FDA Warning

	FDA Warning: Fluoride Toothpaste Poisons Little Children
HOMEPAGE 911 NWO Illuminati Freemasonry Order Of The Garter The Committee of 300 Skull and Bones The Bohemian Grove The Antichrist The Bloodlines Bildebergers Knights Templar Rosicrucian's The Virginia Company Golden Dawn Rennes Le Chateau Protocols Of Zion Rothschild's Rockefeller Chip Implants Mind Control Propaganda Music Television Culture Education Freedoms Electronic Voting Banking PNAC Neocons Leo Strauss Bush File Cheney File Iraq War Patriot Act Homeland Security _______________ Elf Prions Fluoride GM Foods "You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe." Escape Enter "You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I'll show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes." Store and Support "There is but one thing in the world really worth pursuing - the knowledge of God." Robert H. Benson	Fluoride Poisoning From The Townsend Newsletter For Doctors May 2000 The following article is taken from the Townsend Newsletter For Doctors, Published in May 2000. I believe it is one of the best and most comprehensive assesments on fluride published recently. I would also recomend all to subscribe to this journal wich is a wealth of information not easilly obtained in the more formal journals. Fluoride ‑ an industrial waste product commonly sold as poison for killing rats and insects ‑ is not good for the human body either. Yet, most dentists spouting the American Dental Association's propaganda insist that there must be fluoridation of our drinking water. These dentists, as proponents of adding fluoride to public water supplies or administering dental fluoride treatments to patients or making fluoride an ingredient of toothpaste, are perpetrating an evil against all of us. Most especially they're harming our children. If fluoridation is such a wonderful thing, why is there a Poison Control warning on fluoride toothpastes? It needs to be clearly stated that this Poison Control warning is not unique to Crest. It appears on ALL fluoride toothpaste. FDA Warning: Fluoride Toothpaste Poisons Little Children The Food and Drug Administration has sent down a ruling. It requires that on all fluoride toothpastes manufactured after April 1997, a printed admonition must appear on the fluoridated toothpaste package reading: "Warning: Keep out of the reach of children under six years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control center immediately." Following that FDA ruling, the manufacturers of fluoride toothpastes either disregarded it altogether, ignored the ruling's voluntary guidelines or interpreted them overly broadly; consequently, the FDA has put teeth in its current rules of enforcement. Inasmuch as pharmacies, groceries, convenience stores, health food stores, supermarkets, and other stores have finally sold out old and overstocked inventories of fluoridated toothpastes, you can now read the warning on various, newly distributed toothpaste tubes, boxes, bottles, and cans. For example, Procter & Gamble has included the message inside packages of Crest Multicare^(TM) advising customers to stop using the brand if they experience any form of body irritation. The Colgate‑Palmolive Corporation prints the FDA warning on its newest toothpaste, Colgate Total'. Church & Dwight, the manufacturer of Arm & Hammer toothpaste, provides a new tollfree telephone number for any reports of fluoride poisoning. Unilever PLC, the maker of Mentadent(TM) has put fluoride toxicity information on its Web site. Some toothpaste brands, like Oral B bubble‑gum flavor and the Tom's of Maine "Silly Strawberry" formula are so delicious that little children, even as they brush, eat their fluoridated toothpaste like candy. There is danger here, because the kids can die or at the very least become very sick from ingesting the fluoride poison. Certainly they may come down with dental fluorosis. Dental Fluorosis is a condition characterized by mottled tooth enamel, which is opaque and may be stained. Its incidence increases when the level of fluoride in the water supply is above two parts per million. When the drinking water's level of fluoride reaches over eight parts per million, systemic fluorosis may occur, with calcification of ligaments. In general, fluorosis is a bony overgrowth accompanied by neurologic complications and arthritis brought on by long‑term fluoride intake, such as occurs in industrial workers. If asked, manufacturers do admit that no child could get through a six‑ounce tube of fluoridated toothpaste without vomiting. Fluoride causes vomiting because large doses of it combined with gastric juices tend to irritate the child's ‑ and even an adult's ‑ stomach and intestines. Of the 4,453 cases of unintended "fluoride exposure" reported to poison‑control centers in 1997, 99% turned out not to be life‑threatening but definitely had the potential to bring on death. In the remaining 1%, severe illness, near‑death, or actual death did occur.' Harmful Effects Caused by Fluoride Ingestion In 1974, a three‑year‑old Brooklyn boy had stannous fluoride gel swabbed over his teeth by a pedodontist (specialist in children's dentistry) as the means of preventing tooth decay. Five hours later this child died from fluoride poisoning because of one fatal mistake. After rinsing his mouth the small boy did not spit out the rinse water but swallowed it instead.' In New York City five years before, another boy, age four, went into violent convulsions and died directly after receiving topical fluoride applications to his teeth. Personnel of the dental clinic claimed this child had sustained a heart attack, even though there was no history of cardiac disease for him or any members of his family. In fact, the ingestion of even small amounts of fluoride is known among cardiologists to be a possible cause of cardiac arrest. It's one of water fluoridation's "side effects. 113 On May 23, 1998, in Hooper Bay, Alaska, 41 year‑old Dominic Smith drank fluoridated well water along with thirty other residents of this Bering Sea coastal village. All of them got sick, but Mr. Smith died. It seems that a broken pump had ¹ injected a little more than the usual fluoride quantity into Hooper Bay's water supply. As a result, Dr. Peter Kakamura, director of the A] askan State Division of Public Health, reports: "The man's death occurred by reason of fluoridation." He was poisoned. There was near‑death of Dominic Smith's sister too, plus flu‑like symptoms struck 29 others who drank from one of the two public wells. Fluoride is routinely added to Alaska's public water supplies, including those in Anchorage and many Eskimo villages "to reduce tooth decay. ‑4 From Auckland, New Zealand, nutritionist Toni Jeffreys, PhD, asks, "I wonder if the epidemic of osteoporosis and escalating heart disease in women is not due to the current conventional medical advice to take calcium and fluoride tablets? Most of us know that calcium is antagonistic to magnesium, and that it is magnesium that protects our hearts. But also, magnesium is the mineral that provides elasticity in bones. Without magnesium we can build lots of bone but it's a poor grade bone which shatters and fractures at any strain.' "Unfortunately fluoride is also antagonistic to magnesium and will cancel it out," continues Dr. Jeffreys. "It is therefore quite murderous to give women calcium and fluoride tablets, when we are already overburdened with fluoride in the environment in numerous ways and are deficient in magnesilim."⁶ As shown by a scientific study conducted by four prestigious research institutions, Harvard Medical School, Eastman Dental Center, Iowa State University, and Forsyth Research Institute, fluoride has an adverse effect on the brain and central nervous system (CNS). It causes "motor dysfunction, IQ deficits, and/or learning disabilities in humans," say the institutions' cooperating researchers .7 At approximately one part per million (1 ppm), fluoride has been added to most public water supplies throughout the United States for over four decades at the urging of dentists, but these four research groups report that the CNS's functional output is vulnerable to fluoride. This scholarly laboratory study indicates that fluoride ingestion's "neurotoxic risks deserve further evaluation."" Taking in fluoride definitely has deleterious consequences for the brain. Pathological conditions of the brain have been studied by Russians, Chinese, the United States Public Health Service (USPHS), and others since 1978. For instance, in their 1978 book Fluoridation, the Great Dilemma, three medical authors describe the findings of practicing Soviet physicians. The Russian physicians observed that 79% of patients with occupational fluorosis show a series of chalky‑white, irregularly distributed patches on the surface of the enamel which become infiltrated by yellow or brown staining or other discolorations on teeth from fluoride ingestion. With these patches, say the Russians, the patients "demonstrate dysfunction of subcortical axial nonspecific structures of the brain."9 Moreover, the 1991 review, Fluoride Benefits and Risks, published by the USPHS, states that there is "relative impermability of the blood‑brain barrier to fluoride." This mineral does penetrate the brain's first line of defense against toxins and potentially may be responsible for various brain syndromes such as senile dementia, schizophrenia, and Alzheimer's disease.10 Recent studies from China on the relationship between drinking fluoridated water by residents in endemic Chinese dental fluorosis areas and the population's intelligence quotient, contain significant references and discussions. They indicate that diminishing IQ for people living in dental fluorosis areas has been known since 1989. Chinese studies indicate that the influence of a high fluoride environment on the intelligence of children may occur early in development such as during the stages of embryonic life or infancy when differentiation and growth are more rapid. Ultramicroscopi study of embryonic brain tissue obtained from termination of pregnancy operations in endemic fluorosis regions showed "differentiation of brain nerve cells were poor, and brain development was delayed. ‑11,12 The incidence of thigh bone fractures at the femoral neck in those people 65 years of age and older was compared in three communities in the State of Utah. Among the Utah towns, one of them had its water artificially fluoridated to one part per million. The other two did not. Measured over a seven year period, the relative risk of hip fracture for women drinking fluoridated water increased by 1.27, and for men the risk rose to 1.41. As a conclusion to their study, the four medical researchers state, "We found a significant increase in the risk of hip fracture in both men and women exposed to artificial fluoridation at one ppm, suggesting that low levels of fluoride increase the risk of hip fracture in the elderly"13 Commenting on this finding, Seattle, Washington medical nutritional therapist Alan R. Gaby, MD, made an observation similar to that of Dr. Toni Jeffreys (above). Dr. Gaby said: "Hip fracture is the second most common cause of admission to nursing homes, accounting for approximately 60,000 admissions each year. Fluoride apparently causes new bone formation of inferior quality, especially in the femoral head, where there is more cortical bone. Some studies suggest that fluoride is also a carcinogen."14 Fluoride as a Carcinogen In 1977, epidemiological studies on fluoridation carried out by Dean Burk, PhD, former head of the Cytochemistry Section of the National Cancer Institute, in conjunction with John Yiamouyiannis, PhD, President of the Safe Water Foundation of Delaware, Ohio, were the subject of full‑scale United States Congressional Hearings. The Burk/Yiamouyiannis studies showed that fluoridation is linked to about 10,000 cancer deaths annually in this nation. The US Public Health Service, co‑promoter of fluoridation with the American Dental Association (ADA), opposed the Burk/Yiamouyiannis investigations. The USPHS tried to refute findings of the two scientists with its own report. But Drs. Yiamouyiannis and Burk evaluated the USPHS findings. Then they explained to the Congress how "conflicting findings of the USPHS are due to the fact that the Service had made mathematical errors by leaving out 80‑90% of the recorded data. When these errors and omissions are corrected, its method of simultaneously adjusting for age, race, and sex confirm that 10,000 excess cancer deaths per year are linked to water fluoridation in the United States." To their amazement, officials of the USPHS discovered that their own findings really did coincide with findings from Drs. Burk and Yiamouyiannis. All of the findings from both studies, going back a quarter century, clearly point to fluoride as a cancer culprit. When added to drinking water fluoride creates a carcinogen. More than this, the following are results released in 1990 by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) under the auspices of the USPHS:15 • Precancerous. changes occur in human oral squamous cells as a result of elevating the levels of fluoride in drinking water. • There is an increase in the incidence of tumors and cancers in oral squamous cells as a result of increasing levels of fluoride in the drinking water. Osteosarcoma, a rare form of bone cancer, occurs only in animals with fluoride in their drinking water. There is an increase in the incidence of thyroid follicular cell tumors as a result of increasing levels of fluoride in the drinking water. Hepatocholangiocarcinoma a rare form of liver cancer, occurs in animals with fluoride in their drinking water. The doses of fluoride that are linked to cancer in this NTP study are only one tenth to one fiftieth of the amount used to produce can by benzene. Thus, fluoride is up to fifty times more carcinogenic than benzene. The cancer‑causing potential of fluoride is not limited to one type of cancer. Similar to cancer‑coverups by cigarette manufacturers in the tobacco industry, Proctor & Gamble, manufacturer of the many Crest' fluoridated toothpaste brands, which are endorsed (for a fee) by the American Dental Association, performed carcinogenicity studies with sodium fluoride four years before the above‑reported 1990 NTP/USPHS report was released. Dose‑dependent increases in cancer were observed in every parameter tested, including squamous cell metaplasias, but the USPHS held back this information and only released it when forced to do so by Dr. John Yiamouyiannis under the Freedom of Information Act." Added to all that, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gathered a massive amount of evidence for its own 1991 report, "Review of Fluoride Benefits and Risks." This additional report supports the link between drinking and bathing in fluoridated water and the creation of human cancers. Here is what was learned by the HHS:17 • Based on rates of 279 cancer cases expected in nonfluoridated areas, 290 people contracted bone and joint cancers when they lived in areas whose water is fluoridated. • Although 30.33 cases were expected, there was an excess of 49 people suffering from Ewing's sarcoma in fluoridated counties. • The observed‑to‑expected rate of soft tissue cancer for both sexes in Seattle, Washington increased with the duration of fluoridation of the city's water supply. • For kidney cancer, the risk ratios for both sexes in Seattle with its fluoridated drinking water rose by 10%, a trend that the HHS considered statistically significant. In December 1992, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy and the New Jersey Department of Health released their joint study of November 8, 1992. New Jersey State findings were that bone cancer rates among ten‑ to nineteen‑year‑old males living in all New Jersey municipalities having fluoridated drinking water is 6.9 times higher than in other areas of the state. There is no doubt that New Jersey residents drinking from fluoridated public water supplies suffer from a much higher incidence of bone cancer.',, Because it continues to fluoridate its public drinking water, the State of New Jersey is a candidate for a class action suit by its residents and by visitors to the state. Additional Hazardous Results from Fluoride Ingestion In the United States Pharmacopoeia, the poisonous hazards of fluoride ingestion are listed. They include the less lethal side effects of nausea, vomiting, stomach cramps, tremors, faintness, weakness, unusual psychological excitement, skin rash, sores in the mouth and on the lips, pain and aching of bones, and white, brown, or near‑black discolorations of teeth identified as dental fluorosis. Dental or occupational fluorosis is actually a visible sign that fluoride content of the body has caused the enamelforming cells, the ameloblasts, to produce damaged collagen. Collagen makes up 30% of the body's protein. It provides the structural framework for skin, ligaments, tendons, muscles, cartilage, bones, and teeth. In his well‑documented and detailed book, Fluoride, The Aging Factor, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis explains that fluoride ingestion causes "increased production of imperfect collagen or collagen‑like protein," not just in the teeth but throughout the body. The body's structural components that should not become mineralized such as ligaments, cartilage, and tendons turn into hardened tissues. The skin which produces the disease scleroderma, as well as arteries, not only harden but also calcify. Fluoride ingestion also affects the structure and strength of bone by causing fused vertebrae, calcified joints, arthritis, and an increase in fractures. It decreases the bone's healing ability. Several studies that evaluate fluoride as a treatment for osteoporosis found that this mineral increases, rather than prevents, skeletal fragility. Only one ppm fluoride in drinking water, disrupts collagen metabolism. Yet, the US Environmental Protection Agency allows 4 ppm fluoride in our nation's water supply." Not only does drinking fluoridated water disrupt collagen, it affects other proteins as well, causing widespread dysfunction of enzymes and the immune system, and even chromosomal damage. Fluoride ingestion breaks up existing protein bonds and forms an extremely strong bond to the one particular protein bond known as "H2," disrupting the normal shape and function of other necessary proteins. When the proteins that form enzymes are disrupted in this way, the enzymes themselves become inactivated. Enzymes are the catalysts that cause the biochemical changes in the body. Not only are these enzymatic proteins inactivated, they are rendered unrecognizable to the body's immune system, setting up an autoimmune allergic reaction. Because of this peculiarity, fluoride causes a vast variety of ill effects. "The United States National Academy of Sciences (USNAS)20 and the World Health Organization (WHO) 21 as well as other institutions, have published lists of enzymes that are inhibited at fluoride levels of one ppm or less," writes Dr. Yiamouyiannis. Among them, acetylcholinesterase, glutamine synthetase, ATPase, and the DNA Repair Enzyme System are just a few of the known enzymes inhibited by fluoride ingestion at one ppm. One part per million fluoride in drinking water or other ingested solvents (such as diet cola drinks which contain fluoride) cuts the activity of the DNA repair enzyme by 50%, resulting in increased genetic damage. In his 1993 book, Dr. Yiamouyiannis lists nineteen studies since 1973, that show evidence of fluoride‑induced genetic damage in mammals, one of which was done by Proctor and Gamble (already cited). Scientific studies prove that fluoride levels found in the autopsied brains of persons drinking fluoridated water average 1.5 ppm fluoride; in their autopsied hearts 1.8 ppm was found; and in their thyroid glands there was 4.0 ppm. Fluoride is used, according to the Merck Index, to suppress thyroid activity. Clearly, a fluoridated substance taken into the body affects more than teeth .22 With All this Damage, Why Are We Fluoridating Ourselves? Despite so much documentation of fluoride's ill‑effects on the body and the very real danger all of us face from its ingestion, we continue to fluoridate ourselves by means of adding it to drinking water, toothpastes, oral rinses, baked goods, prescribed dental treatments, food supplements, soft drinks, beer, wine, fruit juices made from concentrates, and in additional ways. In one analysis, Coke Classic Tm, bottled in Chicago, is shown to contain 2.56 ppm fluoride. And, as was alluded to, the Chicago‑made Diet Coke@ contains 2.96 ppm. Produce grown with fluorine‑containing fertilizers offer up from six to 12 times more fluoride than those fruits an vegetables not "fed" with these fertilizers. Not only does fluoride pollute our food and water, but certain manufacturing plants such as aluminum, phosphate, steel, clay, glass, enamel, and many other factory types release high levels of fluoride into the air, soil, rivers, and lakes.23 You have every right to ask, why are we continuing to fluoridate ourselves into sickness and death? We do it as a result of media bombardment: emphatic promotions by the United States Public Health Service, propaganda from the American Dental Association, advertising by fluoride toothpaste manufacturers, and other more subtle capitalistic reasons having nothing to do with dental health. So, allow me to answer your question as to why we are fluoridating ourselves. First, however, you should know the political background of fluoridation 'that's forced on our populace in the United States. American fluoridation proponents are ever‑continuing to assert that fluoride is a mineral essential to the body and responsible for preventing tooth decay. But a 1971 review of numerous studies concerning the nutritional value of fluoride, performed by the US National Academy of Sciences, found no evidence to support the claim that fluoride is an essential mineral. Further, both the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, Georgia and the British Ministry of Health admit that no laboratory or epidemiological study supports the claim that adding fluoride to the drinking water prevents tooth decays The reason Americans are fluoridating their water supplies is strictly related to big business greed and the buying off of bureaucrats. Yes, it has everything to do with making money for certain vested interests and nothing to do with our dental health. Money‑Eyed Interests Fluoridate Us As the aluminum and phosphate fertilizer industries grew in the 1920s and 1930s, manufacturers were faced with how to get rid of their poisonous byproduct, the fluoride waste. They could sell only so much rodenticide and insecticide and desperately needed another means of getting rid of fluoride without incurring public censor. The manufacturers hit on an idea of using it for fluoridating reservoirs, lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, aquifiers and other sources of drinking water. They lobbied the US Public Health Service to introduce this fluoridation measure into the public trough. H. Trendley Dean, MD, then a bureaucrat with the USPHS, performed surveys of areas in the 1930s that relied for drinking water on fluoridepolluted streams and rivers. In a 1937 report that Dr. Dean published, he found that the higher the content of fluoride in the water, the greater the incidence of mottled teeth (dental fluorosis). He wrote an excellent paper which clearly made the case against fluoridation.` Then Dr. Gerald J. Cox, an official of the Mellon Institute pronounced that, while too much fluoride can cause mottling of teeth, low levels of one ppm actually was nutritionally beneficial and prevented tooth decay. Dr. Cox's boss, the Mellon family, owned the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA), a major fluoride polluter. The Mellons were seeking a way to unload their massive amount of fluoride byproduct and maybe even make money from its sale. Persuaded by a high‑paying position provided by the Mellons as the first director of the National Institute of Dental Research, in 1938 Dr. H. Trendley Dean changed his findings from seven years before. He reversed himself by publishing skewed data to support Dr. Cox's cavity‑prevention Pronouncement Then, six years later, Oscar Ewing, an ALCOA attorney, was appointed the United States' Federal Security Administrator in 1944 and took charge of the USPHS. Mr. Ewing appointed Edward L. Bernays as the "father of public relations" for popularizing ALCOA's water fluoridation campaign. Thus, Bernays turned rat poison into "a beneficial provider of gleaming smiles." He did it with clinical reports praising the use of fluoride for cavity prevention published in various medical and dental journals. Mr. Bernays knew that by offering appropriate "under‑the‑counter" compensation, he could get officials of the American Medical Association, the American Dental association, Proctor and Gamble, independent scientists and laboratories, physicians, dentists, and certain government bureaucrats to proclaim fluoride's safety and advantages for teeth. This public relations gambit Mr. Bernays achieved long before any clinical studies were completed. By accomplishing such positivesounding publication and declarations, the government officials, physicians, dentists, business executives, scientists, laboratory directors, and others would be too embarrassed and frightened of lawsuits to renege on their well‑paid endorsements ‑ regardless of the results of scientific studies. Those whose scientific research refuted fluoride and showed its toxicity were ignored, labeled crackpots, fired from jobs, denied grants, and stripped of dental and medical licenses. In his very fine book, Dr. Yiamouyiannis contends that the fluoridation campaign still continues under the leadership of New York City psychiatrist, Stephen Barrett, MD, who is cofounder of the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), which recently changed its name to the National Council for Reliable Health Information (NCRHI).26 (To learn how Dr. Barrett and his fellow members of the NCAHF or NCRHI have situated themselves among the candidates for a class action suit, see the end of this article.) Does Fluoride Prevent Dental Cavities? Fluoride, a natural trace mineral in the diet, is found in drinking water naturally in widely varying concentrations from trace amounts to a dozen parts per million. Much like selenium, manganese and other trace minerals, there is an ideal level of intake. When fluoride's intake is too low, dental caries could possibly occur. When too high, dental fluorosis will occur. Cardiologist/dentologist Thomas Levy, MD, of Colorado Springs, Colorado, who had worked with biocompatible dentist Dr. Hal Huggins, tells us about the mottling of teeth by the pathological onset of fluorosis. "Known in the United States since at least 1916, dental fluorosis is sometimes referred to as "Colorado Brown Stain" and "Texas Teeth" as these two states have a high endemic fluoride level in much of their drinking water," states Dr. Levy. "In its advanced stages, affected teeth demonstrate pitting and brittleness. Often chipping, and a yellow, brown, or black appearance [shows up] in different areas [of the teeth]. Earlier stages show a chalky, mottled, inconsistent appearance .1127 The elegant study in 1937 by Dr. H. Trendley Dean of the USPHS that I described earlier clearly points out that the incidence of dental fluorosis is directly related to fluoride concentration in drinking water, reaching virtually 100% when the level exceeds 4.5 ppm. Levels of only 2.2 ppm show a roughly 70% incidence of this affliction. 28 Dr. Dean's initial dental fluorosis finding, well after his refutation of it for money, was later supported substantially by another 1984 study published in the Journal of the American Dental Association.29 Worse, USPHS medical scientists uncovered in 1954 that Bartlett, Texas, with 8 ppm fluoride in its water supply, presented a mortality rate among its residents three times greater than that of a neighboring town with a fluoride drinking water level of merely 0.4 ppm.30 Added to this Bartlett township discovery was another study published in a 1978 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine that stated death occurs more frequently among the populace of cities and towns drinking fluoridated water as compared to those folks drinking unfluoridated water.31 Fluoride Weakens Bones and Teeth Fluoride is not essential for sound teeth and it does not prevent cavities. However, as a result of a 1940s study commissioned by the USPHS that determined one ppm of fluoride in water reduced tooth decay by 60%, many countries acted on this erroneous finding. Today, two‑thirds of the population of Australia, half the population of the United States, Canada, Ireland and New Zealand, 30% of the population of Brazil, and 10% of the population of Great Britain, mostly in the west Midlands and Northern regions of England, drink water from municipal supplies that have been artificially fluoridated. Other, more enlightened European nations such as Sweden, Holland and Germany have reversed their policy and discontinued the practice." While fluoride ingestion tends to stimulate bone density, the fluoride‑stimulated bone is structurally unsound. Restoration of bone mass by use of this mineral not only fails to reduce the risk of fractures in women who suffer with postmenopausal osteoporosis, but it actually increases the risk of such fractures .33 And more disturbing is accumulating evidence that the fluoridation of public water supplies eventually increases the risk of fractures in the whole community.34 Scientific studies are currently reporting higher prevalence of dental fluorosis following the fluoridation of drinking water than had been predicted .35 Melvyn R. Werbach, MD, of Tarzana, California, an internationally acclaimed medical journalist, questions the propriety of the decision to allow fluoridation to remain in United States' drinking water. Dr. Werbach writes, "The fluoride controversy is simply another example of the peculiar bias mainstream medicine shows towards apparently powerful new treatments whose dangers are largely unknown, while it continues to show bias against many gentler therapies with safety records far exceeding those of standard treatments."36 A University of Arizona study, published in the July 27, 1992 issue of Chemical & Engineering News by Cornelius Steelink, PhD Professor Emeritus in the university's Department of Chemistry, reported that the more fluoride a child drank in its water supply, the more cavities appeared in the child's teeth .37 The City of Tucson, Arizona provided Dr. Steelink with a unique opportunity to test the many fluoridation hypotheses handed out wholesale by proponents of fluoride additives to drinking water. The professor writes: "Historically, this city has had discrete geographic areas of groundwater with high fluoride contents of 0.8 ppm and areas of low fluoride contents with 0.3 ppm." When Dr. Steelink's evaluation committee plotted the incidence of tooth decay versus fluoride content in a child's neighborhood drinking water a positive correlation was revealed. As stated above, Professor Steelink's committee reported with this exact summarizing quote: "In other words, the more fluoride a child drank, the more cavities appeared in the teeth. "38 David C. Kennedy, DDS, of San Diego, California, the author of How to Save Your Teeth: Toxic‑Free Preventive Dentistry, outright declares that fluorides do not reduce tooth decay. 39 In a published letter, Dr. Kennedy writes to the Safe Water Coalition of Washington State: "In Canada, the areas which report the lowest incidence of decay are the unfluoridated areas. Tooth decay is declining world‑wide with no statistical difference between fluoridated and unfluoridated areas. Some authors [proponents of fluoridation] attempt to attribute the decline of cavities in unfluoridated areas to a decrease in the consumption of refined sugars. I believe statistics show we are consuming more, not less refined sugar. The latest data from the National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) found no difference in the incidence of tooth decay in children ages five through 17 years raised in nonfluoridated, partially fluoridated, and fluoridated communities. NIDR studies show no relationship between fluoridation and tooth decay rates."40 Fluoride Reacts with Aluminum to Cause Alzheimer's Disease Newly declassified documents, obtained under the US Freedom of Information legislation, today provides shocking medical facts known but concealed by the US Government since the 1940's. During that same period when Dr. H. Trendley Dean changed his laboratory test findings and ALCOA attorney Oscar Ewing won his political appointment, the United States Public Health Service knew that fluoride produces adverse human central nervous system effects. It's true! For over 50 years, the USPHS has hidden this horrible information about fluoride as a polluter and deteriorater of the human brain. Ellie Rudolph, Director of the Pennsylvania Chapter of the Health Alliance International, advises that pathological changes in the brain tissue of animals given fluoride and aluminum‑fluoride combined are the same changes found in the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. Director Rudolph states: "Low levels of fluoride have serious health implications for people and the effect is enhanced in the presence of other neurotoxins like aluminum .1141 (To discuss this hidden aspect of fluoridation pathology, you may contact Ellie Rudolph in person by consulting Appendix A of my book, Elements of Danger: Protect Yourself Against the Hazards of Modern Dentistry.) The peer‑reviewed medicaljournal, Brain Researchh, reveals that aluminum‑induced neural degeneration in rats is greatly increased when the animals are fed low doses of fluoride. The presence of fluoride enhances the bio‑availability of aluminum causing more aluminum to cross the blood‑brain barrier and become deposited in the brain. The brain researchers write: "The aluminum level in the brains of the fluoride‑treated group of animals was double that of the controls ."42 Even worse, the study's authors say, "While the small amount of aluminum‑fluoride in the drinking water of rats required for neurotoxic effects is surprising, perhaps more significant are the neurotoxic results of sodium fluoride (Nor) at the dose given of 2.1 ppm Nor. This 2.1 parts per million NaF equals 1.0 mg fluoride ion per lure of water which is the same level found in 1.0 ppm "optimally" fluoridated drinking water. Note: The formula for converting NaF to fluoride ion is ppm x 45% so that 2.1 ppm x 45% =.95 ppm (ppm = mgs/litre). The present fluoride/aluminum study on the brains of laboratory animals confirms the work of two separate groups of scientists in China, each group publishing their investigations in 1995 and reported on earlier in this chapter. Both Chinese studies showed that drinking water containing fluoride adversely affects the intelligence quotients of children."," References 1.Canedy, D. Toothpaste a hazard? Just ask the F.D.A. The New York Times March 24, 1998, p. A18. 2.The New York Times, January 20, 1779, p. 16. 3.McIvor, M., et al. Hyperkalemia and cardiac arrest from fluoride exposure during hemodialysis. American Journal of Cardiology. 51:901‑902, 1983. 4.Fluoride blamed for death. Ketchikan, Alaska Daily News, June 1, 1998. 5. Machoy‑Mokrzynska, A. Fluoride‑magnesium interactions‑ Fluoride. 28(4):175, November 1995. 6. Jeffreys, T. Fluoride supplements for osteoporosis? Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 171:112, October 1997. 7Mullenix, PJ.; Denbesten, PK; Schunior, A. Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Neurotoxicology and Teratology. 17(2):169‑177, 1995. 8 Safe Water Coalition of Washington State. Fluoride has adverse effect on central nervous system. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 1,55:21, June 1996. 9 Walbott, G.L.; Burgstahler, A‑W.; McKinney, H.L Fluoridation, the Great Dilemma. (Lawrence, Kansas: Coronado Press, 1978). 10. Department of Health and Human Services, USPHS. Fluoride Benefits and Risks. February 1991. 11. Li, X.S.; Zhi, J.L.; Gao, R.O. Effect of fluoride exposure on intelligence of children. Fluoride. 28(4):189‑192,1995. 12. Zhao, L.; Liang, G.H.; Zhang, D.; Wu, X. Effect of high fluoride water supply on children's intelligence. 1995. 13. Danielson, C.; Lyon, J.L.; Egger, M.; Goodenough, G.K. Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah's elderly population‑ Journal of the American Medical Association. 258:746748,1992. 14. Gaby, A.R. Literature Review & Commentary. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 113:1058, December 1992. 15.Yiamouyiannis, J. Update on fluoride and cancer. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 89:864‑865, December 1990. 16. U.S. Public Health Service. Carcinogenicity studies with sodium fluoride performed by Proctor and Gamble. Medical Tribune. February 22,1990. 17. Safe Water Coalition of Washington State, Spokane, Washington. HHS report on fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 97/98:638, September 1991. 18. Safe Water Coalition of Washington State, Spokane, Washington. Re: fluoridation. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 115/116:206, February/march 1993. 19.Ylamouyiannis, J. Fluoride The Aging Factor, 3rd Edition. (Delaware, Ohio: Health Action Press, 1993). 20. Is fluorine an' essential element? Fluorides. (Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1971), pp. 66‑68 and 70‑73. 21.Fluorides and Human Health. (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 1970),p. 183. 22.Op. cit., Yianouyiannis., p. 7. 23.Klotterj The fraud of fluoridation. Townsend Letter for Doctors &Fhtients‑ 145/146:119 120, August/September 1995. 24.Ibid. 25.Dean, MT. and Elvove, E_ Further studies on minimal threshhold of chronic endemic dental fluosis. Public Health Reports. 52:1249‑1264, 1937. 26 Op. cit. Yiamouyiannis, pp. 99‑122. 27.Levy, T Fluoridation: paving the road to the final solution. Extraordinary ScienceJanuary/February/March 1994, pp. 29‑41. 28Op. cit., Dean and Elvove. 29.SegrettoVA., et al.A current study of mottled enamel in Texas. Journal of the American Dental Association. 108:56‑59, 1984. 30.Leone, N., et al. Medical aspects of excessive fluoride in a water supply. Public Health Reports. 69:925‑936,1954. 31.Erickson, J.D. Mortality of selected cities with fluoridated and nonfluoridated water supplies. New England Journal of Medicine. 298:1112‑1116, 1978. 32.Diesendorf, M. Have the benefits of water fluoridation been overestimated? International Clinical Nutrition Review. 10(2):292‑303,1990. 33.Lindsay, R. Fluoride and bone ‑quantity versus quality. Editorial. New England Journal of Medicine. 322(12):845‑846, 1990. 34.Colquhoun, J. Fluoridation: new evidence of harm to young teeth and old bones. International Clinical Nutrition Review. 12(l):1‑8,1992. 35 Ibid. 36.Werbach, M.R. Fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors. 133/134:853, August/September 1994. 37.Safe Water Coalition of Washington State. The more fluoride ‑ the more cavities. Townsend Letter for Doctors. 129:376, April 1994. 38.Steelink, C. Tooth decay & fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors 136:1128, October 1994. 39.Kennedy, D.C.How to Save Your Teeth: Toxic‑free Preventive Dentistry. (Delaware, Ohio: Health Action Press, August 1993). 40. Safe Water Coalition of Washington State. Don't applaud fluoride use for cavities. Townsend Letter for Doctors. 82:286‑288, May 1990. 41.Rudolph, E. Alzheimer's disease and dementia ‑ important new study shows grave implications from interaction of aluminum and low dose fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 184:27, November 1998. 42.Verner, JA.; Jensen, K.F.; Horvath,W.; Isaacson, R.L. Brain Research. 784:1998, Elsevier Science. 43.Op. cit. Li, X.S.; Zhi, J.L.; Gov, R.O., 1996. 44.Zhao, L.; Liang G.H.; Zhang, D.; Wu, X., 1995. 54 Glasser, G.Colgate pays out for fluoride damaged teeth. London Telegraph, November 24,1996. FAIR USE NOTICE. This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Chemtrailpatrol is making this article available in our efforts to advance the understanding of environmental, justice issues, corporate accountability, human rights, labor rights and social understanding. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

FDA Warning:

Fluoride Toothpaste Poisons Little Children

HOMEPAGE

_______________

"You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe."

Escape Enter

"You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I'll show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes."

Store and Support

"There is but one thing in the world really worth pursuing - the knowledge of God."

Robert H. Benson

Fluoride Poisoning

From The Townsend Newsletter For Doctors

May 2000

The following article is taken from the Townsend Newsletter For Doctors, Published in May 2000. I believe it is one of the best and most comprehensive assesments on fluride published recently. I would also recomend all to subscribe to this journal wich is a wealth of information not easilly obtained in the more formal journals.

Fluoride ‑ an industrial waste product commonly sold as poison for killing rats and insects ‑ is not good for the human body either. Yet, most dentists spouting the American Dental Association's propaganda insist that there must be fluoridation of our drinking water. These dentists, as proponents of adding fluoride to public water supplies or administering dental fluoride treatments to patients or making fluoride an ingredient of toothpaste, are perpetrating an evil against all of us. Most especially they're harming our children.

If fluoridation is such a wonderful thing, why is there a Poison Control warning on fluoride toothpastes?

It needs to be clearly stated that this Poison Control warning is not unique to Crest. It appears on ALL fluoride toothpaste.

FDA Warning:

Fluoride Toothpaste Poisons Little Children

The Food and Drug Administration has sent down a ruling. It requires that on all fluoride toothpastes manufactured after April 1997, a printed admonition must appear on the fluoridated toothpaste package reading: "Warning: Keep out of the reach of children under six years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for brushing, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control center immediately."

Following that FDA ruling, the manufacturers of fluoride toothpastes either disregarded it altogether, ignored the ruling's voluntary guidelines or interpreted them overly broadly; consequently, the FDA has put teeth in its current rules of enforcement. Inasmuch as pharmacies, groceries, convenience stores, health food stores, supermarkets, and other stores have finally sold out old and overstocked inventories of fluoridated toothpastes, you can now read the warning on various, newly distributed toothpaste tubes, boxes, bottles, and cans. For example, Procter & Gamble has included the message inside packages of Crest Multicare^(TM) advising customers to stop using the brand if they experience any form of body irritation. The Colgate‑Palmolive Corporation prints the FDA warning on its newest toothpaste, Colgate Total'. Church & Dwight, the manufacturer of Arm & Hammer toothpaste, provides a new tollfree telephone number for any reports of fluoride poisoning. Unilever PLC, the maker of Mentadent(TM) has put fluoride toxicity information on its Web site.

Some toothpaste brands, like Oral B bubble‑gum flavor and the Tom's of Maine "Silly Strawberry" formula are so delicious that little children, even as they brush, eat their fluoridated toothpaste like candy. There is danger here, because the kids can die or at the very least become very sick from ingesting the fluoride poison. Certainly they may come down with dental fluorosis.

Dental Fluorosis is a condition characterized by mottled tooth enamel, which is opaque and may be stained. Its incidence increases when the level of fluoride in the water supply is above two parts per million. When the drinking water's level of fluoride reaches over eight parts per million, systemic fluorosis may occur, with calcification of ligaments. In general, fluorosis is a bony overgrowth accompanied by neurologic complications and arthritis brought on by long‑term fluoride intake, such as occurs in industrial workers.

If asked, manufacturers do admit that no child could get through a six‑ounce tube of fluoridated toothpaste without vomiting. Fluoride causes vomiting because large doses of it combined with gastric juices tend to irritate the child's ‑ and even an adult's ‑ stomach and intestines. Of the 4,453 cases of unintended "fluoride exposure" reported to poison‑control centers in 1997, 99% turned out not to be life‑threatening but definitely had the potential to bring on death. In the remaining 1%, severe illness, near‑death, or actual death did occur.'

Harmful Effects Caused by Fluoride Ingestion

In 1974, a three‑year‑old Brooklyn boy had stannous fluoride gel swabbed over his teeth by a pedodontist (specialist in children's dentistry) as the means of preventing tooth decay. Five hours later this child died from fluoride poisoning because of one fatal mistake. After rinsing his mouth the small boy did not spit out the rinse water but swallowed it instead.'

In New York City five years before, another boy, age four, went into violent convulsions and died directly after receiving topical fluoride applications to his teeth. Personnel of the dental clinic claimed this child had sustained a heart attack, even though there was no history of cardiac disease for him or any members of his family. In fact, the ingestion of even small amounts of fluoride is known among cardiologists to be a possible cause of cardiac arrest. It's one of water fluoridation's "side effects. 113

On May 23, 1998, in Hooper Bay, Alaska, 41 year‑old Dominic Smith drank fluoridated well water along with thirty other residents of this Bering Sea coastal village. All of them got sick, but Mr. Smith died. It seems that a broken pump had ¹ injected a little more than the usual fluoride quantity into Hooper Bay's water supply. As a result, Dr. Peter Kakamura, director of the A] askan State Division of Public Health, reports: "The man's death occurred by reason of fluoridation." He was poisoned. There was near‑death of Dominic Smith's sister too, plus flu‑like symptoms struck 29 others who drank from one of the two public wells. Fluoride is routinely added to Alaska's public water supplies, including those in Anchorage and many Eskimo villages "to reduce tooth decay. ‑4

From Auckland, New Zealand, nutritionist Toni Jeffreys, PhD, asks, "I wonder if the epidemic of osteoporosis and escalating heart disease in women is not due to the current conventional medical advice to take calcium and fluoride tablets? Most of us know that calcium is antagonistic to magnesium, and that it is magnesium that protects our hearts. But also, magnesium is the mineral that provides elasticity in bones. Without magnesium we can build lots of bone but it's a poor grade bone which shatters and fractures at any strain.'

"Unfortunately fluoride is also antagonistic to magnesium and will cancel it out," continues Dr. Jeffreys. "It is therefore quite murderous to give women calcium and fluoride tablets, when we are already overburdened with fluoride in the environment in numerous ways and are deficient in magnesilim."⁶

As shown by a scientific study conducted by four prestigious research institutions, Harvard Medical School, Eastman Dental Center, Iowa State University, and Forsyth Research Institute, fluoride has an adverse effect on the brain and central nervous system (CNS). It causes "motor dysfunction, IQ deficits, and/or learning disabilities in humans," say the institutions' cooperating researchers .7

At approximately one part per million (1 ppm), fluoride has been added to most public water supplies throughout the United States for over four decades at the urging of dentists, but these four research groups report that the CNS's functional output is vulnerable to fluoride. This scholarly laboratory study indicates that fluoride ingestion's "neurotoxic risks deserve further evaluation.""

Taking in fluoride definitely has deleterious consequences for the brain. Pathological conditions of the brain have been studied by Russians, Chinese, the United States Public Health Service (USPHS), and others since 1978. For instance, in their 1978 book Fluoridation, the Great Dilemma, three medical authors describe the findings of practicing Soviet physicians. The Russian physicians observed that 79% of patients with occupational fluorosis show a series of chalky‑white, irregularly distributed patches on the surface of the enamel which become infiltrated by yellow or brown staining or other discolorations on teeth from fluoride ingestion. With these patches, say the Russians, the patients "demonstrate dysfunction of subcortical axial nonspecific structures of the brain."9

Moreover, the 1991 review, Fluoride Benefits and Risks, published by the USPHS, states that there is "relative impermability of the blood‑brain barrier to fluoride." This mineral does penetrate the brain's first line of defense against toxins and potentially may be responsible for various brain syndromes such as senile dementia, schizophrenia, and Alzheimer's disease.10

Recent studies from China on the relationship between drinking fluoridated water by residents in endemic Chinese dental fluorosis areas and the population's intelligence quotient, contain significant references and discussions. They indicate that diminishing IQ for people living in dental fluorosis areas has been known since 1989. Chinese studies indicate that the influence of a high fluoride environment on the intelligence of children may occur early in development such as during the stages of embryonic life or infancy when differentiation and growth are more rapid. Ultramicroscopi study of embryonic brain tissue obtained from termination of pregnancy operations in endemic fluorosis regions showed "differentiation of brain nerve cells were poor, and brain development was delayed. ‑11,12

The incidence of thigh bone fractures at the femoral neck in those people 65 years of age and older was compared in three communities in the State of Utah. Among the Utah towns, one of them had its water artificially fluoridated to one part per million. The other two did not. Measured over a seven year period, the relative risk of hip fracture for women drinking fluoridated water increased by 1.27, and for men the risk rose to 1.41. As a conclusion to their study, the four medical researchers state, "We found a significant increase in the risk of hip fracture in both men and women exposed to artificial fluoridation at one ppm, suggesting that low levels of fluoride increase the risk of hip fracture in the elderly"13

Commenting on this finding, Seattle, Washington medical nutritional therapist Alan R. Gaby, MD, made an observation similar to that of Dr. Toni Jeffreys (above). Dr. Gaby said: "Hip fracture is the second most common cause of admission to nursing homes, accounting for approximately 60,000 admissions each year. Fluoride apparently causes new bone formation of inferior quality, especially in the femoral head, where there is more cortical bone. Some studies suggest that fluoride is also a carcinogen."14

Fluoride as a Carcinogen

In 1977, epidemiological studies on fluoridation carried out by Dean Burk, PhD, former head of the Cytochemistry Section of the National Cancer Institute, in conjunction with John Yiamouyiannis, PhD, President of the Safe Water Foundation of Delaware, Ohio, were the subject of full‑scale United States Congressional Hearings. The Burk/Yiamouyiannis studies showed that fluoridation is linked to about 10,000 cancer deaths annually in this nation. The US Public Health Service, co‑promoter of fluoridation with the American Dental Association (ADA), opposed the Burk/Yiamouyiannis investigations. The USPHS tried to refute findings of the two scientists with its own report. But Drs. Yiamouyiannis and Burk evaluated the USPHS findings. Then they explained to the Congress how "conflicting findings of the USPHS are due to the fact that the Service had made mathematical errors by leaving out 80‑90% of the recorded data. When these errors and omissions are corrected, its method of simultaneously adjusting for age, race, and sex confirm that 10,000 excess cancer deaths per year are linked to water fluoridation in the United States."

To their amazement, officials of the USPHS discovered that their own findings really did coincide with findings from Drs. Burk and Yiamouyiannis. All of the findings from both studies, going back a quarter century, clearly point to fluoride as a cancer culprit. When added to drinking water fluoride creates a carcinogen. More than this, the following are results released in 1990 by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) under the auspices of the USPHS:15

• Precancerous. changes occur in human oral squamous cells as a result of elevating the levels of fluoride in drinking water.

• There is an increase in the incidence of tumors and cancers in oral squamous cells as a result of increasing levels of fluoride in the drinking water.

Osteosarcoma, a rare form of bone cancer, occurs only in animals with fluoride in their drinking water.

There is an increase in the incidence of thyroid follicular cell tumors as a result of increasing levels of fluoride in the drinking water.

Hepatocholangiocarcinoma a rare form of liver cancer, occurs in animals with fluoride in their drinking water.

The doses of fluoride that are linked to cancer in this NTP study are only one tenth to one fiftieth of the amount used to produce can by benzene. Thus, fluoride is up to fifty times more carcinogenic than benzene.

The cancer‑causing potential of fluoride is not limited to one type of cancer.

Similar to cancer‑coverups by cigarette manufacturers in the tobacco industry, Proctor & Gamble, manufacturer of the many Crest' fluoridated toothpaste brands, which are endorsed (for a fee) by the American Dental Association, performed carcinogenicity studies with sodium fluoride four years before the above‑reported 1990 NTP/USPHS report was released. Dose‑dependent increases in cancer were observed in every parameter tested, including squamous cell metaplasias, but the USPHS held back this information and only released it when forced to do so by Dr. John Yiamouyiannis under the Freedom of Information Act."

Added to all that, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) gathered a massive amount of evidence for its own 1991 report, "Review of Fluoride Benefits and Risks." This additional report supports the link between drinking and bathing in fluoridated water and the creation of human cancers. Here is what was learned by the HHS:17

• Based on rates of 279 cancer cases expected in nonfluoridated areas, 290 people contracted bone and joint cancers when they lived in areas whose water is fluoridated.

• Although 30.33 cases were expected, there was an excess of 49 people suffering from Ewing's sarcoma in fluoridated counties.

• The observed‑to‑expected rate of soft tissue cancer for both sexes in Seattle, Washington increased with the duration of fluoridation of the city's water supply.

• For kidney cancer, the risk ratios for both sexes in Seattle with its fluoridated drinking water rose by 10%, a trend that the HHS considered statistically significant.

In December 1992, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy and the New Jersey Department of Health released their joint study of November 8, 1992. New Jersey State findings were that bone cancer rates among ten‑ to nineteen‑year‑old males living in all New Jersey municipalities having fluoridated drinking water is 6.9 times higher than in other areas of the state. There is no doubt that New Jersey residents drinking from fluoridated public water supplies suffer from a much higher incidence of bone cancer.',, Because it continues to fluoridate its public drinking water, the State of New Jersey is a candidate for a class action suit by its residents and by visitors to the state.

Additional Hazardous Results from Fluoride Ingestion In the United States Pharmacopoeia, the poisonous hazards of fluoride ingestion are listed. They include the less lethal side effects of nausea, vomiting, stomach cramps, tremors, faintness, weakness, unusual psychological excitement, skin rash, sores in the mouth and on the lips, pain and aching of bones, and white, brown, or near‑black discolorations of teeth identified as dental fluorosis.

Dental or occupational fluorosis is actually a visible sign that fluoride content of the body has caused the enamelforming cells, the ameloblasts, to produce damaged collagen. Collagen makes up 30% of the body's protein. It provides the structural framework for skin, ligaments, tendons, muscles, cartilage, bones, and teeth.

In his well‑documented and detailed book, Fluoride, The Aging Factor, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis explains that fluoride ingestion causes "increased production of imperfect collagen or collagen‑like protein," not just in the teeth but throughout the body. The body's structural components that should not become mineralized such as ligaments, cartilage, and tendons turn into hardened tissues. The skin which produces the disease scleroderma, as well as arteries, not only harden but also calcify.

Fluoride ingestion also affects the structure and strength of bone by causing fused vertebrae, calcified joints, arthritis, and an increase in fractures. It decreases the bone's healing ability. Several studies that evaluate fluoride as a treatment for osteoporosis found that this mineral increases, rather than prevents, skeletal fragility. Only one ppm fluoride in drinking water, disrupts collagen metabolism. Yet, the US Environmental Protection Agency allows 4 ppm fluoride in our nation's water supply."

Not only does drinking fluoridated water disrupt collagen, it affects other proteins as well, causing widespread dysfunction of enzymes and the immune system, and even chromosomal damage. Fluoride ingestion breaks up existing protein bonds and forms an extremely strong bond to the one particular protein bond known as "H2," disrupting the normal shape and function of other necessary proteins. When the proteins that form enzymes are disrupted in this way, the enzymes themselves become inactivated. Enzymes are the catalysts that cause the biochemical changes in the body.

Not only are these enzymatic proteins inactivated, they are rendered unrecognizable to the body's immune system, setting up an autoimmune allergic reaction. Because of this peculiarity, fluoride causes a vast variety of ill effects. "The United States National Academy of Sciences (USNAS)20 and the World Health Organization (WHO) 21 as well as other institutions, have published lists of enzymes that are inhibited at fluoride levels of one ppm or less," writes Dr. Yiamouyiannis. Among them, acetylcholinesterase, glutamine synthetase, ATPase, and the DNA Repair Enzyme System are just a few of the known enzymes inhibited by fluoride ingestion at one ppm.

One part per million fluoride in drinking water or other ingested solvents (such as diet cola drinks which contain fluoride) cuts the activity of the DNA repair enzyme by 50%, resulting in increased genetic damage. In his 1993 book, Dr. Yiamouyiannis lists nineteen studies since 1973, that show evidence of fluoride‑induced genetic damage in mammals, one of which was done by Proctor and Gamble (already cited). Scientific studies prove that fluoride levels found in the autopsied brains of persons drinking fluoridated water average 1.5 ppm fluoride; in their autopsied hearts 1.8 ppm was found; and in their thyroid glands there was 4.0 ppm. Fluoride is used, according to the Merck Index, to suppress thyroid activity. Clearly, a fluoridated substance taken into the body affects more than teeth .22

With All this Damage, Why Are We Fluoridating Ourselves?

Despite so much documentation of fluoride's ill‑effects on the body and the very real danger all of us face from its ingestion, we continue to fluoridate ourselves by means of adding it to drinking water, toothpastes, oral rinses, baked goods, prescribed dental treatments, food supplements, soft drinks, beer, wine, fruit juices made from concentrates, and in additional ways. In one analysis, Coke Classic Tm, bottled in Chicago, is shown to contain 2.56 ppm fluoride. And, as was alluded to, the Chicago‑made Diet Coke@ contains 2.96 ppm. Produce grown with fluorine‑containing fertilizers offer up from six to 12 times more fluoride than those fruits an vegetables not "fed" with these fertilizers. Not only does fluoride pollute our food and water, but certain manufacturing plants such as aluminum, phosphate, steel, clay, glass, enamel, and many other factory types release high levels of fluoride into the air, soil, rivers, and lakes.23

You have every right to ask, why are we continuing to fluoridate ourselves into sickness and death? We do it as a result of media bombardment: emphatic promotions by the United States Public Health Service, propaganda from the American Dental Association, advertising by fluoride toothpaste manufacturers, and other more subtle capitalistic reasons having nothing to do with dental health. So, allow me to answer your question as to why we are fluoridating ourselves. First, however, you should know the political background of fluoridation 'that's forced on our populace in the United States.

American fluoridation proponents are ever‑continuing to assert that fluoride is a mineral essential to the body and responsible for preventing tooth decay. But a 1971 review of numerous studies concerning the nutritional value of fluoride, performed by the US National Academy of Sciences, found no evidence to support the claim that fluoride is an essential mineral. Further, both the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, Georgia and the British Ministry of Health admit that no laboratory or epidemiological study supports the claim that adding fluoride to the drinking water prevents tooth decays

The reason Americans are fluoridating their water supplies is strictly related to big business greed and the buying off of bureaucrats. Yes, it has everything to do with making money for certain vested interests and nothing to do with our dental health.

Money‑Eyed Interests Fluoridate Us

As the aluminum and phosphate fertilizer industries grew in the 1920s and 1930s, manufacturers were faced with how to get rid of their poisonous byproduct, the fluoride waste. They could sell only so much rodenticide and insecticide and desperately needed another means of getting rid of fluoride without incurring public censor. The manufacturers hit on an idea of using it for fluoridating reservoirs, lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, aquifiers and other sources of drinking water. They lobbied the US Public Health Service to introduce this fluoridation measure into the public trough. H. Trendley Dean, MD, then a bureaucrat with the USPHS, performed surveys of areas in the 1930s that relied for drinking water on fluoridepolluted streams and rivers. In a 1937 report that Dr. Dean published, he found that the higher the content of fluoride in the water, the greater the incidence of mottled teeth (dental fluorosis). He wrote an excellent paper which clearly made the case against fluoridation.`

Then Dr. Gerald J. Cox, an official of the Mellon Institute pronounced that, while too much fluoride can cause mottling of teeth, low levels of one ppm actually was nutritionally beneficial and prevented tooth decay. Dr. Cox's boss, the Mellon family, owned the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA), a major fluoride polluter. The Mellons were seeking a way to unload their massive amount of fluoride byproduct and maybe even make money from its sale.

Persuaded by a high‑paying position provided by the Mellons as the first director of the National Institute of Dental Research, in 1938 Dr. H. Trendley Dean changed his findings from seven years before. He reversed himself by publishing skewed data to support Dr. Cox's cavity‑prevention Pronouncement Then, six years later, Oscar Ewing, an ALCOA attorney, was appointed the United States' Federal Security Administrator in 1944 and took charge of the USPHS. Mr. Ewing appointed Edward L. Bernays as the "father of public relations" for popularizing ALCOA's water fluoridation campaign. Thus, Bernays turned rat poison into "a beneficial provider of gleaming smiles." He did it with clinical reports praising the use of fluoride for cavity prevention published in various medical and dental journals.

Mr. Bernays knew that by offering appropriate "under‑the‑counter" compensation, he could get officials of the American Medical Association, the American Dental association, Proctor and Gamble, independent scientists and laboratories, physicians, dentists, and certain government bureaucrats to proclaim fluoride's safety and advantages for teeth. This public relations gambit Mr. Bernays achieved long before any clinical studies were completed. By accomplishing such positivesounding publication and declarations, the government officials, physicians, dentists, business executives, scientists, laboratory directors, and others would be too embarrassed and frightened of lawsuits to renege on their well‑paid endorsements ‑ regardless of the results of scientific studies.

Those whose scientific research refuted fluoride and showed its toxicity were ignored, labeled crackpots, fired from jobs, denied grants, and stripped of dental and medical licenses. In his very fine book, Dr. Yiamouyiannis contends that the fluoridation campaign still continues under the leadership of New York City psychiatrist, Stephen Barrett, MD, who is cofounder of the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF), which recently changed its name to the National Council for Reliable Health Information (NCRHI).26 (To learn how Dr. Barrett and his fellow members of the NCAHF or NCRHI have situated themselves among the candidates for a class action suit, see the end of this article.)

Does Fluoride Prevent Dental Cavities?

Fluoride, a natural trace mineral in the diet, is found in drinking water naturally in widely varying concentrations from trace amounts to a dozen parts per million. Much like selenium, manganese and other trace minerals, there is an ideal level of intake. When fluoride's intake is too low, dental caries could possibly occur. When too high, dental fluorosis will occur.

Cardiologist/dentologist Thomas Levy, MD, of Colorado Springs, Colorado, who had worked with biocompatible dentist Dr. Hal Huggins, tells us about the mottling of teeth by the pathological onset of fluorosis. "Known in the United States

since at least 1916, dental fluorosis is sometimes referred to as "Colorado Brown Stain" and "Texas Teeth" as these two states have a high endemic fluoride level in much of their drinking water," states Dr. Levy. "In its advanced stages, affected teeth demonstrate pitting and brittleness. Often chipping, and a yellow, brown, or black appearance [shows up] in different areas [of the teeth]. Earlier stages show a chalky, mottled, inconsistent appearance .1127

The elegant study in 1937 by Dr. H. Trendley Dean of the USPHS that I described earlier clearly points out that the incidence of dental fluorosis is directly related to fluoride concentration in drinking water, reaching virtually 100% when the level exceeds 4.5 ppm. Levels of only 2.2 ppm show a roughly 70% incidence of this affliction. 28 Dr. Dean's initial dental fluorosis finding, well after his refutation of it for money, was later supported substantially by another 1984 study published in the Journal of the American Dental Association.29

Worse, USPHS medical scientists uncovered in 1954 that Bartlett, Texas, with 8 ppm fluoride in its water supply, presented a mortality rate among its residents three times greater than that of a neighboring town with a fluoride drinking water level of merely 0.4 ppm.30 Added to this Bartlett township discovery was another study published in a 1978 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine that stated death occurs more frequently among the populace of cities and towns drinking fluoridated water as compared to those folks drinking unfluoridated water.31

Fluoride Weakens Bones and Teeth

Fluoride is not essential for sound teeth and it does not prevent cavities. However, as a result of a 1940s study commissioned by the USPHS that determined one ppm of fluoride in water reduced tooth decay by 60%, many countries acted on this erroneous finding. Today, two‑thirds of the population of Australia, half the population of the United States, Canada, Ireland and New Zealand, 30% of the population of Brazil, and 10% of the population of Great Britain, mostly in the west Midlands and Northern regions of England, drink water from municipal supplies that have been artificially fluoridated. Other, more enlightened European nations such as Sweden, Holland and Germany have reversed their policy and discontinued the practice."

While fluoride ingestion tends to stimulate bone density, the fluoride‑stimulated bone is structurally unsound. Restoration of bone mass by use of this mineral not only fails to reduce the risk of fractures in women who suffer with postmenopausal osteoporosis, but it actually increases the risk of such fractures .33 And more disturbing is accumulating evidence that the fluoridation of public water supplies eventually increases the risk of fractures in the whole community.34

Scientific studies are currently reporting higher prevalence of dental fluorosis following the fluoridation of drinking water than had been predicted .35 Melvyn R. Werbach, MD, of Tarzana, California, an internationally acclaimed medical journalist, questions the propriety of the decision to allow fluoridation to remain in United States' drinking water. Dr. Werbach writes, "The fluoride controversy is simply another example of the peculiar bias mainstream medicine shows towards apparently powerful new treatments whose dangers are largely unknown, while it continues to show bias against many gentler therapies with safety records far exceeding those of standard treatments."36

A University of Arizona study, published in the July 27, 1992 issue of Chemical & Engineering News by Cornelius Steelink, PhD Professor Emeritus in the university's Department of Chemistry, reported that the more fluoride a child drank in its water supply, the more cavities appeared in the child's teeth .37

The City of Tucson, Arizona provided Dr. Steelink with a unique opportunity to test the many fluoridation hypotheses handed out wholesale by proponents of fluoride additives to drinking water. The professor writes: "Historically, this city has had discrete geographic areas of groundwater with high fluoride contents of 0.8 ppm and areas of low fluoride contents with 0.3 ppm." When Dr. Steelink's evaluation committee plotted the incidence of tooth decay versus fluoride content in a child's neighborhood drinking water a positive correlation was revealed. As stated above, Professor Steelink's committee reported with this exact summarizing quote: "In other words, the more fluoride a child drank, the more cavities appeared in the teeth. "38

David C. Kennedy, DDS, of San Diego, California, the author of How to Save Your Teeth: Toxic‑Free Preventive Dentistry, outright declares that fluorides do not reduce tooth decay. 39

In a published letter, Dr. Kennedy writes to the Safe Water Coalition of Washington State: "In Canada, the areas which report the lowest incidence of decay are the unfluoridated areas. Tooth decay is declining world‑wide with no statistical difference between fluoridated and unfluoridated areas. Some authors [proponents of fluoridation] attempt to attribute the decline of cavities in unfluoridated areas to a decrease in the consumption of refined sugars. I believe statistics show we are consuming more, not less refined sugar. The latest data from the National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) found no difference in the incidence of tooth decay in children ages five through 17 years raised in nonfluoridated, partially fluoridated, and fluoridated communities. NIDR studies show no relationship between fluoridation and tooth decay rates."40

Fluoride Reacts with Aluminum to Cause Alzheimer's Disease

Newly declassified documents, obtained under the US Freedom of Information legislation, today provides shocking medical facts known but concealed by the US Government since the 1940's. During that same period when Dr. H. Trendley Dean changed his laboratory test findings and ALCOA attorney Oscar Ewing won his political appointment, the United States Public Health Service knew that fluoride produces adverse human central nervous system effects. It's true! For over 50 years, the USPHS has hidden this horrible information about fluoride as a polluter and deteriorater of the human brain.

Ellie Rudolph, Director of the Pennsylvania Chapter of the Health Alliance International, advises that pathological changes in the brain tissue of animals given fluoride and aluminum‑fluoride combined are the same changes found in the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. Director Rudolph states: "Low levels of fluoride have serious health implications for people and the effect is enhanced in the presence of other neurotoxins like aluminum .1141 (To discuss this hidden aspect of fluoridation pathology, you may contact Ellie Rudolph in person by consulting Appendix A of my book, Elements of Danger: Protect Yourself Against the Hazards of Modern Dentistry.)

The peer‑reviewed medicaljournal, Brain Researchh, reveals that aluminum‑induced neural degeneration in rats is greatly increased when the animals are fed low doses of fluoride. The presence of fluoride enhances the bio‑availability of aluminum causing more aluminum to cross the blood‑brain barrier and become deposited in the brain. The brain researchers write: "The aluminum level in the brains of the fluoride‑treated group of animals was double that of the controls ."42

Even worse, the study's authors say, "While the small amount of aluminum‑fluoride in the drinking water of rats required for neurotoxic effects is surprising, perhaps more significant are the neurotoxic results of sodium fluoride (Nor) at the dose given of 2.1 ppm Nor. This 2.1 parts per million NaF equals 1.0 mg fluoride ion per lure of water which is the same level found in 1.0 ppm "optimally" fluoridated drinking water.

Note: The formula for converting NaF to fluoride ion is ppm x 45% so that 2.1 ppm x 45% =.95 ppm (ppm = mgs/litre).

The present fluoride/aluminum study on the brains of laboratory animals confirms the work of two separate groups of scientists in China, each group publishing their investigations in 1995 and reported on earlier in this chapter. Both Chinese studies showed that drinking water containing fluoride adversely affects the intelligence quotients of children.","

References

1.Canedy, D. Toothpaste a hazard? Just ask the F.D.A. The New York Times March 24, 1998, p. A18.

2.The New York Times, January 20, 1779, p. 16.

3.McIvor, M., et al. Hyperkalemia and cardiac arrest from fluoride exposure during hemodialysis. American Journal of Cardiology. 51:901‑902, 1983.

4.Fluoride blamed for death. Ketchikan, Alaska Daily News, June 1, 1998.

5. Machoy‑Mokrzynska, A. Fluoride‑magnesium interactions‑ Fluoride. 28(4):175, November 1995.

6. Jeffreys, T. Fluoride supplements for osteoporosis? Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 171:112, October 1997.

7Mullenix, PJ.; Denbesten, PK; Schunior, A. Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Neurotoxicology and Teratology. 17(2):169‑177, 1995.

8 Safe Water Coalition of Washington State. Fluoride has adverse effect on central nervous system. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 1,55:21, June 1996.

9 Walbott, G.L.; Burgstahler, A‑W.; McKinney, H.L Fluoridation, the Great Dilemma. (Lawrence, Kansas: Coronado Press, 1978).

10. Department of Health and Human Services, USPHS. Fluoride Benefits and Risks. February 1991.

11. Li, X.S.; Zhi, J.L.; Gao, R.O. Effect of fluoride exposure on intelligence of children. Fluoride. 28(4):189‑192,1995.

12. Zhao, L.; Liang, G.H.; Zhang, D.; Wu, X. Effect of high fluoride water supply on children's intelligence. 1995.

13. Danielson, C.; Lyon, J.L.; Egger, M.; Goodenough, G.K. Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah's elderly population‑ Journal of the American Medical Association. 258:746748,1992.

14. Gaby, A.R. Literature Review & Commentary. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 113:1058, December 1992.

15.Yiamouyiannis, J. Update on fluoride and cancer. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 89:864‑865, December 1990.

16. U.S. Public Health Service. Carcinogenicity studies with sodium fluoride performed by Proctor and Gamble. Medical Tribune. February 22,1990.

17. Safe Water Coalition of Washington State, Spokane, Washington. HHS report on fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 97/98:638, September 1991.

18. Safe Water Coalition of Washington State, Spokane, Washington. Re: fluoridation. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 115/116:206, February/march 1993.

19.Ylamouyiannis, J. Fluoride The Aging Factor, 3rd Edition. (Delaware, Ohio: Health Action Press, 1993).

20. Is fluorine an' essential element? Fluorides. (Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1971), pp. 66‑68 and 70‑73.

21.Fluorides and Human Health. (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 1970),p. 183.

22.Op. cit., Yianouyiannis., p. 7.

23.Klotterj The fraud of fluoridation. Townsend Letter for Doctors &Fhtients‑ 145/146:119

120, August/September 1995.

24.Ibid.

25.Dean, MT. and Elvove, E_ Further studies on minimal threshhold of chronic endemic dental fluosis. Public Health Reports. 52:1249‑1264, 1937.

26 Op. cit. Yiamouyiannis, pp. 99‑122.

27.Levy, T Fluoridation: paving the road to the final solution. Extraordinary ScienceJanuary/February/March 1994, pp. 29‑41.

28Op. cit., Dean and Elvove.

29.SegrettoVA., et al.A current study of mottled enamel in Texas. Journal of the American Dental Association. 108:56‑59, 1984.

30.Leone, N., et al. Medical aspects of excessive fluoride in a water supply. Public Health Reports. 69:925‑936,1954.

31.Erickson, J.D. Mortality of selected cities with fluoridated and nonfluoridated water supplies. New England Journal of Medicine. 298:1112‑1116, 1978.

32.Diesendorf, M. Have the benefits of water fluoridation been overestimated? International Clinical Nutrition Review. 10(2):292‑303,1990.

33.Lindsay, R. Fluoride and bone ‑quantity versus quality. Editorial. New England Journal of Medicine. 322(12):845‑846, 1990.

34.Colquhoun, J. Fluoridation: new evidence of harm to young teeth and old bones. International Clinical Nutrition Review. 12(l):1‑8,1992.

35 Ibid.

36.Werbach, M.R. Fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors. 133/134:853, August/September 1994.

37.Safe Water Coalition of Washington State. The more fluoride ‑ the more cavities. Townsend Letter for Doctors. 129:376, April 1994.

38.Steelink, C. Tooth decay & fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors 136:1128, October 1994.

39.Kennedy, D.C.How to Save Your Teeth: Toxic‑free Preventive Dentistry. (Delaware, Ohio: Health Action Press, August 1993).

40. Safe Water Coalition of Washington State. Don't applaud fluoride use for cavities. Townsend Letter for Doctors. 82:286‑288, May 1990.

41.Rudolph, E. Alzheimer's disease and dementia ‑ important new study shows grave implications from interaction of aluminum and low dose fluoride. Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients. 184:27, November 1998.

42.Verner, JA.; Jensen, K.F.; Horvath,W.; Isaacson, R.L. Brain Research. 784:1998, Elsevier Science.

43.Op. cit. Li, X.S.; Zhi, J.L.; Gov, R.O., 1996.

44.Zhao, L.; Liang G.H.; Zhang, D.; Wu, X., 1995.

54 Glasser, G.Colgate pays out for fluoride damaged teeth. London Telegraph, November 24,1996.

FAIR USE NOTICE. This document contains copyrighted material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Chemtrailpatrol is making this article available in our efforts to advance the understanding of environmental, justice issues, corporate accountability, human rights, labor rights and social understanding. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.