nyscof

Posts Tagged ‘teeth’

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

All Infant Formula Contains Fluoride at Tooth Discoloring Levels

In Uncategorized on October 27, 2009 at 10:17 am

October 2009 – All infant formulas, whether ready-to-feed,
concentrated or organic, contain fluoride at levels which can discolor
developing teeth, reports the October 2009 Journal of the American
Dental Association (JADA) (1).

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

 

 

Cancer-Causing Toxins in Fluoride Chemicals

In Uncategorized on April 14, 2009 at 2:44 pm
Traces of arsenic, copper, lead and other impurities are found in chemicals used to fluoridate public water supplies, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). (1)

Controversial fluoridation schemes are promoted by special-interest groups such as the American Dental Association (ADA) which claims adding fluoride chemicals to public water supplies reduces tooth decay. “Most public and government officials take their lead from the ADA,” says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.
Arsenic was detected in 43% of the 245 diluted water fluoridation chemicals sampled by NSF International between the years 2000 and 2006  which regulates public water supply additives. (2)
Arsenic may increase cancer risk, according to the EPA which sets the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal of arsenic in water supplies at zero.(3)
Also 3% of the samples contained copper; 2% contained lead; and less than 1% contained barium, chromium, mercury, selenium or thallium. Silicates, the second most prevalent substance in fluoridation chemicals, are not health regulated.
Although no radionuclides or beryllium were found in these samples, 0.4 parts-per-billion is allowed.
Bottled water suppliers, who add fluoride, typically follow the same standards, according to the CDC. (1)
Community water fluoridation uses industrial-waste fluoride (silicofluorides). However, pharmaceutical grade fluoride may also be contaminated. According to the CDC, “Given the volumes of chemicals used in water fluoridation, a pharmaceutical grade of sodium fluoride for fluoridation could potentially contain much higher levels of arsenic, radionuclides, and regulated heavy metals than a NSF/ANSI Standard 60-certified product [the standard that water fluoridation chemicals must meet].”
The FDA regulates bottled water. But it’s almost impossible to know how much fluoride is in the bottle, unless you call the manufacturer, because:
— Domestic bottled water with no added fluoride may contain between 1.4 and 2.4 mg/L fluoride
— Imported bottled water with no added fluoride may not contain fluoride in excess of 1.4 mg/L.
— Domestic bottled water with added fluoride can contain between 0.8 and 1.7 mg/L fluoride
— Imported bottled water with added fluoride may not contain more than 0.8 mg/L fluoride.
Bottlers are not required to list any naturally-occurring fluoride on the labels.(1)
“Fluoridation is irrational whether it’s coming from the tap or the bottle,” says Beeber. “It’s time to leave fluoride chemicals and all their contaminants out of every water source.”
Over 2,400 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.
Also, eleven Environmental Protection Agency employee unions representing over 7000 environmental and public health professionals called for a moratorium on drinking water fluoridation programs across the country, and have asked EPA management to recognize fluoride as posing a serious risk of causing cancer in people. (5)

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)

References
(1) US Centers for Disease Control, Community Water Fluoridation, Fact Sheet on Questions About Bottled Water and fluoride, date last updated February 25, 2008
(2) NSF Fact Sheet on Fluoriadtion Chemicals, February 2008
(3)  US Environmental Protection Agency, Arsenic in Drinking Water, accessed April 8, 2009
(4) US Centers for Disease Control, Community Water Fluoridation, Water Fluoriodation Additives, modified and reviewed December 1, 2008

Second Thoughts about Fluoride, reports Top Sci Mag

In Uncategorized on February 14, 2008 at 2:05 pm

“Some recent studies suggest that over-consumption of fluoride can raise the risks of disorders affecting teeth, bones, the brain and the thyroid gland,” reports Scientific American editors (January 2008). “Scientific attitudes toward fluoridation may be starting to shift,” writes author Dan Fagin.

“Fluoride, the most consumed drug in the USA, is deliberately added to 2/3 of public water supplies theoretically to reduce tooth decay, but with no scientifically-valid evidence  proving safety or effectiveness,” says lawyer Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation.

Fagin, award-wining environmental reporter and Director of New York University’s Science, Health and Environmental Reporting Program, writes, “There is no universally accepted optimal level for daily intake of fluoride.” Some researchers even wonder whether the 1 mg/L added into drinking water is too much, reports Fagin.

After 3 years of scrutinizing hundreds of studies, a National Research Council (NRC) committee “concluded that fluoride can subtly alter endocrine function, especially in the thyroid – the gland that produces hormones regulating growth and metabolism,” reports Fagin.

 

Fagin quotes John Doull, professor emeritus of pharmacology and toxicology at the University of Kansas Medical Center, who chaired the NRC committee thusly, “The thyroid changes do worry me.”

 

Fluoride in foods, beverages, medicines and dental products can result in fluoride over-consumption, visible in young children as dental fluorosis – white spotted, yellow, brown and/or pitted teeth. We can’t normally see fluoride’s effects to the rest of the body.

 

Reports Fagin, “a series of epidemiological studies in China have associated high fluoride exposures with lower IQ.”

“(E)pidemiological studies and tests on lab animals suggest that high fluoride exposure increases the risk of bone fracture, especially in vulnerable populations such as the elderly and diabetics,” writes Fagin.

Fagin interviewed Steven Levy, director of the Iowa Fluoride Study which tracked about 700 Iowa children for sixteen years. Nine-year-old “Iowa children who lived in communities where the water was fluoridated were 50 percent more likely to have mild fluorosis… than [nine-year-old] children living in nonfluoridated areas of the state,” writes Fagin. Levy will study fluoride’s effects on their bones.

 

Over 1200 professionals urge Congress to cease water fluoridation and conduct Congressional hearings because scientific evidence indicates fluoridation is ineffective and has serious health risks. Support them; write your representative here:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2477/t/2782/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=21960

 (or http://www.FluorideAction.Net /congress

 

 

“(G)enetic, environmental and even cultural factors appear to leave some people much more susceptible to the effects of fluoride,” writes Fagin

 

“What the [NRC] committee found is that we’ve gone with the status quo regarding fluoride … for too long… and now we need to take a fresh look,” Doull says, “ In the scientific community, people tend to think that its settled… But when we looked at the studies that have been done, we found that many of these questions are unsettled and we have much less information than we should, considering how long this [fluoridation] has been going on. I think that’s why fluoridation is still being challenged so many years after it began, In the face of ignorance, controversy is rampant.”

 

SOURCE:  NYS Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc (NYSCOF)

PO Box 263

Old Bethpage, NY  11804

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

http://www.FluorideAction.Net

NYSCOF News Releases:

http://tinyurl.com/6kqtu