HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0669.000 1998-2000 tr ar ,,L
J. CURTIS TYLER, III Bus: (808) 326-5684
CoumllMember Fax: (808) 326-5697
DisMcf 8 (North Kona) ~ ctyler@iotatpac.rot
..N'r~
HAWAII COUNTY COUNT.
. ~ iD 23
February 22, 2000
MEMORANDUM:
TO: The Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman
Hawaii County Council
FROM: J. Curtis Tyler III .1~~
Council Member V ~
RE: Flouride In Our Wate stems
I received the enclosed letter and materials from Mr. and Mrs. Norman Gonsalves. I
would like to request that the attached document be circulated to all Council Members. I
have asked the Gonsalves to follow-up with their State legislators.
Attachment - On file in the Office of the County Clerk
Comm. No.~,~~,
F51e No.
Ref. Tot
Ref. Date DEB 2 5 200
Kona Council Office: 77-6399 Nalani Street • Suite I04 • KaBua•Kona • Hawaii •96740-8980
II III a/1
c t
February 12, 2000
Honorable J. Curtis Tyler, III
Council Member
County of Hawaii
25 Aupuni Street
' Hilo, Hawai'i 96720
Dear Council Member Tyler:
We are very concerned that the State of Hawaii is considering the use of' fluoride in our
water systems. Over the years, we have stayed away from the use of aluminum products
due to the potential risks that it causes for the human body. Fluoride is a by- product of
the aluminum manufacturing process.
We are enclosing information that you may, or may not, have to illustrate what our
concerns are based on. Please take the time to review the enclosed material, with special
emphasis on paragraph 2, 3 and 4 of Page 3. This information was compiled by
approximately 50 medical professionals who are deeply concerned about the dangers of
fluoridation.
Thank you for your time and consideration in the review of this letter, and supporting
documents. •
Sine ely yours, (/ g,"� �
A an onsalves Susanchi Gonsalves
PMB 207
65 -1158 Mamalahoa Hwy. #8A
Kamuela, HI 96743
Encl.
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison ht tp:// www .arthriristrust.org/tluoride.htm
• .
I Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison
'Medical data is for informational purposes only. You should always consult your
family physician, or one of our referral physicians prior to treatment
Sources are given in references.
•
Authors of contributions \quotations are alphabetically arranged; major
author, if any, is underlined.
1 Anne Anderson, R.P.N., M. Bely, M.D., Ralph S. Blois, Dr. LD. Brouwer,
I Dr. Dean Burk, Robert Carton, Ph.D., Judge David A. Clarke, Jr., Dr. J.
Colquhoun, Dr. Cooper, Christa Danielson, M.D., Dr. Trendley Dean,
William Campbell Douglass, M.D., Robert O. Dustrude, RPh., Dr. Mark
IDisendorf Marlene Egger, Ph.D., Judge John P. Flaherty, Richard G.
Foulkes, B.A., M.D, Dr. Gibson, Gerald K. Goodenough, M.D., Sen.
Graham, Dr. Herskowitz, Dr. David B. Hill, P.Eng., Dr. Jacobsen, Gerard
P. Judd, PhD., Dr. David Kennedy, Dr. D.S. Kumari, John R. Lee, M.D.,
Joseph L. Lyon, M.D., Dr. Peter Mansfiled, William Marcus,Ph.D., John R
Marier, Richard J. Mielke, D.M.D., Dr. Hans Mollenburgh, Dr. Norton,
Mitch Postle, H.J. Roberts, M.D., Dyson Rose, Ms. Darlene Sherrel,
'Dominic Smith, Dr. Geoffrey Smith, Cornelius Steelink, PhD., Philip R.N.
Sutton, Drs. Taylor and Taylor, Dr. Tsutsue, Dr. George Waldbott, John
h Yiamouyiannis, Ph.D., Dr. D. Ziegelbecker /Responsible editor /writer
nthony di Fabio.
Copyright 1994
All rights reserved by the The Roger Wyburn -Mason and Jack M.Blount
Foundation for Eradication of Rheumatoid Disease; AKA The Arthritis
Trust, 5106 Old Harding Road, Franklin, TN 37064
Dental surgeon, Geoffrey E. Smith says, "My 12- year -old granddaughter,
Jade -Emma, has 'mottled' teeth, and my wife suffers from osteoporosis.
"Jade's disfigured teeth were caused by fluoride, and there is now a growing
body of evidence suggesting that fluoride can be a factor in the
development of osteoporosis.
"Is the dental wonder of the 1950s set to become the medical blunder of the
1990s? - .
"Such a thought is particularly frustrating for me since I belong to the
profession — dentistry -- which has, for the past 40 years, claimed that
fluoride was essential for sound teeth and 'good' for bones45." •
How Poisoning a Town Starts
This author was city manager of a small community for a short time, when
a young nurse asked to speak before our City Commissioners for the •
1 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Floundation: Governmentally Approved Poison http:// www.anhritistrustorg/tluoride.hm:
• •
purpose of requesting that the city add fluoride to the Water supply.
!Of course, anyone who wishes it could speak before our City
!Commissioners, and so the young nurse was invited to do so.
Her pitch consisted primarily of a request for building healthier teeth
through our young ones -- who can resist such an appeal? -- and to point out
that surrounding communities, much larger cities throughout the nation,
already had fluoridation.
The City Commissioners turned to me, and asked my opinion. Being
somewhat naive and sans research, I agreed with the nurse, and so together
we naively, innocently, and stupidly added fluoride to the City of Fairview's •
(Tennessee) water supply, and that addition continues to this date, despite
the fact that the citizens of the City of Fairview, TN have never had an
;opportunity to know the pros and cons of fluoridation or to vote for or
(against the issue.
We unknowingly doomed hundreds of Fairview citizens to Arthrosis,
vertebral and hip fracture, osteosarcoma (cancer), infertility, birth defects,
bone damage, damage to the immune system, fluorosis, fluoride
•
neurotoxicity, and many other poorly diagnosed conditions, as fluoride
affects every human system, often by inhibiting enzymes which are
essential for the functioning of every human system.
•
Besides the damaging of human tissue by 1 ppm of fluoride added to our
public water systems, the health problem is also one of massive
overconsumption of fluoride. We are being bombarded with fluoride from
all our dental products and also many industrial sources.
Physicians and nurses, of course, are authoritative figures, especially in the
minds of those who do not specialize in health care. If doctors, nurses, or
public health officials say that a drug is good for us, we tend to believe
them, and we don't question their credentials or source of information. Had
we known that we were dooming thousands of people to lesser, or even
damaging, health, we might have questioned further. For example, if the
City Commissioners wish to purchase a new truck, each of them holds
himself out as somewhat knowledgeable in mechanics, and each would
question data brought in by someone that they deemed to have invalid
information, or contrary information.
Likewise, when building a ballpark for the City's youth, each conunissidner
would feel that they had valuable knowledge to contribute.
But question a medical authority or public health official?
Hardly!
Who Benefits By Fluoridation?
•
2 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
•
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http:// www .arthritistrust.org/fluoride.htm
•
• •
I So who does benefit by the addition of Fluoride to Public Water Systems?
!Municipalities may use either Sodium Fluoride plus lime or HydroFuuosilic
!Acid.
The only ones definitely known to benefit from fluoridation are chemical
(companies and fluoridation equipment firms. Fluoride is one of the most
common and also one of the most caustic of industrial chemicals.
Hydrofluoric acid is used to refine high- octane gasoline, to make
!fluorocarbons and chlorfluorocarbons for freezers and air conditioners, and
to manufacture computer screens, fluorescent light bulbs, semiconductors,
( plastics, herbicides, and fluoride toothpaste. It also has the ability to bum •
flesh to the bone, destroy eyes, and sear lungs so that victims drown in their
town body fluid. What's worse is that hydrofluoric acid boils at 68fl F. On a
jwarm day, released hydrofluoric acid forms a low, dense cloud that can
remain hazardous 6 miles from its origin.
"Even though industry takes extreme safety precautions, accidents still
happen. In 1987, a crane operator at Texas City's Marathon Oil refinery
dropped a 90 -ton heating unit on a tank of hydrofluoric acid, releasing 5000
gallons of the stuff. Approximately 5800 people were evacuated, and 1037
required hospital treatment. Many of the people exposed still have difficulty
breathing. Since 1986, 33 such incidents have involved evacuation, injuries,
or death.
"Hydrofluoric acid is made in three U.S. towns, Geismar, Louisiana; La
Porte, Texas; and Calvert City, Texas -- and five Mexican ones. More than
21 million gallons are produced and shipped each year. Given its caustic •
nature and dangerously low boiling point, one can understand why Energy
Safety Council, an advocacy group based in Illinois, wants to replace it with
sulfuric acid. Almost half of the U.S. refineries use sulfuric acid as a
refining catalyst already
It has been said that Fluoride, or hydrofluosilic acid, used in Public
Community water supplies is chiefly a waste byproduct of the aluminum •
industry, and those companies benefit immensely by having us add their
toxic waste product to our water system. If we didn't, they'd have an •
environmental disposal problem, which would increase the cost of
aluminum. We, however, very nicely solve the problem for them by paving •
them for it and then adding it to our drinking water, thereby diluting it, and
spreading the dangerous pollutant throughout the land.
Anne Anderson, R.P.N. and Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D. say that
99.9% of the fluoride added to community drinking waters will not be
drunk, but flushed down the sewage system, and that the effect will be to ,
deposit, for example, roughly 150 tons of fluoride into the North Pacific's
Bow River and environment each year. This effect of spreading toxic
substances throughout our environment, through sewage and river systems
3 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Fkouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison ht tp:// www .arthtitistrust.org/fluoride.hin.
• •
and ground table waters is repeated and multiplied from every municipality
• - that fluoridates drinking water for wrongly presumed decrease of human
'cavities. •
"Often overlooked, and deliberately obscured, is the effect of fluoride
;pollution that comes about as a result of fluoride waste disposal, not only
from industry" but also from community sewage disposal While there are
'many factors that affect decreasing fish returns, such as natural cycles,
changes in ocean temperature and currents, overfishing, destruction of
!spawning grounds by poor logging practices, building activities, dams and
!pollution, obviously the dumping of toxic poison into our streams, lakes and
!oceans is a major part of the declining fish problem.
The Presumed Scientific Basis for Adding Fluoride to Public Water
Systems Initial Studies Invalid
In 1930, Dr. Trendley Dean, "the father of fluoridation," was responsible for.
developing the hypothesis that fluoridation was safe and would protect teeth'
from cavities. He was also the person who established the first trial of
fluoridation of the water supply in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945. Since
that time, he has twice confessed in court that statistics from the early
studies, allegedly supporting the use of fluoridation in community water
systems, were invalid (See City of Oroville vs. Public Utilities, California
1955 and Chicago Citizens vs. City of Chicago, 1960.)
The very earliest studies not supporting the use of fluoridation were
published in 1953 in the Journal of the American Dental Association and
in 1955 in the American Dental Association
In the first, a comparative study of tooth decay in 12 -14 year olds in six
Arizona cities, no reduction in decay and filled or missing teeth could be
observed due to fluoridation •
•
The second compared teeth of residents of Cameron, Texas (with 4 /10th
parts per million [ppm] of naturally present fluoride) and those of Bartlett,
Texas (with 8 ppm of fluoride). The incidence of tooth decay was found to
• be no different between Cameron and Bartlett residents.
• 1979 Injunction Against Fluoridation
• Pennsylvania Supreme Court Judge John P. Flaherty, on July 31, 1979, after
meticulous study of the scientific data presented before him, wrote, to the ::
Mayor of Auckland, New Zealand, saying, "you are correct that I entered an
injunction against the fluoridation of the public water supply for a large
portion of Allegheny County.... In my view, the evidence is quite •
convincing that the addition of sodium fluoride to the public water supply at
one part per million is extremely deleterious to the human body, and a •
review of the evidence will disclose that there was no convincing evidence
I to the contraryl."
4 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison - http:// www .attluitishust.org/fluoride.htm
•
• Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D., former Special Consultant to the Minister
- of Health, Province of British Columbia, and author of a 1973 report,
Health Security for British Columbians, that convinced Candadians to
require Fluoride additions to public water systems, says, "Today, [Judge]
Flaherty could make the same judgement of the evidence concerning the
effectiveness of fluoridation in the reduction of dental caries, ... " •
Why a Former Consultant to the Minister of Health Changed His Support ,
for Fluoridation
•
Originally, in 1973, Richard Foulkes, B.A., M.D., commissioned to "study
and report on the health care system of the province and to make
recommendations...., wrote in his report, "We have studied the data and •
recommendations submitted to us by the Division of Preventive Dentistry,
Health Branch, the College of Dental Surgeons of British Columbia and •
others referring to the effectiveness and potential hazards of the fluoridation'
of piped water supplies. We have concluded that the artificial fluoridation
of community water supplies is both effective and safe.
"Therefore, we recommend ... that discussion begin immediately to •
prepare legislation ... to make fluoridation of major water supplies
mandatory in the Province ....
What Dr. Foulkes studied, and recommended in his 1973 Health Security
for British Columbian was typical of studies and recommendations then
occurring around the globe, regarding adding fluoride to public water
systems. The government studies by honest, professional and
knowledgeable doctors and scientists unknowingly began with incomplete -
and falsified data.
Dr. Foulkes, author of the 2000 -page report that convinced Canada to add
fluoride to their municipal water systems, has since rocked the Canadian
establishment when he recently recanted and said:
•No reference was made to the fact that Dr. Trendley Dean's data supporting
fluoridation was based on statistics that were invalid.
•There was no reference to Philip R.N. Sutton's critique in 1959 of five
studies carried out at Newburgh, Grand Rapids, Evanston and Brantford •
that had begun in 1940's, relating fluoride concentration to dental caries,
and which had served as the original justification for fluoridation in the
United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and several other •
English - speaking countries. Only three of these studies had controls for the
full period of the study, and Philip Sutton had criticized them for poor
experimental design, poor or negligible statistical analysis and failure to
take into account large variations in caries found in the control towns.
•
•The World Health Organization (WHO 1970) and the National Academy
of Science (NAS 1971) both expressed concerns about the safety of •
fluoride.
5 of32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison ht tp:// www .anhritistnut.org/fluoride.htn:
• • •
• - •The studies that had been reported prior to 1972 on the toxic effects of
fluoride did not find their way into [Dr. Foulkes] hands, or his advisors.
These studies had revealed tumor formation in mice (1952, 1956), genetic
damage to plants (1966) and fruit flies (1970, 1971). •
•A report by Dyson Rose and John R. Marier for the Research Council of
Canada in 1971, entitled Enviromental Fluoride reviewed the hazards of
fluoride in its various distribution including water supplies, and was again ,
updated in 1977. Dr. Foulkes says, "If all information then extant had been
examined, it should have been obvious that there was a need for caution and,
further studies, including study of those areas of potential non - lethal effects
of chronic accumulation on populations exposed to lifetime ingestion [of
fluoride] ... our 1973 recommendation should have gone against that of the
'establishment' and submitted that fluoridation of community water supplies
for the purpose of causing a reduction in tooth decay was on shaky ground
and was far from being proved with regard to safety.... In light of what is
currently found in reputable journals with peer review mechanisms and in
various Government documents and correspondence, I now hold a different
view. That is that the fluoridation of community water supplies can no
longer be held to be either safe or effective in the reduction of dental caries
Therefore, the practice should be abandoned or 'put on hold' until all
available information is evaluated by persons who are competent in the
principles of research and who have no vested interest in those institutions
and professional organizations that are currently involved in the thrust
Summary of Studies Since 1973
A summary of scientific studies made since 1973 conclude that the
prescribed or "optimal" level of 1 ppm (1 mg/I) of fluoride, presumed to
reduce incidence of decayed, missing or filled teeth can no longer be •
considered true.
Scientist D. Ziegelbecker in 1981 found no correlation between the level
of fluoride in water and dental caries. Other studies performed in Japan in
1972 also destroyed the basic hypothesis that supported the case for adding
fluoride to community water systems'.
Mark Disendorf studied the relationship to decayed, missing or filled teeth
between fluoridated and non - fluoridated areas in 8 developed countries ;
over 30 years and showed reductions in tooth decay in both Fluoride and
Non - fluoride areas that could not be attributed to Fluoride. •
According to Yiamouyiannis, in an analysis of U.S. data provided by the
National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) covering 40,000 children,
there was no showing of reduced decay rate between Fluoride and
Non - Fluoride regions.
6 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison ht tp:// www.artluitistrust.org/Huoride.htn
a • •
!In new Zealand, J. Colquhoun demonstrated that reductions in dental
caries were taking place before the fluoridation of water supplies and the
;introduction of fluoride toothpastes.
Pro- fluoridation professionals conducted a study presuming to show a
difference between Fluoride and Non- fluoride populations, and came up
with a difference of 17% to 20% respectively, which is a difference of 1
(tooth surface on the average A similar study in an aging community
showed the same small difference without mentioning the extremely high '
(risks encountered by the elderly which will be discussed in this report later.
•
A ten -year study of Canadian children (British Columbia) came to the
(conclusion that fluoridation of community water supplies was "yesterday's
technology'
The studies on presence of decayed, missing and filled teeth are
"subjective" and easy to manipulate, and there is strong evidence that this
was originally done in New Zealand and areas such as Scotland where •
Fluoridation has at last been discontinued •
A Pharmacist Speaks Out
•
The registered pharmacist, Robert O. Dustrude, R.Ph. of Wausau, WI wrote •
to the Criteria and Standard Divsion of Drinking Water, Environmental •
Protection Agency, in Washington, D.C., saying:
"My first approach is as a pharmacist who became interested in the
fluoridation issue several years ago. My research of the literature has
disclosed that fluoride is a protoplasmic poison as described in the
reference book Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products. The same
reference book discloses that fluoride salts have a toxicity rating between 4
and 5 (very toxic to extremely toxic). Aside from the literature, I remember
when I first started working in drug stores that we used to sell sodium
fluoride powder as an effective cockroach poison. I have often asked
myself: 'Why on earth would any sane person want to add that stuff to our
drinking water ?' •
•
( "Just about everything that I dispense in filling prescriptions has passed the
rigors of controlled, double -blind studies before it becomes part of our
medical armamentarium. No such studies exist for fluoride, meaning there
is no scientific evidence substantiating the claims made for it. Why should
this substance be exempt from the standards that apply to other medicines?
On the other hand, according to Dr. Hans Mollenburgh in Fluoride: The
Freedom Fight, a double -blind test showed that fluoridated water caused
side - effects.
"Another consideration is the fact that sodium fluoride requires a
prescription. I cannot sell the tablets or drops from any shelves without a
7 of 32 1/29/004:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison hup:// www .arthritistrust.orp/Iltwride.htm
• •
valid prescription being presented by my customers. Incongrously, laymen
• - who don't know the difference between a halogen and a halide, can
"prescribe" fluoride for our drinking water in concentrations that would
otherwise require a prescription. For example, at - 1 ppm there would be 1
Img of fluoride in 1000 ml of drinking water, a volume easily ingested
'considering all avenues (e.g., drinking water, soups, Kool -aid, etc.)
; "This leads to another issue, the doctor - patient relationship. I know of cases
!where doctors, using their knowledge of their patients' conditions (arthritis
and pre - disposition to cancer), have advised those patients to avoid fluoride.
This advice is all but impossible to heed when the drinking water is
fluoridated. I submit that it is more logical and ethical to leave the •
doctor- patient relationship intact by having fluoride available, if at all, only
by prescription, instead of forcing it literally and figuratively down our •
(throats.
"I would like to approach the issue not as a pharmacist, but as a concerned,
outraged citizen. Even if artificial fluoridation was beneficial, there can be
no excuse for the arrogant, heavy - handed, arbitary way in which that
procedure is accomplished. I reside in the town of Rib Mountain, a
township which has recently installed its own water and sewer system. •
Before long, the sanitary commission, without any expertise or
qualifications, proposed fluoridating our water. At a subsequent meeting, a
representative from the Wisconsin Division of Health gave a talk on the
virtues of fluoride. Inasmuch as dental caries is not a contagious,
communical disease, his attendance was not only inappropriate, but he gave
probably the most mendacious presentation I have ever heard. The agenda •
for this meeting was posted only the legal 24 -hours ahead of time, not
allowing me time to bring in a professor acquaintance of mine to present hi&
testimony on fluoride toxicity. The sanitary commission then, in what was
obviously a predetermined decision, voted to install fluoridation without •
holding a referendum or otherwise allowing the citizenry a chance to
examine both sides of the issue. An attorney friend still insists that the
• above action was in violation of Wisconsin's open- meeing law, but the local
district attorney decided not to prosecute.
"Inasmuch as fluoride is readily available by prescription, and in mouth
washes, toothpastes, etc. thus making artificial fluoridation passe, I urge
your committee to undertake whatever action you are authorized to do to
remove this known poison from our drinking water
Safety of Fluoridation Questioned
Dental Fluorosis
Dental Fluorosis is the discoloration and pitting, even crumbling of teeth,
and overgrowth and weakening of bone.
"While evidence of a link with cancer is relatively new, the link between
fluoride and brittle bones is well established .... Despite solid evidence to
8 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http:/ /www.arthritistru[.org/fluoride.hun
• •
the contrary, fluoride is still prescribed as a treatment for osteoporosis.
( There is now sufficient information in scientific studies to demonstrate that
1 ppm, or higher, of fluoride in community drinking water is neither safe
for health nor effective in preventing cavities. At this "optimal" level,"
!dental and skeletal fluorosis (discoloration and pitting, even crumbling, of
!teeth and overgrowth and weakening of bone) have been identified. ...
About 30% of children in fluoridated areas suffer from fluorosis compared
to 4.25% in low fluoride areas
Although most of the studies concentrate on "cosmetic impairment," that is,• •
the appearance of the teeth, Colquhoun 4 says that "The claim that only
tooth cells are damaged by fluoride is extremely implausible on scientific.
grounds. There is evidence of general harm [to the body].
Apparently there is also an increase in fluorosis in tropical countries, as I.D.
Brouwer and others reported in its incidence in Senegal where WHO
standard of 1.2 ppm was adopted. Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D. says,
"The hot climate and poor nutritional status of the inhabitants result in high
ingestion of the substance.
"Dental and skeletal fluorosis is seen, also, at low doses in those with
kidney disease and can be anticipated to be a more frequent occurence in
the developed countries as the total fluoride increases from all sources
•
including: industrial air emissions, water, fluoridated dental and other
medicinal agents, foods and even teflon cooking utensils (See "Dietary
Fluoride Intake in the U.S.A. Revisited," Fluoride, Vol. 24, No. 1, 1991 for
the ever - present distribution of Fluoride).
Hip Fractures
Hip Fractures have occurred with increasing frequency among women,
especially post - menopausal, since the addition of fluoride to drinking water.:: •
M. Bely, M.D. says, that it is commonly recognized that about 10% of bone
tissue is reorganized each year. As bone tissue breaks down, other cells
rebuild it. "It is a generally accepted fact, that ... fluoride causes
enlargement of the whole bone mass ... Authors agree that the [newly]
formed bone is inferior to normal, the matrix is irregular, the collagen
structure of the newly formed bone tissue differs from normal, and the
mineralization is enhanced.... so fluoride exerts its effects not only on the
newly generated (newly formed woven) bone tissue, but also changes the
collagen structure of the preexisting bone too
The incidence of hip fractures in 246 patients 65 years of age or older was
compared in three communities in Utah, one with and two without water
fluoridated to 1 ppm, over a seven year period. Christa Danielson, M.D.,
Joseph L. Lyon, M.D., Marlene Egger, Ph.D. and Gerald K. Goodenough,
M.D. concluded from this study that "We found a small but significant
9 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
•
Flouridation: Govarnmentally Approved Poison htlp:// www .arthritistrust.org/fluoride.htm
• ;i ncrease in the risk of hip fracture both men and women exposed to •
• - ;artificial fluoridation at 1 ppm, suggesting that low levels of fluoride may
• increase the risk of hip fracture in the elderly The relative risk of hip
;fracture in the higher fluoride group, over the lower fluoride group, was
1 27% greater for women, and 41% greater for men. John R. Lee, M.D.
;concluded from the Utah study that "Fluoride is toxic to bones and increases.
;risk of fracture at all levels of exposure including fluoridation at 1 ppm. •
;Regardless of any other consideration, this is reason enough to discontinue
fluoridation immediately4o "
•
There have been four additional studies in recent years that demonstrate an
increased incidence of hip fractures for elderly people who live in
fluoridated areasi Jacobsen (USA), Cooper (UK) and Colquhoun (New
Zealand) all state that increased fracture of the hip (proximal femur) has
occurred since the advent of fluoridation Colquhoun says, "I find it
astonishing therefore that, at a time when women's hip fractures in New
Zealand are reaching epidemic proportions, health boards are still claiming
that fluoridated water is perfectly safe
According to John R. Lee, M.D., there have been "seven studies showing a
positive correlation of fluoridation with increased hip fracture incidence
and not one acceptable study showing the contrary41 "
Red Blood Cells
•
According to Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D., quoting D.S. Kumari 14 , •
"Severe skeletal fluorosis occurs in India where, in some villages, the
residents are exposed to drinking water with a fluoride content of 7.2 to
10.7 ppm. It has been found that the fluoride is accumulated in bone and
that this accumulated fluoride is associated with an adverse effect on red
blood cel Is "
Cancer
In an alarming report from the New Jersey Health Department, dated
11/8/92, it was shown that osteosarcoma was found in males under age 20
to be 50% higher in New Jersey municipalities serviced with artificially
fluoridated drinking water, than their non - fluoridated counterparts •
"In the three most heavily fluoridated communities, an almost sevenfold
increase in osteosarcoma was found in young males between 10 years and
19 years of age." John Lee, M.D., said, 'I can think of no other agent with
this degree of risk which is mandated by the Public Health Service to be
added to our food or wateri
John Yiamouyiannis, Ph.D., says "In 1963, Drs. Herskowitz and Norton
from St. Louis University showed that increasing levels of fluoride •
increased the incidence of melanotic tumors in fruit flies. In 1965, Drs.
Taylor and Taylor from the University of Texas at Austin found that
10 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http:// www.anhritistrust.org/fluoride.htm
• fluoride in the drinking water at evels of one -half to one part per million
. - increased tumor growth rate in mice by 15 -25 %. In 1984, Drs. Tsutsue and
co- workers from the Nippon Dental university were able to transform
normal cells into cancer cells merely by exposure of the normal cells to
fluoride.
"It is generally agreed that the ability of a substance to cause genetic
damage is a warning of its possible cancer - causing effects. Fluoride has
been shown to cause genetic damage by researchers from Texas A & M
University, the University of Missouri, Columbia University, and the
National Institute of Environmental health Sciences -- as well as by •
researchers from the Central laboratory for Mutagenicity Testing (W.
Germany), the Russian Research Institute for Industrial Health and
Occupational Diseases, the Pomerian Medical Academy (Poland), the
Kunming Institute of Zoology (People's Republic of China), the Nippon
Dental University, Tokyo (Japan), and others. The University of Missouri
study showed that as little as one part per million fluoride in the drinking
water resulted in genetic damage.
•
"In 1977, epidemiological studies by Dr. Dean Burk, former head of the
Cytochemistry Section of the National Cancer Institute, and myself were
the subject of full -scale Congressional Hearings. Our studies showed that
fluoridation was linked to about 10,000 cancer deaths yearly. During the
hearings, U.S. Public Health Service officials (the U.S. Public Health
Service is the world's leading promoter of fluoridation) claimed that our
results were due to changes in the age, race and sex composition of the
populations examined. We were able to show that these officials had made
mathematical errors and had left out 80 -90% of the data. When these errors
and omissions were corrected their very own method confirmed that 10,000
excess cancer deaths yearly were linked to water fluoridation. (In three out
of four court cases tried since 1977, the courts ruled that the preponderance
of the evidence indicates that fluoridation results in an increase in cancer
death rate.) •
"The Congressional Hearings also revealed that U.S. Public Health Service
officials sent their erroneous and omissive data to scientists in Britain who
were told by U.S. Public Health Service to publish it as if it were their own
and to pretend that they had come up with the same results independently. ,
"Asa result of these hearings, Congress mandated that U.S. Public Health •
Service conduct animal studies to determine if they could find whether or
not fluoride caused cancer under laboratory conditions. These tests were
designed to determine whether or not water fluoridation results in an
increase in human cancer risk. They were conducted by the National
Toxicology Program (NTP) under the auspices of the U.S. Public Health ■
Service. Special attention was given to oral, liver, and bone cancers
Scheduled for completion by 1980, it was not until 1990 that the results
were reluctantly released.
11 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http://www.arthritistrustorg/fluoride.hm
• •,
"Analysis of the results in rats s ws that (a) precancerous changes
. - occurred in oral squamous cells as a result of increasing levels of fluoride in
the drinking water. (Late last year, I obtained through the Freedom of
Information Act, 'carcinogenicity studies with sodium fluoride performed
by Proctor and Gamble' which had been submitted to, but covered up by,
the U.S. Public Health Service for 4 years. Dose - dependent increases were
observed in every parameter tested, including squamous cell metaplasias.
These results appeared in the February 22, 1990 issue of the Medical
Tribune.) (b) there was 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, (c) a rare form of cancer (osteosarcoma) occurred only in
animals with fluoride in the drinking water, and (d) there was an increase in
the incidence of thyroid follicular cell tumors as a result of increasing levels`
of fluoride in the drinking water. Analysis of the results in mice shows that
(e) a rare form of liver cancer (hepatocholangiocarcinoma) occurred only in
animals with fluoride in the drinking water.
"In the National Toxicology Program (NTP) study, higher doses of fluoride
were given to compensate for (1) the limited number of animals used, (2)
the relatively short time of their exposure to fluoride, and (3) the fact that
'On a body weight basis, man is generally more vulnerable than the
experimental animal, probably by a factor of 6- 12' The doses of fluoride
that were linked to cancer in this study were only 1 /10th to 1 /50th of the
amount used to produce cancer by benzene.
•
"In -depth analysis of the National Toxicology Program (NTP) study shows
that the cancer - causing potential of fluoride is not limited to one type of •
cancer. Furthermore, the types of cancer caused by fluoride in rats and mice
may be entirely different than the types of cancer caused by that same
substance in humans. Thus, if fluoride had caused cancer in the tails of all
the rats and mice, this would be compelling evidence that fluoride was
carcinogenic. However, you wouldn't do a follow -up study in humans to see
if fluoride caused cancer in human tails. The main point is that fluoride is a
carcinogen and that the Burk - Yiamouyiannis study showing a link between
fluoridation and cancer has been confirmed." •
. Dr. William Marcus, chief toxicologist for the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA) drinking water program and Robert Carton,
Ph.D., an environmental scientist in the EPA's Office of Toxic Substances, !:
and local president.of the National Federation of Employees, ... publicly
accused the Public Health Service (PHS) of underplaying the dangers of
fluorides l."
Dr. Carton said that EPA's 1985 review was "a shoddy job, bordering on
scientific fraud. You could call it a coverup
When Dr. Marcus charged that "In almost all instances, the Battelle board
certified pathologists's findings [on the carcinogenicity of fluoride] were
12 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Floundation: Governmentally Approved Poison htt p:// www.arthritistmst.org/fluoride.hur
et
• •
down- graded by NTP, so that t e use of fluoridation would be politically
6 ,upheld, he was commanded by his EPA superiors not to speak out. He was
in danger of being fired for telling scientific truth, but fortunately Dr.
Marcus was not ... alone in his forthcoming court suit against the EPA, as
i The National Federation of Federal Employees was said to be entering a
;suit against EPA'.
The Battelle report that NTP, and the EPA attempted to distort, or •
downgrade, for political reasons, according to Dr. Lee, "... indicated that
the animals were awash with illness and abnormalities of all kinds
including kidney disease, liver disease, blood diseases, tumors, and cancer. '
In particular, the fluoridated groups showed thyroid adenomas, dysplasias
of the oral and nasal mucosa, liver cancer of a very special rare type •
(hepatocholangiocarcinoma), and the osteosarcomas of which one appeared
in a mid -range male rat and four appeared in high -range male rats. Female
rats exhibited dose - related osteosclerosis and all fluoridated rodents
developed dental fluorosis. It is important to know that the bone fluoride
level of the 'high range' rats was no higher than that which occurs in human ,
bones after 15 -20 years in fluoridated communities. Since fluoride is
cumulative in bone, the so- called 'high range' rats had achieved in 2 years
only what human bones achieve in 15 -20 years. [That] is, the tissue level of
fluoride was no different than what humans will experience'."
John R. Lee, M.D., an internationally recognized authority on fluoridation
stated "that the strength of the fluoride- cancer link study by NTP is greater
than that which resulted in the banning of Alar, Red Dye #3, or
Cyclamate
Neurotoxicity: Effects on the Brain
According to Dr. John Yiamouyiannis, there is an ongoing profound
increase in Alzheimer's disease, migraine, and other neuropsychiatric
disorders. The ingress of fluoride into the brain can be influenced by altered'
permeability of the blood -brain barrier; the inhibition of
acetylcholinesterase activity by fluoride has been reported to be 61% by as
little as 1 ppm; and the adverse effects of long -term fluoride exposure
include headaches, ringing in the ears, depression, confusion, drowsiness,
visual disturbances, severe fatigue, and loss of memory
Court Suits
Besides the threat of two possible suits against the EPA, there is a class
action suit by 35 -40 dentists against the American Dental Association
(ADA), its committees and affiliated organizations in the Superior Court of
the District of Columbia for the ADA's "acting contrary to the ethical
precepts in a number of areas, [including] the promotion of fluoridation, the
pressuring of the EDP to raise the Maximum Containment Level (MCL)
[from I ppm to 4 ppm], and failure to distribute to its members and to the
general public, literature regarding the significant possibility of adverse
effects of fluoridation and the use of dental amalgam [which is another
•
13 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
•
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http:// www .arthritistrustorg/fluoride.hur
• problem.] • •
s -
"Dr. David Kennedy, one of these dentists, says: 'I think it is criminal to
expose large groups of the population to toxic substances without any
evidence of safety. The proponents of toxic dentistry claim that you can't
;prove the agent caused a specific problem.... It is not our responsibility to .
'prove that a poison is not a poison. It is the responsiblity of the person who
•applies the poison to prove that it is harmless. . . .
In Canada, a suit has been filed by a mother and her 7 year -old child,
lagainst the Calgary Board of Health and others for dental fluorosis
associated with the use of fluoride drops and tablets'.
Dominic Smith died of over -dose of fluoride caused by a broken water
•
pump that allowed the water level to decrease while the fluoride injector •
continued to add fluoride to the water supply. Thirty other villagers also
became sick with symptoms similar to Smith's. People suffered nausea,
vomiting, diarrhea and fatigue and some also had neurological symptoms •
such as tingling hands and arms, As these symptoms appeared, people drank'
more of the water to satisfy an increasing thirst.
' Dominic's sister, too, nearly died. •
•
"Officials of Middletown, MD warned residents by radio in November,
1993 not to drink or cook with city water due to high fluroide levels.
Malfunctioning fluoridation equipment caused excessive levels of 70 parts
per million (ppm) in the distribution system. This is 70 times the normal
level and almost 18 times the level considered safe by EPA.
"Based on other fluoridation accidents, the 70 ppm of fluoride is sufficient
to cause vomiting, diarrhea, skin rashes, fever, and other effects: In 1986, a
fluoridation accident in New Haven (North Branford), Connecticut, resulted'
in the public receiving water with 51 ppm fluroide for twelve hours. A
health survey, conducted four days later on 312 persons, determined that 55
of those experienced symptoms of fluroide poisoning which lasted from
1 -60 hours." •
Table 1
Floridation: Four Cities 1992 Canadian Exchange 15%
Campbell
Tacoma Seattle Calgary giver Average
Total •
Population +250,400 1,000,000 593,000 `25,000
Est. Pop. Underr
11 yrs (20% ' 200,000 118,600 15,000
Poll) •
14 of 32 1129/00 4:17 PM
Floundanon Governmentally Approved Poison http://www.arduitisn
•
, . .
'Est. Pop. 3-10
,35,056 140,000 83,020 3,500
. I' 11/1 /_ \
b i yrs ‘ t pop. :
• • Fluoridation Sod H . . 111
H Fluosilic 1Fluosilic
1Chemical(s) 1F+Lime Fluosilicic
!
Flow: Gals F 1 172,000,000 135,000000 89,000,00 1 0 300,000
i Water/Day 1 !, _ _ .
[ Cost of'
, IChemical(s) 1 ' 1$125,000 $236,000 1 $200 > 000 $12,696
1 Per Capita 1 1
i Cost/Year . 1
I '
(Annual 1$0.49 ' $0.23 $0.33 $0.50 1$0.38
1 Cost/Total 1
I Pop.)
1 Gals • ,
Consumed/Day . ,
by Children
16,260 25M00 14,825 625
Under 11 years
at 1 Pint per
Child per Day . ,
Percent of • , .
Total Fluorine
Water
ti0 .008% . 0.018% 0016% 0.20% 0.06%
Used by '
Children Under .1 • ,
11 years
. _ ...
Percent of
Water Not . ' .
Used by • 99.99% 99.98% 1 99.80%
Children Under
11 years
Annual Cost 1 ( .
Fluorine ,
.
Chemical Used $10.00 , $42.48 $32.00 : $25.39
by Children 1
. 1
Under 11 years
,
Amount . .
. !
Received by , .
,
Children Under
$0.08 ' $0.18 $0.16 i $2.00 : $0.60 1
11 years/1,000 1
Spent for 1 .
, • ,
Chemicals '1
!Sources: Costs of chemicals, gals. flow, pop. servedfrom water works in ,
Tacoma, Seattle and Campbell River. Calgary costs, amount of chemicals
jused from D.B. Hill flow estimated from chemicals used to achieve
[5 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http://wynvartbritistrust.orgfiluoride.htm
•
• •
optimal concentration. Populate for children estimated as % total
e - Population as follows: under 11 years, 20 %; 3 -10 years, 14 %; poverty
i level, 6% estimated from 1990 U.S. census for Tacoma city. Calgary
population estimated from current published descriptive data. Costs in U.S.
dollars
Table 2 •
Ten year "Lifetime Cost" of Children where Fluoride Level is Less
than 03 ppm. Using ADA and CDA Recommendations and Oral
Tablets (1 mg F) at an Estimated Cost of $5.72 per thousand
American Dental Association (ADA)
(with American Academy of Pediatrics modification to start at 2 wks
Daily Dose:
2 weeks to 2 years 0.25 mg (1/4 tablet)
2 years to 3 years 0.5 mg (1/2 tablet)
3 years to 10 years 1.0 mg (1 tablet)
•
"Ten Year Lifetime Cost" @ $5.72 /1,000 tablets = $17.74
Canadian Dental Association (CDA) •
Recommendation (1992)
Daily Dose:
Ages 3, 4, 5, 0.25 mg (1/4 tablet)
•
•
6 years to 10 years 1.0 mg (1 tablet)
"Ten Year Lifetime Cost" @ $5.72 /1,000 tablets = $12.00
Robert Camton, Ph.D., scientist and editor of the newsletter The Fluoride
Report, pointed out that toxic spills of fluoride in drinking water are never
publicized by flurodiation promotion agencies, the Public Health Service,
the National Institute for Dental Research and the Center for Disease
Control."
A partial list of such accidents includes:
16 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http:// www .arthtitistrust.org/fluoride.hlm
• i •
. •Poplarville, MS, August 1993: 15 sought treatment at
hospital
•
•Galesburg, IL, August 1993: Delivery tank leaked 15 -20 gallons on city
street.
•Chicago, IL, July 1993: 3 dialysis patients died; 5 additional patients
allergic (toxic) reaction ". •
•Kodiak, AK, May 1993: Residents were warned by phone and public radio
of high fluoride levels, and danger becomes higher with boiling of water,
concentrating fluoride further
•Sarnia, Ontario, January 1993; Fluoride at 13 ppm. Fail -safe system had
failed to shut down. •
•Mann County, California; Pump malfunction allowed too much fluoride in
the Bon Tempe treatment plant, so bad water diverted to Phoenix Lake,
elevating lake surface by more than two inches, forcing some water over the
spillway
•
•Danvers, IL, June 1992; Pump malfunctioned; flushed water through fire
hydrants onto city streets.
•
•Hoopper Bay, AK; May 1992; 1 death, 260 poisoned, 1 airlifted to hospital
in critical condition. First diagnoses speculated that residents had the "flu."
Widow of deceased now suing for $3 million.
•Rice Lake, WI, February 1982; Residents vomiting; Centers for Disease
Control stated that 150 water consumers potentially at risk.-Pump overfed
fluoride for two days, thought to have reached 20 ppm".
•Benton Harbor, MI, December 1991; Faulty pump allowed about 900
gallons of hydrofluosilicic acid to leak into a chemical storage building at
the water plant. So corrosive that it ate through more than two inches of
concrete ".
•Calgary, Alberta, Canada, September 1991: Leak of seven liters of fluoride
sent two water treatment personnel to hospital for oxygen after breathing
fluoride fumes.
•Burlington, NC, September 1991; 4,000 gallons of a 6,000 gallon
fiberglass fluoride tank ruptured.
•Portage, MI, July 1991; About 40 children with abdominal pains, sickness,
vomiting and diarrhea at an arts and crafts show at shcool. One of the city's
:7 of32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Governmentally Approved Poison http:// www.ar@vitistrustorg/fluoride.htm
•
pumps had failed. Fluoride levels reached 92 ppm ". •
0
•St. Louis, MO, November 1990; 500 gallons of hydrofluosilic acid leaked
from ruptured pipe
•Westby, WI, October 1990; 4 families suffered a week of diarrhea, upset
stomach and burning throats. Malfunctioning equipment caused fluoride to
surge to 150 ppm. Fluoride eroded copper pipes in area homes
• •Schenectady, NY, January 1988; 2,000 gallon spill completely destroyed
fluoridation facility
•New Haven (North Branford), CT, March 1986; Of the 312 persons
interviewed 18% had symptoms of abdominal cramping, nausea, headache, •
diarrhea, vomiting, diaphoresis (profuse sweating), and fever. There were
rashes and irritation from bathing and washing dishes. Fluroide peaked at
51 ppm. It leached copper pipes`.
*Annapolis, MD, November 1979; 1 death in a dialysis patient, other
dialysis patients suffered a cardiac arrest (resuscitated), nausea,
hypotension, chest pain, diarrhea, itching, flushing, vomiting (blood tinged),,
difficulty breathing, profuse sweating, weakness, numbness and stomach
cramping. Those not on dialysis reported nausea, headache, cramps,
diarrhea and dizziness. •
•
Wife of the dialysis patient who died sued and settled out of court. Pepsi
Cola sued for $1.6 million for damage to product. Waterworks personnel
also sued, then demoted and had payroll deductions`.
Even though state and county health officials learned of the spill nine days
after it occurred, no public announcement was made and the City Council
was not told of the situation for six more days.
So, in addition to increasing perception of liability for adding fluoride to
municipal water systems based on acceptance of faulty scientific analysis,
and authoritarian pronouncements from those who have never studied the
literature and are not themselves scientists, there is also a constant threat of
litigation from catastrophic incidents. However, the persistent threat to each!
person consuming a steady diet of fluoride in their public drinking water
looms the larger.
Silicon implants were said to be safe, until, many years later, thousands of
women were sickened or disfigured by the effects of leaking silicon. This
resulted in multi- billion dollar litigation that has been consistently won in •
the plaintiffs favor, and even threatens to bankrupt insurance companies.
"In the 1920's, senior public health officials and the American Public Health,
18 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
1•lounda[lon: Uovernmentally Approved Poison ht tp:// www .atttinnstrustOrg/rluOnae.enn
b
Association endorsed lead gaso ne as a 'Gift of God and perfectly safe'
It is not too difficult to envision a like situation with fluoride where,
because of the unknowledgeable and religious conviction of public health
department employees, fluoride public water supplementation has become
nation -wide spread. Court suits usually begin here and there, scattered, and
as objective judges study all the evidence, they rule in favor of plaintiffs.
Then the filing of suits widen, until at last the public is faced with truth --
and also multi- billion dollar damages that must come from each citizen's
pocketbook.
According to William Campbell Douglass "A study from Britain reported
that the difference between a safe dose of fluoride and a harmful dose is
'impressively small'. Danish scientists concurred in a report in which they
said: 'There is no magic borderland' between a safe and a toxic dose.
"The most shocking report comes from a former chief dental officer in
Auckland, Australia: 'When you are indoctrinated with a particular belief
for a lifetime, it is hard to break out. But I examined the figures in my own
city of Auckland and found that decay was Less in the non - fluoridated than
the fluoridated parts.
"The figures that had been given to the public had been shockingly
doctored I pointed out these discrepencies to a conference of senior
dental officers of the New Zealand Department of Health. There was simply'
a stony silence
What Cost Savings?
One argument in favor of fluoridating the public water supply, is that
parents will have less cost in repairing their children's cavities. This has
already been debunked in proper scientific studies at every level. However,
let's look at potential cost savings.
•
According to Ralph S. Blois The National Preventive Dentistry
Demonstration Program (sponsored by the American Fund for Dental
Health, a pro - fluoride group) conducted a study of 30,000 school -age •
children. The study ran from 1977 through 1987, and was the largest ever
conducted. Some of the children were on sealants, some on fluoride water,
some on toothpastes, and so on, and some received the whole range of •
"protection."
Cost of 'medication' was $55 per child per year with a resulting saving of
only two tooth surfaces over a four year span. Equivalent children, who
were non - fluoride children, had one fewer tooth surface decay over the four
year span at a cost of $1 per child per year. "To cut through the garbage,
what it says is that in four years the test showed that children having
fluoride had saved only 2 tooth surfaces (at a cost of $55X4 = $220) while
non-fluoridated children saved only one tooth surface (cost $4). For Pete's
•
19 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Flouridation: Ciovemmentally Approved Poison http: / /www.arthnhstrust.orgaiuonde.htm
e •
sake -- fluoride claims to produ ne less decay in four years than
. anon- fluoride. That is not at all statistically signficant. Yet nobody seems to
have picked up on this.
1 "Of those children who had fluoride mouth wash -- the study laments the
poor performance of mouth washes. Here over 4 years, the amount of tooth
surfaces saved was less than one. The report states, 'On the basis of our
results, we can't make any strong argument that fluoride mouthrinse
programs are effective enough to be recommended and in fluoridated
communities they are not merited at all'
We were promised, with the addition of fluoride to public water systems,
that tooth decay would decrease by 60 percent. Later studies revised this '
figure to somewhere between 20 and 40 percent. New evidence from New
Zealand and Canada suggest that with the use of fluoride, tooth decay is
higher
Argumentation in favor of fluoridating municipal water supplies usually
starts out with "'How could anyone be against water fluoridation? It is the
most cost - effective public health measure in history. It costs 50 cents per
year to protect a child from what is, perhaps, the most common disease in
the world, and the benefits last a lifetime.' •
•
"This quotation was taken from an editorial 'Let's Get With It,' written by •
Richard J. Mielke, D.M.D. in the Washington state Dental Association
News of April 1993 to praise its members' support of a Bill [which lost] to
empower Public Utility Districts to fluoridate, an effort that failed a second
time in April 1993. This statement is similar to that found in Fluoridation
Facts, the official pamphlet of the American Dental Association (ADA). It
is based on the amount paid per year on behalf of each person in the
population served by a water district to purchase fluoride chemicals. This is
an average of 35 -40 cents in the ADA document
Assuming that fluoride addition to municipal water supplies is both safe
and effective -- which scientific evidence says it is not -- then exactly what
are the savings?
Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D. has detailed the presumed savings by
comparing the cost of supplying fluoride tablets for children as opposed to
the tax load placed on communities to fluoridate the water in Tables 1 and
2. According to these calculations, on average, "for every $1,000 spent by •
the taxpayer for fluoride chemicals, less than .50 cents goes toward
urchase of fluoride for children. Apparently, according to Tables 1 and 2,
the ten -year lifetime cost to supply an individual child with fluoride tablets,
for the purpose of preventing teeth caries, is somewhere between $12 and
$18. The remainder [of fluoride] expenditures is used to purchase a
pollutant such as industrial grade sodium floride or hydrofluosilicic acid to
flush through the community water system into the environment
20 of 32 I/29/00 4: l7 PM
rmunaanon: uovemmentany Approvea romson nnp: irwww.artnnusvust.org'nuonue.nan
• •
To place Foulkes' analysis in further perspective, In Tacoma, WA, $125,000
for chemicals provides $10 for dubious protection of all its children for one
'year.
Considering the true cost of fluoridation, one wonders if children's caries
are the primary reason for political hue and cry in favor of fluoridating city
!municipalities, or is it a'means of disposing of industrial waste at taxpayer's
'expense, and also a way around the enforcement of pollution laws? David
B. Hill, P.Eng., Professor of Computer Science at the University of Calgary,
( said, "The current estimated annual running costs of water fluoridation in
Calgary are $230,000 a year just for the chemicals, and 99.9% of this will
not be drunk, but will be flushed straight down the city sewers. The effect
will be to deposit roughly 150 tons of fluoride into the Bow River and
environment each year. The Reynolds Aluminum Company of Canada Ltd.
in Baie- Comeau, Quebec, is only legally allowed to discharge 36.5 tons of
fluoride into the St. Lawrence River each year ... under pollution control •
regulations36 "
Summary
Assuming that fluoride added to public water systems was both safe and
effective, it obviously is far, far from a cost effective way of preventing
caries.
Assuming that 1 ppm of fluoride added to public water systems was safe
and that it did reduce caries, "Fluoridating the water supply makes a
fundamentally simplistic assumption: that all the people drinking it, no
matter what their size, age or state of health, require the same fluoride
level' s "
No respectable scientist, biologist, or medical doctor would agree with this
premise.
"Fluoride also accumulates in the body from a great number of natural
sources
Respectable scientists recognize that other sources of fluoride are tea, •
industrial air emissions, foodstuffs grown, manufactured or cooked in
fluoridated areas, and even teflon cooking utensils.
An over - accumulation (even assuming the alleged safety of 1 ppm) is
clearly damaging to health.
"Dentists routinely recommend fluoride tablets for children, never testing to
see whether fluoride levels are actually low and without being trained to
recognize existing fluoride damages s "
'According to a Danish study of 56 children regularly taking fluoride tablets,
?1 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
hlounaanon: liovemmentally Approved Poison nup: /lwww.artnnusuust.org/nuonae.nan
•
"almost half showed dental fluo ssis to some degree These tablets can
also kill, according to reports on the case of a 3- year -old boy who collapsed
and died after consuming the equivalent of 16 mg/kg body weight of
'fluoride tablets
1
In 1991 tests conducted by Dr. Peter Mansfiled discovered that 1 in 4
people were in danger of overconsuming fluorides 1.
■
'The great problem with overconsumption of fluoride is that only around •
half of that congested is excreted by the body in healthy adults.
( "Children, diabetics or those with kidney problems may retain up to
two- thirds of the fluoride they take in
According to Gibson's research, "It is, ... , more likely that fluoride affects
cellular metabolism at all concentrations, but that in some [human] systems
this effect is not detectable until doses in excess of 10 micrograms per
millilitre are reached, ... The present series of experiments clearly
demonstrate effects of fluoride as low as 0.5 micrograms per millilitre' l."
According to Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.A., "There may have been some
grounds in 1973 for accepting the hypothesis that fluoridated water is
associated with reduction in dental caries and that water artificially
fluoridated to the 'optimal' level was safe.
"Public Health officials at all levels pushed actively for fluoridation. The
Dental and Medical associations had moved from opposition to a position
of support. The literature supporting the opposite view was difficult to
obtain. But, ... , there was evidence sufficient to suggest caution.
"The situation appears different in 1992. The fluoridation of water supplies
as a viable concept is at the point of collapse. The effectiveness of fluoride,
especially as an additive to community water supplies, to reduce dental
caries is dubious. The idea that this well -known industrial toxin is safe at 1
ppm in the drinking water has been struck a blow; perhaps a mortal one.
"[Pennsylvania] Justice Flaherty ... continued in his letter [to New
Zealand]: 'Prior to my hearing this case, I gave the matter of fluoridation
little, if any, thought. But, I received quite an education and noted that the
proponents of fluoridation do nothing more than impune the objectivity of
those who oppose fluoridation. I seriously believe that few responsible
people have objectively reviewed the evidence'.
"Canada, the USA, and the few countries left that have not discontinued the
fluoridation of community water supplies should join those countries who
have discontinued the process or who never did fluoridate. A list of such
countries includes West Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Finland,
Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Japan'," and France
n of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
rlounaanon: vovemmentauy npprovea rotson nap :uwww.arumusuusLorgnmonuc.nun
O • •
•
Dr. Geoffrey Smith asks, "If artificial fluroidation is so effective, then why
have scientifically advanced countries [such as the above] totally rejected
the measure? There is absolutely no credible evidence that children's teeth
in those countries are any worse than those in Australia, Canada, Ireland,
new Zealand and the United States45 n
True Causes of Declining Dental Caries
"If one were to argue that swallowing fluoridated water leads eventually to
higher fluoride levels in dental enamel, one would then have to explain
away the fact that dental enamel fluoride concentration in children from
fluoridated communities in the U.S. is no different than the fluoride
concentration in teeth of children from non - fluoridated communities."
More than likely, the true causes for decrease in dental caries are the
following factors, given by Dr. Lee. -
•
•Better nutrition
•Less sugar intake (e.g., use of artificial sweetners in kids' diets).
•Better dental hygiene (tooth brushing)
•Rising immunity to Strep mutans, the plaque germ responsible for the
conversion of simple dietary starches into acids that dissolve enamel
•General use of antibiotics bacteriostatic or bacteriocidal to Strep mutans.
•Use of fluoridated toothpaste. This latter factor does not vindicate water
fluoridation. The concentration in toothpaste (which is applied directly to
dental enamel) is 1000 -1500 ppm whereas drinking water (which passes the
teeth into the gut and then excreted in urine) contains only 1 ppm fluoride.
The higher concentration in toothpaste is sufficient to kill or seriously
impair the enzyme processes of Strep mutans plaque germs, whereas the
low concentration in drinking water is simply ineffective
More than likely safer substitues are available for the same teeth brushing
purpose, that will serve to kill Strep mutans.
Gerard P. Judd, Ph.D. summarizes the actual and indicated dangers from
forceful feeding of fluoride as follows:
•Slightly poorer teeth (more Decay, Missing Teeth, Fillings), with egg -shell
white fluorosis and brittleness According to Professor Cornelius Steelink,,
Department of Chemistry at the University of Arizona, who headed up a
subcommitte for study of addition of fluoride to the Tucson, AZ water
supply, their study showed that "... the more fluoride a child drank, the
more cavities appeared in the teeth
Z3 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Floundanon: (iovetmnentally Approved Poison napaiwww .annnusaust.orgwnuonae.nun
•
• •
•
•More brittle bones in the aged •
•
•Destruction of at least 60 out of 63 enzymes, including cytochrome C,
cholinesterase and others handling oxygen
•Genetic change, both in the sperm and other cells
•Dramatic heart death increase in Antiogo, Wisconsin, where a long -term'
study was made
•Down's Syndrome increase of 250 %
•
•Probable major cause of Sudden Infant Death Sydrome (SIDS) and
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), since allergic (toxic) symptoms the
same 46.
•
•Infant mortality increase: for Washington, D.C. Blacks 4 times, for Whites
3 times (48 years of fluoridation) and for the average U.S. population 1.4
times
•Infant birth defects increased 3 times in Chile during its experiment with
fluoridation
•39% increase in cancers overall, with 80% for rectal cancer in the U.S.
after 33 years •
•Fluoride accumulates about 50% daily in the bones and soft tissue
•Miscarriages and spontaneous abortions increase
•50 side effects: arthritis, immobility, blindness, bladder and urinary tract
effect, blood loss in kidneys, uterus, and vagina, bone pain, bruises, cancer
increases, Chizzola macula, collapsing legs, diarrhea, dizziness, dry mouth; ;
8 allergies proven by double blind tests by Moolenburgh using 12.
physicians and 60 patients, Down's Syndrome increase with 70% cataracts,
epileptic seizures, fatigue, weakness, loss in strength, fluorosis, genetic
chromosome change, severe headaches, large heart death increase,
•
hemorrhages in the skin, incoherence, inner ear disorder, intestinal cramps,
distention and constipation, itching, mental depression, mental
concentration inability, nasal disease, nausea, nystagmus (involunatry
movement of eyes), pain in muscles, intestines, bowels, head, spine, and
stomach, polyuria, scotoma, seziures, spastic bowels, stomach bloat, cramps'.
and gas, stomatitis (lip cracks), tendon - ligament calcification, thyroid
calcification, tinnitus, ulcers in the mouth, skin eruption around the mouth,
vision blurring, vomiting and weight loss
24 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
rtounaatton: uovemmentauy Approval rotson uup: nnwww.annnusuusr.orglnuonue.nnn
• •
•Possibly Alzheimers, Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and other viral disease are
made worse due to antibody destruction
How to Avoid Fluorosis Know Truth
According to Foulkes, "Many of us know that senior scientists working for
I the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have been trying for more than a
'decade to persuade their superiors to lower the Maximum Contaminant
Level (MCL) for fluoride to levels that would prevent dental fluorosis
(0.1 -0.2 ppm) only to be overruled by successive Surgeons General and [to
wrongly] have the level increased to 4 ppm 'to prevent cirppling skeletal
fluorosis'31 "
Robert J. Carton, Ph.D. was an environmental scientist with the U.S. Army,
and from September 1972 until May 1992, he spent 15 years in the Office
of Toxic Substances with the EPA, managing risk assessments. For two
years he was responsible for writing regulations under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act. He was also program manager for compliance of
new pollution sources with the National Environmental Policy Act
According to Robert J. Carton, Ph.D., who testified under sworn testimony
to the court in Manitowoc, Wisconsin during litigation on the city's
fluoridation of water, the EPA officials conducted scientific fraud when
they raised the standards from 1 Recommended Maximum Contaminant
Level (RMCL) for fluoridated drinking water, to 4 RMCL. Carton •
testified that:
•The fluoride in drinking water standard, ... , published by the EPA in the
Federal Register on Nov. 14, 1985, is a classic case of political interference !,
with science.
•The regulation is a fraudulent statement by the Federal government that 4
mg/1 of fluoride in drinking water is safe with an adequate margin.
•There is evidence that critical information in the scientific and technical'
support documents used to develop the standard were falsified by the
Department of Health and Human Services and the EPA to protect a.
long - standing public health policy.
•EPA professionals were never asked to conduct a thorough, independent
analysis of the fluoride literature. Instead, their credentials were used to
give the appearance of scientific credibility. They were used to support the
predetermined conclusion that 4 mg/1 of fluoride in drinking water was safe.
•The EPA management ignored the requirements of the law to protect
sensitive individuals such as children, diabetics or people with kidney
impairment. Contrary to law, they made the criteria for considering health
data so stringent that reasonable concerns for safety were eliminated. Data
25 of32 1 /29/00 4:17 PM
Floundation: (iovemmentally Approved Poison tutp://www.annrelsynatorgatuonae.ntin
•
showing positive correlation be en fluoride exposure and genetic effect
'
in almost all laboratory tests were discounted.
•EPA management based its standard on only one health effect: crippling
skeletal fluorosis. They ignored data showing that healthy individuals were
at risk of developing crippling skeletal fluorosis if these individuals
happened to drink large quantities of water at the presumed "safe" level of 4
mg/l. EPA's own data showed that some people drink as much as 5.5 liters
per day. If these people ingested this amount of water containing 4 mg/I of
fluoride, they would receive a daily dose of 22 mg. This exceeds the
minimum dose necessary to cause crippling skeletal fluorosis, or "20
mg/day for 20 years" as stated by the EPA and Public Health Service.
•Most unsettling is the fact that the EPA and the National Academy of
Sciences cannot document the scientific basis for the 20 mg/day threshold
established by the EPA. In a recent series of letters between the National
Academy of Sciences, Ms. Darlene Sherrel, and Sen. Graham of Florida, the
National Academy of Sciences was forced to admit that it could not
document the deriviation of the chronic effect level for crippling skeletal
fluorosis, which the single health effect upon which the fluoride in drinking
water standard is based. The threshold is probably lower.
•There is evidence, ignored by the EPA, in a study by Dr. Geoffrey Smith, ,
that exposure to fluoride at 1 mg/1 in drinking water over a long period of
time may calcify ligaments and tendons, causing arthritic pains, and may be
responsible for the alarming increase in cases of repetititive stress injury.
•EPA management relied upon a report from the Surgeon General which
they knew was false. This report claimed to represent conclusions of an
expert panel (on which the EPA was present as an observer) when, in fact,
the concerns of this panel for the effects of fluoride on the bones of
children, for its effects on the heart, for dental fluorosis, and for the overall
lack of scientific data on the effects of fluoride in U.S. drinking water were
deleted. These changes were made in the final report without the
knowledge or approval of the expert panel.
•The EPA accepted the falsified report from the Surgeon General's office
and asked a contractor to turn this into an "assessment." The contractor
dutifully collected only literature that supported the report. The report was
submitted for public comment, but was never altered to incorporate the
volumes of information sent in by world class experts. Any opinions
contrary to the report were dismissed. The result is actually a "Draft" •
stamped "Final."
•The apparent cover -up of fluoride risks within EPA prompted the EPA
professionals' union, Local 2050 of the National Federation of Federal
Employees, to attempt to file an amicus brief in support of the Natural
Resources Defense Council, who sued EPA in 1986 over the fluoride
standard.
26 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
loundaton: (iovemmentally Approved Poison nnp : / /www.ammnusuust.org'nuonae.nrm
• • •
•EPA has also attempted to silence scientists who do not follow the party •
line. In 1992, EPA fired William L. Marcus, Ph.D. from his job as senior
toxicologist in the Office of Drinking Water, EPA. Judge David A. Clarke,
Jr., declared in his decision on this case on December 3, 1992, that "the
reasons given for Dr. Marcus' firing were a pretext ... his employment was
terminated because he publicly questioned and opposed EPA's fluoride
policy." Judge Clark ordered Dr. Marcus to be reinstated and provided with
back pay, fringe benefits and interest, attorneys fees, and paid $50,000 in
compensatory damages. It was said that every time Dr. Marcus testified it
cost the polluting companies a couple of million dollars. It was reported to
have cost Dow $8 million when he testified against this chemical giant
•Despite knowledge by the EPA that dental fluorosis is considered a visible
sign that potentially destructive effects of fluoride are also occurring in
bone, and even though aware that the report of the Surgeon General's expert
panel had been altered, nevertheless they followed the altered version and
declared in 1985 that dental fluorosis was not an adverse health effect.
•Transcripts obtained of the closed -door testimony by the expert panel, •
obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, showed that the panel had
in fact voted to declare dental fluorosis an adverse health effect. Their
declaration was doctored by unknown individuals to achieve a political end.
There's an obvious political problem that must be solved, which is to get the
Environmental Protection Agency, and other public agencies, to do the job
for which our taxes pay. Even more basic, is that one can join the growing
throng of those who are now aware that scientific studies, worldwide,
demonstrate that fluoridation is damaging to health.
One example of the persistence of advocates of fluoridation was
demonstrated in Eugene, Oregon
•In 1956, the folks of Eugene were asked to approve water fluoridation. The
civic leaders felt it was important and all the pressure and persistence we've
come to know from the fluoridation lobby was brought to bear. The folks of
Eugene said "no."
•
•The issue was placed on the ballot again in 1958. Despite the protagonism
by the civic leaders the folks voted "no" a second time.
•The next time, in a 1964 election, the proponents of the poison won and
the city of Eugene fluoridated its water.
•By September 28, 1965 another election was forced by those who objected •
to dripping the toxic chemical into the water supply and they voted fluoride
out, once and for all -- or so they thought.
•A year later the power of the fluoride Lobby had the issue back on the
7 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
Ploundation: Ciovernmertally Approved Poison nap: I /www.armnusausr.org/nuonae.nrm
• ballot a fifth time. In a heated alit close race, the fluoridation advocates •
won and the city water again felt the drip, drip, drip of fluoride compounds.
•The people of Eugene rose up even more determined and petitions •
circulated for another referendum on the issue. On June 28, 1977 •
fluoridation was repealed by a vote of 9,804 to 5,580.
•Despite the almost two to one defeat, the city council declared they would
be back with another ballot on the matter during the 1978 general election.
However, the people had spoken and today the city of Eugene is fluoride
free.
'City water treatment superintendent Mitch Postle told Search for Health
that he removed the fluoridation equipment in 1978 and he's "glad."
•What seems to have been constantly overlooked by those advocating the
poisoning of the water supply is that if folks want fluoride for their kid's
teeth, they can always buy floride pills. •
"On March 17, 1991, in Washington, D.C., ... the Parent Teacher's
Association (PTA) took a major step away from its long -held (1952)
position in support of fluoridation of the water supplies PTA will seek
to have its membership educated about the risks and benefits of aggregate
fluoride exposure, and the appropriate use and ingestion of products
containing fluoride."
A proposed bill that would have allowed public utilities in Washington state
to fluoridate water was defeated in the Senate Energy and Utilities •
Committee in February 1992, by a coalition of those interested in safe and
clean water24. •
In support of removing fluoridation from municipal systems, H.J. Roberts,
M.D., says, ". . . elected officials who lack an adequate scientific and
medical background must exercise extreme prudence and caution when
voting on public water fluoridation, or continuing to do so.
"This issue transcends the important matter of freedom of choice. It
involves exposing citizens to a toxic substance under the challenged guise
of preventing dental caries. The problem is compounded by the absence of
truly informed consent, and the [already] excessive fluoride intake by many
persons in non - fluoridated areas.
"Elected individuals and their commissions also ought to anticipate
criminal charges for 'practicing [medicine] without a license' if suit were to
be brought by constituents for the fluoride- associated or — aggravated
mecical disorders.... 23"
The late Dr. George Waldbott t listed the following symptoms, stating that
28 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
71oundation: (iovemmentalty Approved Poison flap: iiwww.artnnasuus[.org/rwonae.nnn
their severity and duration will1end on an individual's age, nutritiona
status, enviroment, kidney function and susceptibility to allergies, and he
also suggested various immediate fixes.
Symptoms
•Chronic fatigue not relieved by extra sleep or rest
•Headaches
•Dryness of throat and excessive water consumption
•
•Frequent need to urinate
•Aches and stiffness in muscles/bones •
•Muscular weakness and spasms •
•Gastrointestinal disturbances, including diarrhoea and constipation •
•Pinkish -red or bluish -red spots on the skin, which fade after around a week
•Skin rash or itching after bathing
•Dizziness
•Visual disturbances
•
"The first sign of general systemic poisoning by fluoride is usually a
mottled tooth, which turns gray and develops brown or black spots. The
blemish is permanent and grows worse as exposure continues. After a time
the molars begin to decay, then the gums and the mouth evnironment are
affected. After mottling comes a bewildering variety of bodily aberrations,
seldom diagnosed correctily because most physicians know almost nothing
about chronic fluoride poisoning and thereefore they don't look for it
Suggestions
•If you are displaying what you believe are symptoms, have your fluoride
levels tested.
•If you live in a fluoridated area, your only option is to use solely bottled
water; or fit a reverse - osmosis water purifier in your home. You may also
purchase a service which will deliver bottled mineral water and supply a
dispenser.
•Reduce your intake of tea and soft drinks. Drink herbal tea made with
non - fluoridated water instead. [Tea contains considerable fluoride, and soft
drinks may have been made with city water that is fluoridated.]
:9 of 32 129/00 4:17 PM
Floundanon: Governmentally Approved Poison nnp: iiwww.aruurusuust.orgtnuonae.ns
•
-Switch to a non - fluoridated to1aste. Never let children use "adult"
. fluoride toothpaste.
Check your nutritional status. A poor diet will only increase your
susceptibility to symptoms of fluoride poisoning. Adequate levels of
magnesium, zinc and iron will help your body counter the effects of
fluoride.
•Watch your consumption of prepared foods, particularly frozen vegetables.
•Never use fluoridated water for baby formula (another good argument for .
breastfeeding.)
References
1. Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D., "Fluoridation of Community Water
Supplies 1992 Update," Townsend Letter for Doctors, 911 Tyler St. ,
Port Townsend, WA, 98368 -6541 June 1992, p. 450.
2. D. Ziegelbecker, Fluoride 14; 1981, p. 123 -128.
3. Mark Disendorf, Nature, Vol. 322; July 1986, p. 10.
4. J. Colquhoun, Fluoride, No. 3, July 1990, p. 23.
5. Journal PH Dent, Vol. 49; No. 5; 1989; includes studies by Kumar
and Newbrun in Dent Vol. 49; No. 4; 1989,
6. Allen Gray, J. Canad Dent. Assn., No. 10; 1987.
7. R.J. Hunt, Jour PH Dent, Vol. 49; No. 3; 1989.
8. Robert O. Dustrude, R.Ph., Health Freedom News, 212 W. Foothill '
Blvd., Monrovia, CA 91016, January 1993, p. 36.
9. M. Bely, M.D., Arthrosis, The Journal of the Academy of Rheumatoid
Disease, Vol. 1, No. 3, The Arthritis Fund/The Rheumatoid Disease
Foundation, 5106 Old Harding Road, Franklin, TN 37064, 1987, p.
41.
10. Christa Danielson, M.D., Joseph L. Lyon, M.D., Marlene Egger,
Ph.D., Gerald K. Goodenough, M.D., Fluoridation Abstract, JAMA,
1992; 268: 746 -748; from "Hip Fractures & Fluoridation in Utah's
Elderly," Townsend Letter for Doctors, Op. Cit., April 1993, p. 374.
11. Fiona Bawdon, "Fluoride," WDDTYDental Handbook, 1993, p. .
15 -18.
12. Jacobsen, JAMA 264; 500 -502; 1990; Cooper, J. Epidem ad Comm
Health 44; 17- 19;1990 and JAMA Vol. 266; No. 4; July 24, 1991
(letter); Colquhoun, New Zeal Med J14 Aug. 1991.
13. I.D. Brouwer, et. al. Lancet, Jan. 30, 1988.
14. D.S. Kumari, Biochemistry International, Vol. 23, No. 4, March ,
1991.
15. Experimental Pathology Laboratories, Inc., Quality Assessment
Narrative: Rats, p. 13; Mice, p. 18.
16. Drinking Water and Health (National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, D.C., 1977) p. 52 -3.
17. John Yiamouyiannis, Ph.D., "Update on Fluoride and Cancer,"
Townsend Letter for Doctors, December 1990, p. 865.
18. Journal of the American Dental Association, Vol. 47, pp. 159 - 179,
30 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
1
Floundsnon: Governmentally Approved Poison http://www.arthrmstnistorgrnuoncle.htm
1951
' 19. American Dental Association, Vol. 50, pp. 272 -277, 1955.
20. JFS, "Letters to the Editors," Health Freedom News, Op. Cit., April
1993, p. 43.
21. M.J. Larsen et. al. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1989.
22. National Fluoridation, vol. XXXDC, No. 1.
23. H.J. Roberts, M.D., "Re: Toxicology of Fluoride," Townsend Letter for
Doctors, Op.Cit., July 1992, p. 623.
24. Betty Fowler, "Proposed Fluoridation Bill Defeated in Washington
State," Townsend Letter for Doctors, Op., Cit., August/September
1992, p. 697.
25. "National PTA Reverses Its Endorsement of Fluoridated Water,"
Townsend Letter for Doctors, Op., Cit., February/March 1992, p. 147.
26. Betty Fowler, "Don't Applaud Fluoride Use for Cavities," Townsend
Letter for Doctors, Op., Cit., May 1990, p. 286.
27. "Fluoride Linked to Bone Cancer in Fed Study," Townsend Letter for
Doctors, Op., Cit., April 1990, p. 162; from the Medical Tribune.
28. "Safe Water Coalition of Washington State," Townsend Letter for
Doctors, Op., Cit., June 1989, p. 291.
29. William Campbell Douglass, "Fluoridation Losing its Bite,"
Second Opinion, December 1992, p. 3.
30. "Fluoride Linked to Bone Cancer in New Government Study," Health
Freedom News, Op. Cit., March 1993, p. 21; see A Brief Report on
the Association of Drinking Water Fluoridation and the Incidence of
Osteosarcoma Among Young Males, Perry D. Cohn, Ph.D., produced
by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and
Energy and the New Jersey Department of Health, November 8,
1992.
31. Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D., "'Open Letter' in Response to Dr.
John Millar's Address to Kamloops City Council, December 15,
1992," Townsend Letter for Doctors, Op., Cit., May 1993, p. 459
32. Citizens for Alternative Health Care, "Hydrofluoric Acid," Townsend
Letter for Doctors, Op., Cit., July 1993, p. 696.
33. Anne Anderson, R.P.N., Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D., "Re:
Fluoride Pollution," Townsend Letter for Doctors, 'bid, p. 734.
34. "Fluoridation Drama in Eugene, Oregon," Health Freedom News,
Op.Cit., August 1993, p. 11.
35. Robert J. Carton, Ph.D., "Fluoridation: Scientific Fraud Alleged,"
Health Freedom News, Op.Cit., August 1993, p. 9.
•
36. Richard G. Foulkes, B.A., M.D., "The 'Cost' of Fluoridation,"
Townsend Letter for Doctors, Op., Cit., November 1993, p. 1086.
37. Levy, S.M., Muchow, G., "Provider Compliance with Recommended
Dietary Supplement Protocol," Am. Jour. P.H., Vol. 82, No. 2; Table
1, Feb. 1992.
38. Marquis, C., "New Fluoride Supplement Recommendations," B.C.
Med Jour, Vol. 35, No. January 9, 1993.
39. Hill, D.R., Discussion paper presented to public forum sponsored by
The Chemical Institute of Canada, Calgary, Sept. 29, 1992.
31 of 32 1/29/00 4:17,PM
1
Floundanon: Governmentally Approved Poison http:// www. aithritisttust.org/tluozide.htm
40. John R. Lee, M.D., "Fluotion and Osteoporosis: The Facts," •
Health Freedom News, Op.Cit., January 1994, p. 26.
41. John R. Lee, M.D., "Fluoridation and Hip Fracture According to the
National Research Council Report: Health Effects of Ingested
Fluoride," Townsend Letter for Doctors, Op., Cit., May 1994, p.48'7.
42. John R. Lee, M.D., "Does Fluoridation Work ?" Health Freedom
News, Op.Cit., June 1994, p. 13.
43. "Whistle Blower Reinstated," National Council Improved Health
flyer, received 1994, source unknown.
44. "Middletown, Maryland Latest City to Receive Toxic Spill of
Fluoride in Their Drinking Water," Townsend Letter for Doctors, Op. •
Cit., October 1994, p. 1124.
45. Geoffrey E. Smith, LDS, RCS, "Fluoride: Dental Wonder or Medical
Blunder ?" Explore! , Numbers 5 & 6, 1994, p. 60.
46. Gerard P. Judd, Ph.D., "Evidence Against Fluoride Continues to
Mount," Health Freedom News, November/December 1994, p. 29.
47. Comelius Steelink, "Tooth Decay & Fluroide," Townsend Letter for
Doctors, Op. Cit., October 1994, p. 1128. •
Top of Page
•
Content (C) 1996 and prior years, The Arthritis Trust •
•
•
32 of 32 1/29/00 4:17 PM
1