Go Back   Natural Medicine Talk > Health > Heart Health > Hypertension

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-03-2013, 07:25 AM
truestorytotell's Avatar
truestorytotell truestorytotell is offline
Enlightener
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 719
truestorytotell is on a distinguished road
Default Fluoride Lowers IQ and...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/...-problems.html



Its All there...
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-03-2013, 03:18 PM
pinballdoctor's Avatar
pinballdoctor pinballdoctor is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Saskatchewan Canada
Posts: 1,919
pinballdoctor will become famous soon enoughpinballdoctor will become famous soon enough
Default

Its been known for about 80 years that fluoride is a toxic poison, and I don't mean natural fluoride which is an essential nutrient... I mean the toxic poison that is scraped from furnace stacks and added to city water systems.

Its nice that this lady pediatrician warns of the dangers of fluoride, however I would be willing to bet the farm she believes strongly in vaccinations.. oh well... one poison at a time..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:33 AM
happy2bhere's Avatar
happy2bhere happy2bhere is offline
Observing cool stuff
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: INternets
Posts: 775
happy2bhere will become famous soon enoughhappy2bhere will become famous soon enough
Default

Some doctors just might be a bit reluctant to go against Big Pharma. I wonder, do many doctors invest in medicines? Research? Is it a conflict of interest? Or is that even a "thing" in this day and age anymore.

Personally, I would like to know if my md had some investment in Big Pharma. From what I have "heard" it is usually some type of endorsement - like when they all claimed Camels were the cigarettes they chose. wink wink
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-04-2013, 03:54 PM
Ajax's Avatar
Ajax Ajax is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Chicago Area
Posts: 395
Ajax has a spectacular aura aboutAjax has a spectacular aura aboutAjax has a spectacular aura about
Default

A dentist who doesn't talk about flouride like it's the greatest thing ever gets in trouble with the ADA. The ADA website claims flouride is "proven" safe and effective even though they don't have any data to back up that claim and they have never dared to ask the FDA for approval of flouride products and/or fluoridated water which would result in the FDA actually testing the stuff. It seems they don't want fluoridated water tested and yet they want all the dentists to claim it is proven safe.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-04-2013, 08:01 PM
Mad Scientest's Avatar
Mad Scientest Mad Scientest is offline
Lecturer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 2,077
Mad Scientest has a spectacular aura aboutMad Scientest has a spectacular aura aboutMad Scientest has a spectacular aura about
Default

I suspect that many doctors actually believe that they are helping their patients by recommending fluoride. however

Quote:
Like most dentists, she was taught in dental school that fluoride saves teeth, and it never occurred to her to question that


A few years back my dentist had a sign on the wall proclaiming the joys of have your teeth professionally "whitened" by a dentist. It listed ten reasons your teeth might not be as white as they could be and one of them was excess fluoride.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-05-2013, 10:03 AM
happy2bhere's Avatar
happy2bhere happy2bhere is offline
Observing cool stuff
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: INternets
Posts: 775
happy2bhere will become famous soon enoughhappy2bhere will become famous soon enough
Default

I truly regret agreeing to those fluoride treatments done on my daughter during her childhood. Had half her thyroid removed at 19.

If I had done some simple reading at the library - instead of blindly believing.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-07-2013, 09:53 AM
happy2bhere's Avatar
happy2bhere happy2bhere is offline
Observing cool stuff
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: INternets
Posts: 775
happy2bhere will become famous soon enoughhappy2bhere will become famous soon enough
Default

http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/MWF/index.asp


Quote:
Water System ID Number: IN 5245021 Total population served by water system: 23696
Primary county and population served:Lake23696

Water source:
Surface Water system type: Community

Does this water system supply fluoridated water?

**See Note Below**
Yes.

This water system purchases its water from a water system that adjusts the fluoride concentration upward to the optimum level for the prevention of dental caries (cavities).


Optimal fluoride concentration:
1.00 mg/L

Fluoride compound used:
Fluorosilicic Acid
This water system is under the jurisdiction of:
State of Indiana
Prevention of dental caries? Is there a way I can ask them to prove this?

We get our water from this place: (a table of the Safety): http://www.hammondwaterworks.com/doc...REPORT2011.pdf

(Source of Contaminants: (flouride) Erosion of natural deposits; Water additive which promotes strong teeth; Discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories. )

Wonder if the "ACID" comes from here:
http://www.nsf.org/certified/PwsChem...S&PlantRegion=

This is interesting:
http://www.just-think-it.com/f-facts.htm

http://www.zerowasteamerica.org/fluoridechronology.htm --

Quote:
This paper is a chronicle and overview spanning the history of modern industry. It shows the rise of fluoride pollution and how economic motives have overridden concerns for human health. We take you back to the early metal refinery pollution in Europe and show the record of lawsuits for fluoride damage. This reveals the basis for American industry's fear of being shut down by lawsuits. We also document the steps taken by industry to divert public attention away from fluoride air pollution. This chronicle shows that the origin of water fluoridation is in these fluoride fears of industry - not in concern for children's teeth.
During the 1940s, the development of the atom bomb required handling huge amounts of fluoride in the production of nuclear weapons. Documented here is a major safety study by the Atomic Energy Commission. As a result of this extensive study, the federal government became involved in the suppression of information about fluoride poisoning. Formerly restricted government documents now made available under the Freedom of Information Act have filled in some blank spaces in this chronology.
Thus, both big government and big industry, for different reasons, became involved in the cover-up. The succeeding collaboration of industry and government is documented in detail.
http://www.ada.org/sections/newsAndE...tion_facts.pdf
Quote:
Question 26.
Why is there a warning label on a tube of fluoride toothpaste?
Answer.
The American Dental Association originally required
manufacturers to place a label on fluoride toothpaste
in 1991 to ensure proper use and therefore reduce the
risk of dental fluorosis.
Basically, they are claiming the need for a warning on toothpaste tubes? To get children to USE the item and prevent cavities. For if they swallow it, they will get cavities.

http://www.nofluoride.com/PDF/State%...0Directors.pdf
(How to best MARKET a known poison onto the public. Fourth Annual Conference of State Dental Directors--1951)

Page 22, Paragraph 7: "...Now let's get into a couple of don'ts. We have had some experience on some things to avoid. Don't use the word "artificial," and don't use sodium fluoride. You don't know what a community is going to end up using as its fluoriding agent. But don't let them raise the question of rat poison if you can help it. And certainly don't use the word "experimental."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-07-2013, 11:24 AM
Living Food Living Food is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 437
Living Food will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Prevention of dental caries? Is there a way I can ask them to prove this?
They can't prove it because fluoride is a con and actually increases dental carries. But talking to those people won't get you anywhere, you need to start educating the people in your area and bring it up with the city/town council. More and more areas are starting to ban fluoride because the truth is coming out, but we still have many more areas to go.

Now, the fluoride proponents will probably try to shut you down by quoting from numerous studies like the Grand Rapids study or others since then, but these studies are all flawed and you can prove it. The original fluoridation studies used multiple methods to alter the data, like changing the definition of cavities after fluoridation started to make it look like there was less tooth decay going on. Also, fluoride inhibits the eruption of the teeth - if you don't have as many teeth, you won't have as many cavities. PROOF:

“Fluoridation of drinking water in the Boston areas was 1.0 ppm, a level
considered 'optimal' in the USA. Girls from the fluoridated Boston area were shown in this study to have a significantly (p<0.05) delayed dental age when compared to their chronological age” [Campagna L, et al. (1995). Fluoridated drinking water and maturation of permanent teeth at age 12. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry 19(3):225-8.]

“The emergence of the teeth…was later in the children living in an endemic fluoride area” [Virtanen JI, et al. (1994). Timing of eruption of permanent teeth: standard Finnish patient documents. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 22(5 Pt 1):286-8.]

“The small benefit that remains today from water fluoridation can…be explained by fluoride ingestion retarding tooth eruption, resulting in a delay in dental caries.” [Limeback, H. (2002). Systemic Fluoride: Delayed Tooth Eruption and DMFT vs Age Profiles. abstract presented at IADR/AADR/CADR 80th General Session. San Diego, California. March 6-9.]

Until 2009, Queensland's water was never fluoridated, but the vast majority of the water in the rest of Australia was. Take a look at the difference in tooth eruption rates:



Now, if you take all of the studies that purport to show that fluoride reduces tooth decay, you'll notice that none of them actually take into consideration the effect fluoride has on the rate of tooth development. The left-hand graph shows the difference in tooth decay of children with life-long fluoride exposure and those who never drank fluoridated water. The children who drank fluoridated water had less tooth decay. BUT, it's now been proven that fluoride can delay the rate of tooth eruption by about .8 to up to 2 years - if you adjust for a delayed eruption of the teeth by one year, there's no difference between the fluoridated or unfluoridated areas! See the tricks they play?



Another common ploy is this kind of study: "50 years ago there was X amount of tooth decay. We started fluoridating water, and now there's much less tooth decay. Therefor, water fluoridation decreases tooth decay." See the CDC's graph below:



There's just one problem - it's just a correlation, not proof of anything. I could make up a completely factual graph that shows that 50 years ago, people drove less cars and there was a lot more tooth decay. But no many more people are driving cars and there's a lot less tooth decay. Therefor, driving a car reduces tooth decay. It's absurd, but it's that's the exact same thing the CDC, ADA, etc are doing. As it turns out, tooth decay rates have been plummeting across the globe even in areas that were never fluoridated, because of improved hygiene and other reasons. See the graphs below:





The WHO's own data shows that whether a country fluoridates it's water or not, they all have seen extreme and roughly equal decreases in tooth decay. Something isn't right here; see below:



The above graph shows the changes in tooth decay in various EU countries since the 80’s to almost present day.

Cyprus: DOES NOT fluoridate water, still significant improvement in decay rates.
Denmark: DOES NOT fluoridate water, LARGEST improvement out of them all.
Germany: DOES NOT fluoridate water.
UK: Roughly 10% fluoridated.
Austria: DOES NOT fluoridate water.
Italy: DOES NOT fluoridate water.
France: DOES NOT fluoridate water.
Spain: About 10% fluoridated.
Ireland: 71% fluoridated.

Do you notice how Ireland, the only country to fluoridate a large percentage of it’s water, not only had the lowest decrease in dental decay rates but also has the highest rate of dental decay of all the countries on the graph? The UNFLUORIDATED countries have
lower rates of dental decay then the fluoridated ones. See, their deception only works if people blindly listen to the authorities, which most do. But if you start to look into the facts for yourself, it's game over.

So at this point they'll scramble to save face and say, "well, those reductions are because of the widespread use of fluoride toothpaste and fluoride dental treatments." If you don't know your stuff they might be able to trick you, but if you're well educated you can call them out. The former Principle Dental officer for Auckland, New Zealand, (John Colquhoun), started to realize that there really wasn't a difference in fluoridated vs unfluoridated areas. Everyone said that it was because of the widespread use of fluoridated toothpaste, rinses, varnishes, etc, and he bought that for a little while. But then he decided to do his own research and discovered that the rates of tooth decay actually started decreasing before not only water fluoridation, but also before fluoridated toothpaste and mouthwashes. Strike 3!


John Colquhoun's data

Dr. Hardy Limeback, also with a very impressive pedigree, discovered the same thing. His graph shows many of the possible causes for this decline in dental caries:



Note: refrigerators means more access to fresh produce and other fresh food, penicillin decreases tooth decay, the others are self-explanatory.

There's so much more to talk about on this topic, I haven't even gotten to arthritis, cancer, bone fractures, dental and skeletal fluorosis, hypothyroidism, lead poisoning, endocrine and reproductive issues, brain damage, or any of the other dozens of adverse effects of fluoride. I'll get back to you later on all that. Just quickly I'll quote some studies showing that fluoridation actually increases tooth decay (because it increases the brittleness and porosity of the enamel):

“A significant (p < 0.02) positive association was found between the caries experience (DMFS) and the enamel fluoride level of children from the high fluoride area (3.70).” [Grobler SR, van Wyk CW, Kotze D. (1986). Relationship between enamel fluoride levels, degree of fluorosis and caries experience in communities with a nearly optimal and a high fluoride level in the drinking water. Caries Research20:284-8.] - ie, the higher the level of fluoride in the enamel, the higher the rate of tooth decay! I like this one because the commonly believed lie is that fluoride gets incorporated into tooth enamel and so protects it from acid. This study blows that assumption away.

“In this study, DT (Decayed Permanent Teeth) increased with an increase in the fluoride content.” [Budipramana ES, et al. (2002). Dental fluorosis and caries prevalence in the fluorosis endemic area of Asembagus, Indonesia. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry 12:415-22]

“Subjects in the high-F and urban Arusha municipality were at a significantly higher risk of dental caries than children in the low-F areas.” Awadia AK, et al. (2002). [Caries experience and caries predictors – a study of Tanzanian children consuming drinking water with different fluoride concentrations. Clinical Oral Investigations 6 :98-103.]

And I've got dozens more where those came from. Later I'll also debunk the lie that fluoride works topically, which even the ADA and CDC have admitted but may dentists still believe. And I'll bring up the pits-and-fissures point.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-07-2013, 11:26 AM
Living Food Living Food is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 437
Living Food will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
http://www.nofluoride.com/PDF/State%...0Directors.pdf
(How to best MARKET a known poison onto the public. Fourth Annual Conference of State Dental Directors--1951)

Page 22, Paragraph 7: "...Now let's get into a couple of don'ts. We have had some experience on some things to avoid. Don't use the word "artificial," and don't use sodium fluoride. You don't know what a community is going to end up using as its fluoriding agent. But don't let them raise the question of rat poison if you can help it. And certainly don't use the word "experimental."
I like that link. I've read the whole report, and it's amusing how many times they mention "selling" fluoride to the public. The whole thing was a PR push, complete with rigged studies and the whole 9 yards.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-07-2013, 11:34 AM
Living Food Living Food is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 437
Living Food will become famous soon enough
Default

If you want to do your own research here are some of my favorite sites:

www.fluoridealert.org
www.slweb.org
www.fluoridation.com
www.keepers-of-the-well.org/
www.nofluoride.com

Undoubtedly plenty more not coming to mind at the moment. I'll update this after I go back into my fluoridation file.


Amusingly, the ADA bought the domain names fluoridealert.com and fluoridealert.net and filled them with pro-fluoridation garbage, apparently to waylay people trying to go to the actual website. Methinks they're afraid.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-07-2013, 11:39 AM
happy2bhere's Avatar
happy2bhere happy2bhere is offline
Observing cool stuff
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: INternets
Posts: 775
happy2bhere will become famous soon enoughhappy2bhere will become famous soon enough
Default

Our town gets water from another city that gets it from Chicago (Lake Michigan). I would like to know where Chicago Water buys the "treatment."

I suppose I can just give Chicago a call. Read Chicago's treated water has the HIGHEST amount of fluoride. *Good thing I triple filter
More Marketing:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1...pply-dentistry
Quote:
During the course of the debate, one council member suggested that because many doctors now say an aspirin a day is good for some people, they could also put aspirin in the water supply. Another council member said that because doctors also say there are benefits to drinking small amounts of alcohol, perhaps Scotch could be added, as well.


"The whole thing reminds me of when I was a boy on my dad's farm," Crystal River Mayor Curtis Rich said in an interview Tuesday. "Everyone said DDT was wonderful. It would increase your yields. You could even eat it in small amounts. It turns out that DDT wasn't wonderful."
John McManus, president of the John Birch Society, calls fluoridation "compulsory medication."


"If somebody believes fluoride is beneficial in their water supply, they can put it in their own supply," McManus said. "Why do we have to wash our cars with it? Why do we have to wash our cat with it? There is almost a Hitlerian attitude about it: Government knows best and you will do what you are told."
Most scientists agree, however, that when the first municipal fluoridation treatment plant opened in Grand Rapids, Mich., on Jan. 25, 1945, it started what amounts to a health revolution.


Fluoride, which actually rebuilds teeth and strengthens them, is credited with dramatically reducing the number of cavities people get. Research shows that fluoride reduces cavities by 20 to 40 percent in children and 15 to 35 percent in adults.
Oooh, I think I found something to help me with Chicago's poisoned water:

https://s4-us4.ixquick-proxy.com/do/...35c66f42e1ce6d

Water Fluoridation: Chicago’s Government Employees Poison People

There is a concern that has come to my attention that is so alarming that I find it difficult to express the urgency that is needed to not only bring it to your attention but also galvanize you to act immediately so as to protect the people that you are entitled to serve. This significant concern, which is causing my blood to boil while writing this, is the City of Chicago’s act of fluoridating the water supply. Now before you roll your eyes and say, “fluoride is to prevent cavities and is safe” and move this note into the stack of papers destined for the trash, let me ask you two questions:
1. Do you know the city’s official reason, as stated on it’s own Department of Water Management’s website, as to why the water is fluoridated?
2. Do you know what the Material Safety Data Sheet, which accompanies the fluoride that is used in Chicago’s water, says about the fluoride used in Chicago’s water supply?
Let me provide you the correct answers:
Answer to number 1: “Fluoride: to help fight cavities in children’s teeth.” – http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en...treatment.html
Answer to number 2: “Prolonged exposure [to the fluoride the Chicago's government uses] could result in bone changes, corrosive effect of mucous membranes including ulceration of nose, throat and bronchial tubes, cough, shock, pulmonary edema, Fluorosis, coma, and death.” – Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) from Lucier Chemical Industries, Ltd. LCI, Ltd Jacksonville Beach FL which accompanies the fluoride that Chicago uses
The specific type of fluoride that the city uses is hydrofluosilicic acid (also known as fluorosilicic acid). The MSDS warns that exposure can occur via the eyes, skin contact, ingestion, and inhalation. The MSDS also recommends using “tight-fitting chemical splash goggles and a full-face shield” as well as “acid-proof clothing, gloves and shoes” in the handling of hydrofluosilicic acid.
Now knowing the facts about hydrofluosilicic acid’s poisonous nature, a person with a properly functioning brain has to ask, “all of these risks to prevent cavities in children?” Is it worth it? It’s not worth the risk to me or to my children. But you might counter these facts with the statement, “the amount of fluoride used in the water is a very small amount and therefore is harmless.” Really, if fluoride is so harmless why is there a warning printed on every fluoridated toothpaste container that states “Keep out of the reach of children under 6 years of age. If you accidentally swallow more than used for bushing, seek professional assistance or contact a Poison Control Center immediately. As with other toothpaste, if irritation occurs discontinue use.” And please tell me how fluoridated water prevents cavities in children in the first place? Also, how is it possible to regulate the “correct” amount of fluoride that a person, regardless of age, intakes everyday? I’ll answer this one: it is not possible to regulate intake, or more correctly stated, regulate contact with hydrofluosilicic acid. People wash themselves with fluoridated water, drink fluoridated water, cook with fluoridated water, wash clothes with it, brush teeth with it. These points of contact increase exposure to this toxic substance and since fluoride is cumulative, this poison builds in one’s body overtime and thus leads to chronic exposure, and we know from the MSDS what chronic exposure can lead to.


Even though a small amount of hydrofluosilicic acid is put into the water, it is still poison. If John Holdren, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, said that gasoline prevents cavities, would you allow John to put gasoline into a glass of water that you’re drinking? Even a tiny amount? But it’s only a tiny amount. It couldn’t possibly hurt you. Would you drink from this glass?


Futhermore, I am not a child, neither are you, so what’s the benefit of fluoridated water to us? What are it’s influences on our health? What if one has perfect teeth. But don’t just listen to my words about hydrofluosilicic acid. Read the words from the following scientists:


“Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century” – Robert Carlton, Ph. D., former U. S. EPA scientist on ” Marketplace” Canadian Broadcast Company, Nov. 24, 1992
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-07-2013, 12:08 PM
Living Food Living Food is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 437
Living Food will become famous soon enough
Default

Undoubtedly from fertilizer or maybe aluminum plants somewhere; some countries are getting theirs from Chinese fertilizer factories but most of ours comes domestically. Count your blessings

Still, wherever it comes from, it's bound to be contaminated with heavy metals and maybe even radioactive materials:

"Fluorosilicic acid (30-35%) can readily be recovered in the hydrogen fluoride process from the silicon tetrafluoride-containing plant vent gases, as well as from wet-process phosphoric acid plants. In the manufacture of phosphate fertilizer in Central Florida, fluorides and radionuclides (radium and uranium) are released as toxic pollutants. During the acidulation process, radon gas can be released and carried into the fluorosilicic acid, while polonium can be captured during the scrubbing process and combined with fluoride." [Sodium Hexafluorosilicate [CASRN 16893-85-9] and Fluorosilicic Acid [CASRN 16961-83-4] Review of Toxicological Literature]



These chemicals are so toxic it's illegal to dump them in the ocean, so they put them in our drinking water instead! Apparently nobody realizes that our drinking water eventually ends up in the ocean.






Drink up!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-07-2013, 12:15 PM
Ajax's Avatar
Ajax Ajax is offline
Guide
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Chicago Area
Posts: 395
Ajax has a spectacular aura aboutAjax has a spectacular aura aboutAjax has a spectacular aura about
Default

I get Chicago water too. I'll have to track down actual documentation, but I believe they get their water from China. You see, it's against the law in China to dump the fluoridated waste liquid from the aluminum plants so their only choice is to ship it out of their country to here in the Chicago area where we take the stuff -- which is too dangerous to bury in barrels in China -- and have our people drink it.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-07-2013, 01:02 PM
happy2bhere's Avatar
happy2bhere happy2bhere is offline
Observing cool stuff
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: INternets
Posts: 775
happy2bhere will become famous soon enoughhappy2bhere will become famous soon enough
Default

Just to DELIVER the "POISON" :

http://dealmortgage.net/fluoride-cla...e-contract.pdf

That company, Lucier Chemical Industries, Ltd. DBA/ LCI, Ltd is buying the stuff from China? Before selling to Chicago?



http://www.mosaicco.com/images/Hydro...Acid_05_11.pdf

Ingestion (Swallowing)
Corrosive. Harmful or fatal if swallowed. May cause severe irritation and burns of the mouth, throat and digestive tract.

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...7556251&page=1


Containers

Bags 5M2 Multi-wall water resistant paper bags,



50 lbs net weight (Domestic)
Super Sacks
Bulk Hopper Trucks
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-07-2013, 01:41 PM
happy2bhere's Avatar
happy2bhere happy2bhere is offline
Observing cool stuff
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: INternets
Posts: 775
happy2bhere will become famous soon enoughhappy2bhere will become famous soon enough
Default

http://blog.fluoridefreeaustin.com/2...tries-llc.aspx

Quote:
Lucier Chemical Industries, Ltd., the Jacksonville Beach, Florida-based company from which Austin purchases its fluorosilicic acid for water fluoridation. Lucier is a re-seller. It produces nothing; it refines nothing. It is strictly a distributor of industrial—not pharmaceutical—grade fluoride byproducts it purchases from such Florida phosphate fertilizer-producers as Cargill and Mosaic.
Cargill. UGH

The Product Data Sheet provides additional information. It lets us know that fluorosilicic acid has no uses outside of water fluoridation, and describes the additive as a “colorless to straw yellow, transparent, fuming, corrosive liquid with a pungent odor and irritating action on the skin.” It also tells us that their product typically contains .02% lead and other toxic contaminants (“heavy metals, as lead” is their way of putting it). So there you have it. We’re paying over half a million dollars a year for fluoride, but we get the lead for free. http://www.cityofaustin.org/edims/do....cfm?id=114639


In fact, in 2006 the American Dental Association issued a “guideline” recommending that infant formula for babies up to 12 months be mixed with non-fluoridated water. That’s right, the same group that supports community water fluoridation as a wonderful public health measure declares it unsafe for infants. Instead, they helpfully recommend breast milk—as if everyone had the luxury of being able to breast feed. Alternatively, they advise parents to buy filtered water at the grocery store “for less than $1 per gallon.”
Reply With Quote
Reply
Please reply to this thread with any new information or opinions.

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Himalayan salt found high in fluoride mommysunshine Nutrition 27 02-04-2014 06:14 PM
CDC and ADA Advise to Avoid Using Fluoride jfh Dentistry 7 10-31-2012 10:32 AM
Dispensing With Fluoride kind2creatures Dentistry 2 08-09-2012 05:58 AM
How to get fluoride out of the water mommysunshine General Discussions 8 10-09-2011 12:58 PM
Fluoride Found Dangerous to Thyroid Arrowwind09 Nutrition 9 09-07-2011 07:10 AM