acid reflux. All of these drugs treat symptoms of fluoride toxicity.

    We’ve been duped into believing better health can come from a pill or chemical with direct advertising from big Pharma. We’re constantly assaulted with endorsements from dentists and doctors about the benefits of fluoride. Our trust in pharmaceutical companies, dentists and doctors is as dangerous as the goods they’re pushing.

    Hopefully sites like yours and others fighting to bring the truth to light, will finally give people the insight and knowledge to understand we the people, are the only ones looking out for ourselves. We need to take our health into our own hands before we become a discarded waste product of corporate manufacturing.
    Thank you and carry on!

  • Dagny:

    Thank you for posting such a well researched, on point piece. I belong to a group in San Diego who are feverishly trying to get our city to stop poisoning its citizens with hydrofluorosilicic acid, aka fluoride. People are waking up and our numbers are growing, so please keep up your efforts on this site. Thank you!

Leave a Reply

HostGator Website Hosting