“…exposure to increased amounts of lead and fluoride occurs at about the same age (1-3 years)… Therefore, this is a critical time when systemic exposure to fluoride should be minimized since fluoride may increase lead accumulation,” the researchers caution.

Fluoride purchased from China and used in Frostburg, Maryland contains 0.032% Lead.  See Certificate of Analysis:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/29108391/Chinese-Fluoride

Fluoride chemicals are added to water supplies ostensibly to reduce tooth decay in tap water drinkers.   However, recent studies show fluoridation does not reduce tooth decay but does create more dental fluorosis (discolored teeth) in children.  (See  http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/Clinch_2009_No_Benefit_Definite_Harm.pdf

Low-level lead exposure is associated with lower IQ, ADHD and many health and behavior ailments.

The New York State Department of Health lists drinking water as a potential source of lead.

NSF International, a private company that regulates public water supply additives, reported in February 2008 that 2% of   245 fluoridation batches sampled over a six year period had detectable levels of Lead.  (There are approximately 155,000 US public water supplies.) Lead is an allowable trace contaminant in fluoridation chemicals along with antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, selenium,  and thallium.  See:

http://www.nsf.org/business/water_distribution/pdf/NSF_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Sawan’s team put fluosilicic acid, with and without lead, into lab animals’ drinking water. They found more lead in tooth enamel, surface bone, whole bone, and tooth dentine in rats co-exposed to fluoride and lead.

Possibly anticipating criticism that rats were fed higher fluoride-concentrated water than people drink, the authors write, “this concentration was chosen because it produces plasma fluoride levels that are comparable with those commonly found in humans…”

Increased prevalence and severity of fluoride-discolored teeth (fluorosis) proves US children are already fluoride-overexposed “which may cause their blood-lead levels to increase and produce more lead toxicity,” they write.

“These findings suggest that a biological effect, not recognized so far, may underlie the epidemiological association between increased blood-lead levels in children and water fluoridation,” concludes Sawan’s research team.

“[O]ur findings may have serious implications for populations exposed to increased amounts of both lead and fluoride, particularly young children,” the research team writes.

Attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF) says, “People need to lobby and petition their legislators to stop fluoridation in their towns, cities and states. Legislators are ignoring the science proving fluoridation is endangering our health, our water supplies and wasting tax dollars while denying freedom of choice.” (see: http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/sitemap.html )

Masters and Coplan’s landmark studies (included NYS children) show higher blood-lead-levels in children living in silico-fluoridated communities (Neurotoxicology 2000, 2007).  Macek’s research shows children’s higher blood-lead-levels are associated with water fluoridation when lead is already in the environment (Environmental Health Perspectives, 2006).

New York State Department of Health dentist J. V. Kumar published national statistics in the July 2009 JADA which show similar cavity rates regardless of water fluoride content, However, dental fluorosis rates increased along with water fluoride levels.  See analysis “Fluoridation No Benefit; Definite Harm,” by Kathleen M. Thiessen, Ph.D., SENES Oak Ridge, Inc., Center for Risk Analysis here:

http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/Clinch_2009_No_Benefit_Definite_Harm.pdf

Some fluoridation chemicals originate in China, Mexico and Japan, reports the CDC. ABC-TV Boston reported that a Massachusetts city was forced to discontinue fluoridation because  Chinese fluoridation chemicals were clogging up the water system with an unidentifiable contaminant.

CBS-TV Atlanta reports: “Fluoride, Friend or Foe.”

SOURCE:  New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.

PO Box 263

Old Bethpage, NY  11804

http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

http://www.FluorideAction.Net

Follow NYSCOF on Twitter or Facebook

Fluoride, in the form of silicofluorides, injected into 2/3 of U.S.
public water supplies, ostensibly to reduce tooth decay, was never
safety-tested.(B)

“Many Americans are exposed to fluoride in the ranges associated with
thyroid effects, especially for people with iodine deficiency,” says
Kathleen Thiessen, PhD, co-author of the government-sponsored NRC
report. “The recent decline in iodine intake in the U.S could
contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals,”
says Thiessen.

“A low level of thyroid hormone can increase the risk of cardiac
disease, high cholesterol, depression and, in pregnant woman,
decreased intelligence of offspring,” said Thiessen.(C)

Common thyroid symptoms include fatigue, weight gain, constipation,
fuzzy thinking, low blood pressure, fluid retention, depression, body
pain, slow reflexes, and more. It’s estimated that 59 million
Americans have thyroid conditions.(D)

Robert Carton, PhD, an environmental scientist who worked for over 30
years for the U.S. government including managing risk assessments on
high priority toxic chemicals, says “fluoride has detrimental effects
on the thyroid gland of healthy males at 3.5 mg a day. With iodine
deficiency, the effect level drops to 0.7 milligrams/day for an
average male.”(E) (1.0 mg/L fluoride is in most water supplies)

Among many others, the NRC Report cites human studies which show

- fluoride concentrations in thyroids exceeding that found  in other
soft tissues except
kidney

- an association between endemic goiter and fluoride exposure or
enamel fluorosis in
human populations

- fluoride adversely affects thyroid and parathyroid hormones, which
affect bone
health

“If you have a thyroid problem, avoiding fluoride may be a good
preventive health measure for you,” writes Drs’ Richard and Karilee
Shames in “Thyroid Power.”(F).

Over, 2600 Physicians, Dentists, Scientists, Academics and
Environmentalists urge Congress to stop water fluoridation until
Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific
evidence that fluoridation is ineffective and has serious health
risks. (http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html)

Please sign the petition and Congressional letter to support these
professionals http://www.FluorideAction.Net

“Fluoride can harm bones, teeth, kidneys, brain and more,” says lawyer
Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to
Fluoridation.

References:

(A) “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s
Standards,” Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, Board on
Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Division on Earth and Life
Studies, National Research Council of the National Academies of
Science. March 2006 Chapter 8
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571

“Thyroid Function: Fluoride exposure in humans is associated with
elevated TSH concentrations, increased goiter prevalence, and altered
T4 and T3 concentrations.” (Page 262)

“(The thyroid effects are associated with average fluoride intakes
that) will be reached by persons with average exposures at fluoride
concentrations of 1-4 mg/L in drinking water, especially the
children.” (Page 260)

(B) Sodium Hexafluorosilicate and Fluorosilicic Acid
Review of Toxicological Literature, October 2001
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/Chem_Background/ExSumPDF/Fluorosi…

(C) Chemical & Engineering News, “Fluoride Risks Are Still A
Challenge,” by Bette Hileman, September 4, 2006,
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/government/84/8436gov1.html

(D)   Mary Shomon, About.com Thyroid editor, Patient Advocate –
Author of “The Thyroid Diet” and “Living Well With Hypothyroidism”
http://thyroid.about.com/

(E) Fluoride, “Review of the 2006 National Research Council Report:
Fluoride in Drinking Water,” July-September 2006, by Robert J. Carton
http://www.fluorideresearch.org/393/files/FJ2006_v39_n3_p163-172.pdf

(F)  Thyroid Power and Feeling Fat Fuzzy or Frazzeled”by Richard
Shames MD & Karilee Shames RN, PhD http://www.thyroidpower.com
http://www.feelingfff.com/

Fluoride/Thyroid Health Effects
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/thyroid/

Sources of Fluoride
http://www.fluoridealert.org/f-sources.htm

Sulfuryl Fluoride Pesticide Residues Allowed on Foods
http://www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/sulfuryl.f.all.food.html
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Fluoride
Database of Selected  Beverages and Foods
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/Fluoride.html

Fluoride, added to some bottled and public water supplies ostensibly
to prevent cavities, is also in many foods and beverages, including
infant formula. Excessive fluoride discolors and/or weakens permanent
teeth (moderate fluorosis).

Researchers measured fluoride content of 49 infant formulas. See:
http://www.freewebs.com/fluoridation/infantformulafluoride.htm

The research team concludes,  ”Most infants from birth to age 12
months who consume predominantly powdered and liquid concentrate
formula are likely to exceed the upper tolerable limit [of fluoride]
if the formula is reconstituted with optimally fluoridated water (0.7
- 1.2 ppm).”

Surprisingly, the study reveals that all 6-month-olds and younger will
also exceed the lower “adequate intake” (0.01 mg/day) from all
formulas (concentrated or not) risking moderate dental fluorosis from
formula, alone. (2)

Breast milk contains about 250 times less fluoride than “optimally”
fluoridated water and isn’t linked to fluorosis.

“Babies don’t need fluoride and fluoride ingestion doesn’t reduce
tooth decay,” says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State
Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. “So why are US babies still
exposed to unnecessary fluoride chemicals via the water and food
supplies and why aren’t parents informed of the consequences?” asks
Beeber.

Up to 48% of school children have fluorosed teeth – 4% severe, reports
the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) (3).

Both the CDC and the American Dental Association’s web sites advise
parents to avoid mixing fluoridated water into concentrated infant
formula, but they have never effectively broadcast this information to
parents or the media (4,5).

A review of human studies by different researchers published in JADA
(July 2009) concluded, “Our systematic review indicated that the
consumption of infant formula [concentrated and ready-to-feed] is, on
average, associated with an increased risk of developing at least some
detectable level of enamel fluorosis.” (6)

“Parents, protect your children since dental and government agencies
won’t. Petition local and state legislators to stop adding unnecessary
and harmful fluoride chemicals into public water supplies and,
thereby, into our food supply,” says Beeber. “Further, demand that the
fluoride content of all food products be required on labels.”

Researchers agree that infant formula levels should be lowered.

“One interpretation of the available
evidence would be that public health officials should create
guidelines for infant formula consumption ensuring that the upper
intake level established by the Institute of Medicine… is not
exceeded. Another approach would be to strive for ‘biological
normality’ and to strive for fluoride levels observed in breast milk,”
write Hujoel et al. in “Infant Formula and Enamel Fluorosis: A
Systematic Review. (6)

A recent investigation by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) found
that over-exposure to fluoride among infants is a widespread problem
in most major American cities. EWG’s study found that, on any given
day, up to 60% of formula-fed babies in US cities were exceeding the
Institute of Medicine’s “upper tolerable” limit for fluoride. (6a)

In 2004, fluoride researcher Dr. Teresa A. Marshall told Reuters
Health, “Very young infants are unlikely to benefit from the caries-
prevention effects of fluoride…They may be at increased risk of dental
fluorosis.” (7) Marshall co-authored “Associations between Intakes of
Fluoride from Beverages during Infancy and Dental Fluorosis of Primary
Teeth,” in the Journal of American Clinical Nutrition. (b)

In 2000, researcher A K Mascarenhas evaluating only well-conducted
studies from the 1980s through the 1990s concluded in Pediatric
Dentistry that infant formula was a major risk factor for dental
fluorosis. (8)

As part of the on-going Iowa Fluoride Study, Levy and his team
measured the fluoride content of infant formula and found from 0.15 to
0.30 ppm in ready-to-feed infant formula. (9)

Common household water filters (e.g. carbon filters) do not remove
fluoride and unlike chlorine, which dissipates upon boiling, fluoride
becomes more concentrated when water is boiled.

Only distillation, reverse osmosis and political activism removes fluoride from tap water.

Parents are advised to control their chldren’s total daily fluoride intake with the help of their dentists.  But most dentists don’t know what foods contain fluoride and at what levels.  Also, most dentists are unaware that fluoride ingestion does not reduce tooth decay e.g. http://tinyurl.com/Yoder The USDA set up a Fluoride in Foods database to help parents out.  However, that also is not well-advertised.

USDA: Fluoride-content of common foods: http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=6312

Pictures of fluorosis
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/teeth/fluorosis/moderate-severe.html

SOURCE:  New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof
http://www.FluorideAction.Net

References:

1)   “Assessing a potential risk factor for enamel fluorosis: a
preliminary evaluation of fluoride content in infant formulas,”
Journal of the American Dental Association October 2009

2) http://fluoridation.webs.com/intakefromformula.htm

3) http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/figures/s403a1t23.gif

4) http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/safety/infant_formula.htm

5)  http://www.ada.org/prof/resources/pubs/adanews/adanewsarticle.asp?art…

6)  “Infant Formula and Enamel Fluorosis: A Systematic Review,”
Journal of the American Dental Association by Hujoel, et al, July 2009

6a) “National Academy Calls for Lowering Fluoride Limits in Tap
Water,” EWG News Release, March 2006 http://www.ewg.org/node/21000

7) “Too Much Fluoride May Harm Babies’ Teeth,” Reuters Health, May 5,
2004
http://www.fluoridealert.org/media/2004c.html

8) Pediatric Dentistry. July-August 2000. “Risk factors for dental
fluorosis: a review of the recent literature,” by Mascarenhas AK
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10969430?dopt=Abstract

9) Dental Clinics of North America 47(2003), “Current and future role
of fluoride in nutrition,” by Warren & Levy, 225-243

More evidence that infant formula is linked to dental fluorosis:

http://tinyurl.com/AllFormulaContainsFluoride

There is strong evidence that even tiny amounts of some metals can contribute to aggressive or antisocial behavior, says Neil Ward, a professor of chemistry at the UK’s University of Surrey.  (6)

Now over 2,000 professionals urge the US Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted, citing scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks. See statement: http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html

A Tennessee State legislator who is also an MD is urging all Tennessee Water Districts to stop fluoridation, reported a Tennessee newspaper on 11/29/08. At least 30 Tennessee water districts have already complied with his request.

Since the first FAN statement, the following has occurred:

–  The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment, Canada’s leading voice on environmental health issues, released a statement opposing fluoridation.

–  The National Kidney Foundation dropped its fluoridation support replacing it with this caution: “Individuals with CKD  [Chronic Kidney Disease] should be notified of the potential risk of fluoride exposure.” (1)

— Researchers reporting in the Oct 6 2007  British Medical Journal indicate that fluoridation was never was proven safe or effective and may be unethical. (2)

–  “A qualitative review of …studies found a consistent and strong association between the exposure to fluoride and low IQ,”  concluded Tang el al., in ”Fluoride and Children’s Intelligence: A Meta-analysis” in Biological Trace Element Research (e-published  8/10/08)

– Scientific American editors wrote in January 2008, “Some recent studies suggest that over-consumption of fluoride can raise the risks of disorders affecting teeth, bones, the brain and the thyroid gland”

– Dr. A. K. Susheela, a leading fluoride expert, explains in a video why US physicians overlook fluoride as a possible cause of diseases commonly caused by fluoride. http://tinyurl.com/Susheela

– An expert panel Health Canada commissioned to study the risks of fluoride exposure says the government should cut the recommended amount in drinking water, encourage the use of low-fluoride toothpaste by children and have makers of infant formula reduce levels in their products. The panel recommended reduced fluoride exposure because it was worried children might be getting too much of the chemical.

Signers to the FAN statement include:

–  Dr. Arvid Carlsson,winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine

–   Vyvyan Howard, MD, PhD, President, International Society of Doctors for the Environment

–  Ken Cook and Richard Wiles, Environmental Working  Group

–  Lois Gibbs, Center for Health, Environment, and Justice

—  Joseph Mercola, Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine, who runs the #1 most visited natural health website

–   Theo Colborn, PhD, co-author, “Our Stolen Future”

–   Sam Epstein,  MD, Chairman, Cancer Prevention Coalition

–   The current and six past Presidents of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and  Toxicology

–  Board of Directors (2007), American Academy of Environmental Medicine

–  FIVE Goldman Prize winners – given for excellence in protecting the environment

.  –  Three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology

–  Three officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters

–  Hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.

Nobel Prize winner, Dr. Arvid Carlsson, , says, “Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It’s really obsolete.”

An Online Action Petition to Congress in support of the Professionals’ Statement is available on FAN’s web site, http://congress.fluorideaction.net and over 16,800 individuals have signed so far.

“The NRC fluoride report dramatically changed scientific understanding of fluoride’s health risks,” says Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network.  “Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath as to why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” he added.

The Professionals’ Statement also references:

– The new American Dental Association policy recommending infant formula NOT be prepared with fluoridated water.

– The  CDC’s concession that the predominant benefit of fluoride is topical not systemic.

– CDC data showing that dental fluorosis, caused by fluoride over-exposure, now impacts one third of American children.

– Major research indicating little difference in decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.

– A Harvard study indicating a possible link between fluoridation and bone cancer.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a DC watchdog, revealed that a Harvard professor concealed the fluoridation/bone cancer connection for three years. EWG President Ken Cook states, “It is time for the US to recognize that fluoridation has serious risks that far outweigh any minor benefits, and unlike many other environmental issues, it’s as easy to end as turning off a valve at the water plant.”

END

Contact:  Bill Osmunson, DDS, MPH, Fluoride Action Network Spokesperson

bill@teachingsmiles.com Office 503.675.7300  Cell 425.466.0100  (Pacific Time) Video

or

Paul Connett, PhD, Canton, NY, Emeritus Professor of Chemistry and Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network, 315-379-9200 paul@fluoridealert.org Video of a Paul Connett recent TV presentation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRVYXLBqHV4

References:

(1) National Kidney Foundation, “Fluoride Intake in Chronic Kidney Disease,” April 15, 2008

http://www.kidney.org/atoz/pdf/Fluoride_Intake_in_CKD.pdf

(2) “Adding fluoride to water supplies,” British Medical Journal, KK Cheng, Iain Chalmers, Trevor A. Sheldon, October 6, 2007

SOURCE:  Fluoride Action Network http://www.FluorideAction.

Cavity rates declined equally in fluoridated and non-fluoridated European countries over three decades. “This trend has occurred regardless of the concentration of fluoride in water or the use of fluoridated salt,” write Sir Iain Chalmers, editor of the James Lind Library, which was set up to help people understand the evidence base of medicine, KK Cheng, professor of epidemiology at Birmingham University, and Trevor Sheldon, professor and pro-vice-chancellor at York University.

In 1999, England’s Department of Health commissioned a systematic review on the effects of water fluoridation on dental health and to look for evidence of harm. (York Review). The reviewers were surprised that fluoridation was long endorsed and promoted with such certainty when 3200 world-wide papers failed to show any good quality evidence of benefit or safety. “Thus, evidence on the potential benefits and harms of adding fluoride to water is relatively poor,” the BMJ’s researchers write.

Sheldon, who was Chair of the York Review’s advisory committee, as well as co-author of the BMJ article, wrote in a different 2006 report that officials promoting fluoridation may have misrepresented the York Review findings to suit “prior beliefs and policy intent.” (2)

Discussing the ethics of informed consent, the BMJ researchers write, “This is especially important for water fluoridation, as an uncontrollable dose of fluoride would be given for up to a lifetime, regardless of the risk of caries, and many people would not benefit.” Further, they write “In the case of fluoridation, people should be aware of the limitations of evidence about its potential harms and that it would be almost impossible to detect small but important risks (especially for chronic conditions) after introducing fluoridation,” they write.

Many fluoridation supporters “used the York review’s findings selectively to give an overoptimistic assessment of the evidence in favor of fluoridation,” they write.

Similar problems exist in the U.S. as outlined in the summer 2005 Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons. “Artificial fluoridation of drinking water… probably does not reduce tooth decay…Proponents of fluoridation have censored most media, ignored intelligent discussion of fluoridation, slandered most opponents of fluoridation and overturned legal judgments against fluoridation in a manner that demonstrates their political power. Many published studies that had conclusions favoring fluoridation were later found unsupported by their raw data,” writes JM Kauffman, PhD. (3)

On October 2, 2007,Juneau Alaska voters rejected fluoridation, 61% to 39%, despite the American Dental Association’s $150,000 funded political campaign to return fluoride into Juneau’s water supply after the Juneau legislative body voted it out in November 2006.

Topanga, California residents are fighting to keep their water fluoride-free. (4) But their County Supervisor won’t even meet with them to hear their concerns (5) as of October 8, 2007.

Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director of the Fluoride Action Network says “The BMJ article fails to mention the 2006 National Research Council fluoride review, the most comprehensive overview of the toxicology of fluoride ever written. The crucial message of the NRC’s report is that the highest scientific authority in the US has determined that low levels of fluoride in drinking water may have serious adverse health effects,” says Connett. “Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath about why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” says Connett.

Paul Beeber, President and General Counsel, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, says “This British Medical Journal article lends further credence to our efforts to end fluoridation and have Congressional hearings held in the US concerning the ongoing government goal to fluoridate more water supplies without individual consent and without any valid evidence of its safety or effectiveness.”

An online petition to end fluoridation and call for a Congressional hearing is here http://FluorideAction.Net

Fluoride chemicals are added to 2/3 of U.S. public water supplies which winds up in virtually 100% of the food supply. The Centers for Disease Control tells us that many US school children are over fluoridated, with up to 51% sporting dental fluorosis – white spotted, yellow, brown and/or pitted enamel. Yet cavities are rising in our most fluoridated generation – toddlers.

For example, a New York State TV station reported on October 8, 2007 that in Rochester, NY, fluoridated for decades, “40 percent of 162 toddlers [examined] were suffering from baby bottle tooth decay. Most averaged two cavities; some as many as 20…The cost to one community can be as much as $1 million annually to treat children with this oral disease, a tab picked up almost completely by Medicaid…reasons…Many pediatric dentists won’t care for patients as young as one or two and they often won’t accept Medicaid.” (6)

Dentists often pat themselves on the back while claiming they are the only profession willing to put themselves out of business by forcing fluoridation onto the American public. That’s hardly the case as the New York Times reports it’s a boom time for dentists; but not for teeth. “With dentists’ fees rising far faster than inflation and more than 100 million people lacking dental insurance, the percentage of Americans with untreated cavities began rising this decade, reversing a half-century trend of improvement in dental health,” according to the NY Times (7)

“Dentists’ incomes have grown faster than that of the typical American and the incomes of medical doctors. Formerly poor relations to physicians, American dentists in general practice made an average salary of $185,000 in 2004, the most recent data available. That figure is similar to what non-specialist doctors make, but dentists work far fewer hours. Dental surgeons and orthodontists average more than $300,000 annually,” reports the New York Times.

(7)

References:

(1) “Adding fluoride to water supplies,” British Medical Journal, KK Cheng, Iain Chalmers, Trevor A. Sheldon, October 6, 2007

(2) “Muddy waters: evidence-based policy making, uncertainty and the ‘York review’ on water fluoridation,” Journal Evidence & Policy, Paul Wilson and Trevor Sheldon Vol 2 No 3 2006 pages 321-31

(3) “Water Fluoridation: a Review of Recent Research and Actions,” by Joel M. Kauffman, PhD, Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Volume 10 Number 2 Summer 2005

(4) Topanga Messenger Online, “ Citizens to Zev: Halt Fluoride OPEN LETTER TO SUPERVISOR YAROSLAVSKY,” October 7, 2007

http://www.topangamessenger.com/Articles.asp?SectionID=1&ArticleID=2715

(5) Topanga Messenger Online, “Zev to Citizens ‘No Comment’ Supervisor Approves $20 Million Grant for Fluoride,” by Lee Michaelson, October 7, 2007

http://www.topangamessenger.com/Articles.asp?SectionID=1&ArticleID=2716

(6) “Screening for ECC in baby teeth,” 10/8/2007, by Diana Palotas

http://news10now.com/content/health/healthy_living/?ArID=122323

(7) Boom Times for Dentists, but Not for Teeth , October 11, 2007

By Alex Berenson

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/11/business/11decay.html?ei=5040&en=e2f66b1ea1cb57e8&ex=1192680000&partner=MOREOVERNEWS&pagewanted=print

SOURCE: NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.

PO Box 263

Old Bethpage, NY 11804

http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof
http://www.FluorideAction.Net

Past News Releases: http://tinyurl.com/6kqtu

Online Petition to End Fluoridation and call for a Congressional Hearing

http://www.actionstudio.org/public/page_view_all.cfm?option=begin&pageid=8276

Sponsored by the Fluoride Action Network    http://FluorideAction.Net
End Fluoridation, say 800+

In a statement released August 9, 2007, over 600 (now 800) dentists, physicians, scientists, academics and environmentalists urge Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks. (http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html)

Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.

Signer Dr. Arvid Carlsson, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, says, “Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It’s really obsolete.”

Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), announced that an Online Action Petition to Congress in support of the Professionals’ Statement is available at FAN’s web site, www.fluorideaction.org.

“The NRC report dramatically changed scientific understanding of fluoride’s health risks,” says Connett.  “Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath as to why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” he added.

An Assistant NY State Attorney General calls the report “the most up-to-date expert authority on the health effects of fluoride exposure.”

The Professionals’ Statement also references:

– The new American Dental Association policy recommending infant formula NOT be prepared with fluoridated water.
– The  CDC’s concession that the predominant benefit of fluoride is topical not systemic.
– CDC data showing that dental fluorosis, caused by fluoride over-exposure, now impacts one third of American children.
– Major research indicating little difference in decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.
– A Harvard study indicating a possible link between fluoridation and bone cancer.
– The silicofluoride chemicals used for fluoridation are contaminated industrial waste and have never been FDA-  approved for human ingestion.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a DC watchdog, revealed that a Harvard professor concealed the fluoridation/bone cancer connection for three years. EWG President Ken Cook states, “It is time for the US to recognize that fluoridation has serious risks that far outweigh any minor benefits, and unlike many other environmental issues, it’s as easy to end as turning off a valve at the water plant.”

Take Action to End Fluoridation. Sign the Online Petition to End Fluoridation and call for a Congressional Hearing

http://www.actionstudio.org/public/page_view_all.cfm?option=begin&pageid=8276

SOURCE:  Fluoride Action Network   http://www.FluorideAction.Net

 Dental fluorosis – white spotted, yellow, brown stained and/or pitted teeth – is a visual manifestation of fluoride overdose during childhood. Dental fluorosis afflicts from 1/3 to 1/2 of U.S. schoolchildren, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. (2)

 Inhabitants of the Davangere district of  India were studied where natural water fluoride levels ranged from 1.5 to 3.0 parts-per-million (ppm) which is similar to fluoride levels allowed in U.S. water supplies (up to 4 ppm). The sample consisted of 1,029 subjects between 15- and 74-years-old.

As the degree of dental fluorosis increased, periodontitis (advanced gum infection) increased. “The results suggest that there is a strong association of occurrence of periodontal disease in high-fluoride areas,” write Vandana and Reddy.

 
“Surprisingly, studies have not paid attention to the periodontal status in high-fluoride areas from a research perspective,” the authors write.

 “In addition to inflammatory process, which remains common to high- and low-fluoride areas, the fluorosis induced changes in hard and soft tissues of periodontium requires … attention to suspect fluoride as an etiological (environmental) agent for periodontal disease,” the authors conclude.

 
Two thirds of U.S. public water suppliers purposely add fluoride chemicals (silicofluorides) in an attempt to reduce tooth decay in tap water drinkers.  Some U.S. communities have natural fluoride levels up to 4 ppm..

 “How much longer do the American people have to be the guinea pigs in the U.S.’s fluoridation experiment,” asks lawyer Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation.

The National Research Council advises more studies are required on fluoride’s effects on reasoning ability, endocrine functions, the immune deficient, fertility, gastric response,  bladder cancer, kidney and liver enzyme functions and more. (3)

Studies already link fluoride to cancer, genetic defects, IQ deficits, thyroid dysfunction, kidney, tooth and bone damage. (3a)  But government officials want even more studies before they condemn fluoridation.

“Who will decide when fluoride’s mounting risks outweigh its questionable benefits.  The individual or the government?” asks Beeber. “Fluoridation leaves it in the hands of the government.”

 “Fluoridation chemicals are in short supply these days,” (5) says Beeber, “This would be a good time to gracefully bow out of water fluoridation.”

                                                              END

Contact:  Paul S. Beeber, Esq

President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc

PO Box 263

Old Bethpage, NY  11804

http://www.orgsites.com/ny/nyscof

http://www.FluorideAction.Net

http://www.FluorideResearch.Org

References:

1) “Assessment of periodontal status in dental fluorosis subjects using community periodontal index of treatment needs,” Vandana KL, Sesha Reddy M, Indiana Journal of Dental Research 18(2) 2007

http://www.ijdr.in/temp/IndianJDentRes18267_150451.pdf

2) http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/figures/s403a1t23.gif

3) http://www.fluorideaction.net/health/epa/nrc/excerpts.html

3a) http://www.FluorideAction.Net/health

4) http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_11/sr11_248.pdf

5) “Fluoride shortage affecting water,” The Indiana Courier Press, by John Lucas May 11, 2007

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2007/may/11/fluoride-shortage-affecting-water/