nyscof

Posts Tagged ‘cavities’

Harvard Study Links Fluoride in Water to Lower IQ

In Uncategorized on August 29, 2012 at 4:20 pm

Harvard University researchers’ review of fluoride/brain studies concludes “our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment.” It was published online July 20 in Environmental Health Perspectives, a US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ journal (1),

“The children in high fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ than those who lived in low fluoride areas,” write Choi et al.

Further, the EPA says fluoride is a chemical “with substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.

Senior author Philippe Grandjean says, “Fluoride seems to fit in with lead, mercury, and other poisons that cause chemical brain drain. The effect of each toxicant may seem small, but the combined damage on a population scale can be serious, especially because the brain power of the next generation is crucial to all of us…This risk should not be ignored,” he says.

Fluoride (fluosilicic acid) is added to US water supplies at approximately 1 part per million attempting to reduce tooth decay.

Water was the only fluoride source in the studies reviewed and was based on high water fluoride levels. However, they point out research by Ding (2011) suggested that low water fluoride levels had significant negative associations with children’s intelligence.

Choi et al. write, “Although fluoride may cause neurotoxicity in animal models and acute fluoride poisoning causes neurotoxicity in adults, very little is known of its effects on children’s neurodevelopment.” They recommend more brain/fluoride research on children and at individual-level doses.

“It’s senseless to keep subjecting our children to this ongoing fluoridation experiment to satisfy the political agenda of special-interest groups,” says attorney Paul Beeber, NYSCOF President.  “Even if fluoridation reduced cavities, is tooth health more important than brain health? It’s time to put politics aside and stop artificial fluoridation everywhere,” says Beeber.   

After reviewing fluoride toxicological data, the National Research Council reported in 2006, “It’s apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain.”

Choi’s team writes, “Fluoride readily crosses the placenta. Fluoride exposure to the developing brain, which is much more susceptible to injury caused by toxicants than is the mature brain, may possibly lead to damage of a permanent nature.”

Critics of this research review falsely claim it’s irrelevant because the studies represent high water fluoride levels.

But according to Paul Connett, PhD, co-author of The Case Against Fluoride, “Xiang et al, 2003, one of the 27 studies reviewed by Choi estimated that the threshold for the lowering of IQ was 1.9 ppm. A child drinking two liters of water at 1 ppm fluoride (2 mg of fluoride per day) would get more fluoride than some of the Chinese children drinking one liter of water at 1.9 ppm (1.9 mg/day).

‘Moreover another study ( Ding et al., 2012) found a lowering of IQ in the range of 0.3 – 3 ppm. No matter how you cut it – and no matter how much you want fluoridation to continue for emotional reasons – the science says that there is no adequate margin of safety – by any normal and rational toxicological standard – to protect ALL of America’s children from this serious end point. This outdated practice must be ended QUICKLY before we do further damage to our children and our future. If you must have fluoride, then brush it on your teeth and spit it out but don’t force it on the whole population via our drinking water.”

Fluoride accumulates in the body. Even low doses are harmful to babies, the thyroid, kidney patients and heavy water-drinkers. There are even doubts about fluoridation’s effectiveness (2).  New York City Legislation is pending to stop fluoridation. Many communities have already stopped

Infant formula when mixed with fluoridated water delivers 100-200 times more fluoride than breastmilk. (3)

Audio of radio interview with Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network regarding this study is here: http://tinyurl.com/d6x6gog

http://www.fluoridation.webs.com

http://www.FluorideAction.Net

NYSCOF News Releases

Follow NYSCOF on Twitter or Facebook

Advertisements

Scientists Grow Disillusioned Waiting for \’Clear Guidance\’ From Obama Admin – NYTimes.com

In Uncategorized on August 27, 2010 at 8:57 pm

EPA Scientists Grow Disillusioned Waiting for \’Clear Guidance\’ From Obama Admin – on lowering allowable water fluoride levels to a safe amount.

William Hirzy, a former U.S. EPA chemist, has a favorite example when discussing the role of science in government policy: fluoride in drinking water.

His view — and that of the EPA chapter of the National Treasury Employees Union — is that the chemical can be dangerous, possibly increasing the risk of bone cancer in young boys. But EPA has yet to change its 4-milligrams-per-liter drinking water standard (though a spokesman said the agency is “actively moving ahead” with an assessment).

Hirzy worries that EPA officials are dragging their feet because the U.S. Public Health Service has long touted fluoride as a beneficial additive to drinking water. And to him, that slow response is indicative of the Obama administration’s failure to fulfill its promise of scientific integrity in federal agencies.

President Obama first directed that a scientific integrity directive be released in July 2009. By July 2010, White House officials promised it was forthcoming; almost two months later, there’s no indication of when it will emerge.

“Why this administration has taken so long, I don’t know,” said Hirzy, who is now an adjunct professor at American University. “I don’t know the motives. I just know the effects.”

Government scientists had high hopes when Obama took office. But Hirzy and others say that some are now disillusioned, witnessing less change than they had expected. They point to EPA’s use of dispersants in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the recent salmonella outbreak and egg recall, and the revelation that the diabetes drug Avandia increases the risk of heart attacks. In all cases, the concerns of some agency scientists were ignored, they say.

“All these times where something’s gone wrong, it’s pretty clear that someone on the inside knew or had concerns,” said Francesca Grifo, director of the scientific integrity program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). “Yet because we have no clear guidance on when and how scientists can speak out, and since we have no clear protection for whistle-blowers, it’s a lot to ask someone to go out on a limb.”

Continued:

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/08/27/27greenwire-scientists-grow-disillusioned-waiting-for-clea-91109.html

Fluoride Damages the Thyroid, studies show

In Uncategorized on December 20, 2009 at 1:33 pm

New York –  September 24, 2007 — There is clear evidence that small
amounts of fluoride, at or near levels added to U.S. water supplies,
present potential risks to the thyroid gland, according to the
National Research Council’s (NRC) first-ever published review of the
fluoride/thyroid literature.(A)

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

Fluoridation Not Proved Safe or Effective says Medical Journal

In Uncategorized on October 21, 2007 at 10:49 am

New York – October 2007 – Researchers reporting in the Oct 6 British Medical Journal (BMJ) indicate that fluoridation, touted as a safe cavity preventive, never was proven safe or effective and may be unethical. (1)

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

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