Monday, November 28, 2011

Is Fluoride Unsafe? Only When Swallowed.

What really determines whether fluoride is safe, is the amount that is swallowed,” says Amid I. Ismail, BDS, MPH, MBA, DrPH, and Dean, Temple University, School of Dentistry in Dear Doctor Magazine. (1)
Dr. Ismail says, “Fluoride occurs naturally in soil, fresh and seawater varying dramatically in levels from as low as 0.01 to 8ppm or more....In actuality the “optimal” (most desirable or satisfactory) level is virtually impossible to calculate because of variations in fluoride levels in all sorts of foods and beverages. 
'For example, people living in temperate climates drink less than those in tropical climates. However, it cannot even be assumed that because a person lives in a community with non-fluoridated water, they are receiving low levels of fluoride. Fluoride ingestion can also result from drinking substantial amounts of soft drinks or juices. Most bottled waters contain less than 0.3 ppm; however, some contain close to or more than 1 ppm.”
"Breast milk and cow's milk are very low in fluoride,” says Ismail. Manufacturers voluntarily lowered fluoride levels in infant formula. But when concentrated infant formula is mixed with fluoridated water, infant formula fluoride levels are higher, says Dr. Ismail. Federal agencies, health departments and organized dentistry advise using non-fluoridated water to make infant formula to avoid damaging babies' teeth. References:

“Also, soy-based formulas are consistently higher in fluoride content than milk-based products. Other foods that have high fluoride content are teas, dry infant cereals and processed chicken, fish and seafood products,” says Ismail.

“It should also be emphasized that “topical” fluorides such as toothpaste can also have a systemic effect if inadvertently swallowed by young children,” cautions Dr. Ismail. Fluoride also gets absorbed into the bloodstream even when not swallowed.

"Tooth mottling should be monitored in communities to assess fluoride intake and recommendations made accordingly,” writes Ismail. 

However, few communities follow Dr. Ismail's advice and fluoridate the water without considering residents’ total fluoride intake from other sources. In fact, a Connersville, Indiana, study indicated children already ingested too much fluoride; but dentists lobbied successfully for fluoridation anyway. To our knowledge, no dental fluorosis studies have ever been published on this population.

Dr. Ismail questions whether mild fluorosis is acceptable any more with esthetics becoming more important in this day and age. He says, “decisions concerning this tradeoff could warrant reconsideration. Fluorosis varies in appearance from small white striations to stained pitting and severe brown mottling of enamel,” he writes.

“The main documented risk factors for fluorosis (in no particular order) are fluoride in water, infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water, supplements and dentifrices,” he writes.

Dr. Ismail reports that “Commissioned by the EPA, a 2006 National Research Council (NRC) study has sparked the latest controversy. In addition to unsightly enamel fluorosis at 4 ppm and above, it claims: a possible increased risk of bone fracture in certain conditions; skeletal fluorosis; and potential to cause bone cancer...”

“Fluoride is incorporated into bone...after a point though it can make bone more brittle and at higher levels can cause “skeletal” fluorosis, which has a greater potential for painful joints and even fractures,” reports Ismail.

“The over use of fluoride during the first six to eight years of life represents the important period of tooth development when enamel fluorosis can occur. It is critical for parents to monitor fluoride sources to reduce the occurrence of white spots from fluorosis,” he writes.

The Centers for Disease Control reports that over 41% of adolescents now suffer with dental fluorosis – 3% of it is moderate or severe. At the same time tooth decay rates are increasing in toddlers and untreated tooth decay has become epidemic.

In Kentucky, despite a 1977 fluoridation state-wide mandate, preschoolers cavity rates went from 28% in 1987 to 47% in 2001, according to the July/August 2003 journal, Pediatric Dentistry,

According to an 11/27/2011 news article, “In recent years, Northern Kentucky health officials have encountered more children with cavities in a state known for some of the worst teeth in the nation. Kentucky has the second highest rate of toothlessness in the U.S. The national average is 20.5 percent, while 38 percent of Kentuckians have lost their teeth.”(2) 
The article quotes Linda Poynter, the Northern Kentucky Health Department's oral health program manager. "I've seen too many 5-year-olds with rampant decay who are going to have a body full of abscesses, if (their dental problems) aren't taken care of," Poynter said.
The article continues, “In recent years, pupils in the Northern Kentucky schools that the local health department visits are experiencing more tooth decay. The percentage of students with tooth decay was 45 percent in 2009. That rose to 47 percent in 2010, and so far this school year, 49 percent of the children screened have tooth decay.”

It’s not just Kentucky, tooth decay went up after fluoridation began in San Antonio, Texas, also.

Last week, KENS 5 – TV reported “After 9 years and $3 million of adding fluoride, research shows tooth decay hasn’t dropped among the poorest of Bexar County’s children. It has only increased—up 13% in 2010, the latest date that data was available.
One out of two children in the Head Start program who were checked for cavities had some decay last year.”

Actually tooth decay crises are occurring in all fluoridated cities, states and countries. See:

Fluoride Supplements Just as Useless

Dr. Ismail reported "There is weak and inconsistent evidence that the use of fluoride supplements prevents dental caries [cavities] in primary teeth," according to a systematic review of fluoride supplement research published in the November 2008 Journal of the American Dental Association. Dr. Ismail is also an organizer of the American Dental Association Clinical Recommendation Panels on Fluoride Supplement.

“This review confirmed that, in non-fluoridated communities, the use of fluoride supplements during the first 6 years of life is associated with a significant increase in the risk of developing dental fluorosis, write researchers Ismail & Bandekar and first published in Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, February 1999 and to the ADA's website July 2007 but then taken down.


1) Dear Doctor Magazine, “Fluoride & Fluoridation in Dentistry”

2) “
N.Ky. kids' teeth at risk,”

“Added to our drinking water: A chemical 'more toxic than lead'? “ by Joe Conger
Evidence that fluoridation fails to reduce tooth decay in New York State and fails to level out decay between haves and have nots

Friday, June 10, 2011

Fluoride From a Rock????

America's chief fluoridationist, dentist Howard Pollick, told the San Diego City Council that fluoride comes from a rock. This is true.  But the reason it is taken out of the rock is because it is so toxic that animals fed the stuff died. So, instead, its fed to humans. The following explanation of how and why that happens was put together by Chris Gupta.

Here is a bit of history that illustrates why they feed us hydrofluorosilcic acid in our water. Show this to those who ask why should the authorities slow poison us!

"One of the main reasons for processing the raw phosphate rock for agricultural purposes is because of the fluoride content mainly in the form of fluorosilicates/silicon tetrafluoride.

Back in the early part of the 20th century when industrial farming was first starting-up, they did many experiments on cheap mineral supplements for animals to keep costs down and profits up.

Raw, powdered phosphate rock was the first choice because of the abundance and it was dirt-cheap. Bone meal was the second choice, but it was more expensive because it had needed cooking in ovens (calcining) at high temperatures before the animals could digest it properly.

When the animal nutrition researchers did the first experiments with the powdered phosphate rock, the animals started to get sick. The cow�s milk was drying-up, and there was a high rate of calf stillbirths.

It was really knocking the pigs health for a loop many of them became so sick, they just quit eating, quit breeding, and the researchers said they seemed to give up the will to live.

Well, as for the chickens, they just up and died after eating food supplemented with the raw phosphate rock.

They knew that fluorides were toxic and determined that it was the fluorides, but in later experiments, they found that it wasn't just any type of fluoride, but the fluorosilicates* that were doing most of the damage. They used sodium fluoride (like what they use in toothpaste) and sodium fluorosilicate to compare the poisonous effects on the farm animals, and found that the sodium fluorosilicate was a much more effective poison. Another reason for processing the raw phosphate rock is that the fluoride content is also enough to be toxic to many agricultural crops the raw rock will actually inhibit the growth of crops. Some plants like gladiolas will just wilt will die when fertilized with raw phosphate rock because of the fluoride content.

* Also known as hydrofluorosilcic acid. 

The outcome of those early studies strongly suggested that using raw phosphate rock as a cheap fertilizer or animal mineral supplement is not the way to go if you wanted to make a profit and have healthy plants and animals."

Extracted form the book: "Phosphate Fluorides - Toxic Torts" By Gary O. Pittman (page 26)

For more see: Earth Island Journal - Special Feature: "Fluoride and the Phosphate Connection." It was an expose about how America�s public drinking water is fluoridated with pollution scrubber liquor from phosphoric acid processing. This is must read! (Note: Investigative Journalist, George Glasser, wrote this several years ago when Florida was virtually the only source of fluoridation chemicals. Now, countries with proven lax safety standards such as  Mexico and China are supplying the US  with its phosphate fertilizer waste to be used for fluoridation.)

Thursday, June 02, 2011

Fluoridation Chemicals Endanger Workers

New Book: "Fluoride Phosphates Toxic Torts," by Gary O. Pittman  

   Gary Pittman gave up his life for his job. 

That wasn’t Gary’s plan when he started working at Occidental Chemical Corporation’s phosphate plants.  He just wanted to make a decent living and provide for his family.  Occidental offered the best pay and best benefits for a high school graduate.

Gary was exposed to 100’s of toxic chemicals with only a hard hat and safety glasses for “protection.” So it’s no surprise that he and many of his co-workers developed debilitating chemical-induced diseases. Most workers were uneducated. Some could barely read and write, Gary says.  They were no match for Occidental’s highly-paid corporate lawyers. But Gary refused to back down and pursued a personal injury lawsuit (toxic tort litigation) against Occidental with several co-workers.

Gary paints a bleak picture of what’s inside the plants – the noise, the smell, the darkness, the boot-eating acids. It’s what you would imagine that Hell would look like, Gary says.

Occidental may have protected themselves legally. But ethically, it stinks as badly as the sulfuric acid stench permeating the plants. However, the one deadly chemical all employees were exposed to didn’t have a smell – fluoride – yes, the stuff they put on your teeth and into your drinking water in a failed effort to reduce tooth decay.

   Fluoride, in the form of fluorosilicates or silicon tetrafluoride, is a toxic contaminant of the phosphate rock. These fluorides must be removed to make safe fertilizer and animal feed products.

Gary says, when researchers fed raw powdered fluoride-containing phosphate rock to farm animals, cows’ milk dried up and had high rates of calf stillbirths.   Pigs quit eating and breeding. Chickens died almost instantly.

And to avoid killing animals and plants surrounding the factory, fluorosilicates must be captured or scrubbed out of air emissions. This captured and contaminated waste product is sold unpurified to fluoridating communities.

Gary writes, “When we had to clean the pollution scrubbers, most of us went home with acid burns and coughing up blood.” 

“Once inside those vessels and scrubbers, we had no respirators, and had to breathe that stale, moist acidic air all shift. Sometimes, workers would fall ill with flu-like symptoms, the older workers called it ‘chemical pneumonia,’” writes Gary.

“I remember one time when they assigned me the task of cleaning the filter hood on the pollution scrubber. Powdery fluorosilicate dust was everywhere. As we were cleaning, the dust covered us. It was very hot - 100 to 120 degrees - and we were sweating profusely. When the fluorosilicate dust mixed with the perspiration, it formed acid on the skin and blistered us if we didn't wash it off in time. We were breathing those dusts, too. They didn't give us respirators,” Gary writes.

The pollution scrubbers’ fluorosilicates contain heavy metals such as lead and mercury and radionuclides including radium-226, radon-222 and uranium-238. 

An autopsy of a man who died from several minutes exposure to concentrated fumes at a phosphate fertilizer plant revealed a coating of silica on his lungs. The cause of death, however, was fluorine poisoning, reports Gary.

A dentist speaking at a San Diego City Council meeting, when asked where fluoridation chemicals comes from, answered “from a rock.” He wasn’t lying.  He just didn’t tell the whole truth.

Some fluoridation promoters soften fluorosilicates image by calling them  “co-products” as if the phosphate fertilizer industry made the stuff on purpose. Whatever it’s called, fluorosilicates have never been safety tested in animals or humans.  Yet, it's dumped as is into about 70% of US public drinking water supplies and given a stamp of approval by organized dentistry and its followers.

Gary’s story reveals the horror of working in an industry that provides the chemicals of modern living and how poorly the workers were treated by their employer whose main concern was money. Most of us have no idea how we indirectly put lives in peril. Maybe Gary’s book will get people thinking about it – especially those who endorse, promote or legislate fluorosilicates into our public water supplies. 

Maybe the US phosphate fertilizer industry has improved worker conditions. But now, unbelievably, China, Mexico, Japan and Belgium are selling us their phosphate fertilizer waste fluorosilicates.

China has a history of selling us products with unwanted and/or toxic ingredients. Chinese fluorosilicates have already clogged up water systems in the US.

Organized dentistry, both inside government and out, and the officials they influence have a moral, ethical and maybe legal responsibility to know what toxins are in all fluoridation chemicals, where they come from and whose lives were endangered by handling them. They all need to read this book.

Support Gary's Work:   

Friday, March 25, 2011

Dentists Protect Fluoride Instead of Babies

For Babies, Fluoride is Nothing to Smile About

Almost half of US children have fluoride-discolored teeth (dental fluorosis). So, health officials advise avoiding mixing fluoridated water into infant formula. But New Hampshire dentists, not only fought against publicizing such efforts but, glorified fluoride instead. 
The New Hampshire Dental Society (NHDS)  lobbied against  required formula/fluoride warnings  on water bills (1) then promoted fluoride with a new website and press release conspicuously excluding infant warnings.
Fluoride is added to water supplies ostensibly to reduce tooth decay.  There is no dispute that too much fluoride damages teeth and bones. 
Fluoride is also present in all infant formulas, according to  Dr. Howard Koh,  Assistant Secretary for Health, US Department of Health and Human Services, Koh says, “…tooth enamel formation occurs from birth until about 8 years old. This is also the time when dental fluorosis may occur with excess fluoride consumption...low-fluoride bottled water [should] be used for routinely reconstituting infant formula.”  (2)
Similar warnings have been made by the Centers for Disease Control, American Dental Association, Academy of General Dentistry, Mayo Clinic, Health Canada, Vermont Dep’t of Health, Minnesota Dental Association, Delta Dental, Environmental Working Group and many fluoride researchers. But new parents and pediatricians, who see more babies than dentists, are rarely informed.

According to the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), the NHDS and the NH Oral Health Coalition “claimed that they supported educating parents about infant exposure to fluoride, but believed that the  notice should be given only in the doctor’s office, and not be placed on water bills where they claimed it could ‘scare’ water customers.”

NH Legislators suggested that the bill be re-introduced in 2012, and require warning notices on annual consumer confidence reports.  New Hampshire dentists agree, reports FAN. So why didn’t they incude this information on their “Fluoride Facts” website? Maybe the rest of their fluoride "facts" aren't so factual either.

“Exposure to excessive consumption of fluoride over a lifetime may lead to increased likelihood of bone fractures in adults, and may result in effects on bone leading to pain and tenderness,” according to the Environmental Protection Agency. (3)

Dental fluorosis afflicts more than 41% of adolescents, reports the CDC.  We don't know if these fluoride-overdosed children have weakened bones because no such studies have been done. 

Other health defects linked to fluoride have also not been studied in fluoride-overdosed children such as lower IQ, thyroid dysfunction, irritable bowel syndrome, arthritis. Absence of evidence shouldn’t be misinterpreted as absence of harm.

HHS recently lowered recommended water fluoride levels to 0.7 ppm because they acknowledge US children are fluoride overdosed. However, it makes more sense to stop fluoridation entirely to protect our children from further fluoride abuse to satisfy the politics of organized dentistry.

Fluoride never was FDA safety-tested for human ingestion. FDA regulates fluoridated toothpaste as a drug for topical application which requires poison warning labeling. The EPA regulates fluoride as a water contaminant and air pollutant. The CDC does not do original fluoride research. The CDC's Oral Health Division is hired to promote fluoridation.  The American Dental Association represents the best interests of fluoride manufacturers.

According to a study in The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology ”Fluorosis has some hormonal, gastrointestinal, hematological, skeletal, renal, respiratory, cardiovascular, immunological, neurological and development side effects.”

Public water supplies should not be used to dispense fluoride drugs to the entire population.  People need to take back their water supply from Organized Dentistry and demand their legislators side with  science which shows ingesting fluoride is ineffective at reducing tooth decay and harmful to health.

Dentists prefer to treat the water of low-income people rather than their teeth.  80% of dentists refuse Medicaid patients.  100 million Americans don’t have dental insurance.  US children have died from the consequences of untreated tooth decay and the inability to find a dentist willing to treat them.  Our emergency rooms are flood with people in dental pain costing the tax payers thousands of dollars which an $80 filling could have prevented.

Dentists need to be mandated to treat more low income people – either for free, on a sliding scale or accept government sponsored insurance.  If not, they need to step aside and allow Dental Therapists to do the job. We know dentist love mandates because they are behind virtually every fluoridation mandate in this country.


1)  Dental leaders in Dover tout economical benefits of fluoride
Government Perspectives on Healthcare
    HHS:  Proposed Guidelines on Fluoride in Drinking Water
    A Commentary By Howard K. Koh, MD, MPH

Sunday, January 09, 2011

Austin Texas Dentist Condemns Fluoridation

This is an excerpt from an ABC Radio News story:

Dr. Griffin Cole, a dentist in Austin, Texas, said he has seen several cases of mild to severe fluorosis in his practice.

While he applauded the feds' proposal [to lower water fluoride levels], he'd like to see the recommendations go even lower.

"I still don't think it's enough, honestly," he said. "I don't think there should be fluoride in the water at all.

"I think it's a nice move in the right direction," he said.

Cole said he began his dentistry career in the early 1990s, working for a dentist who was openminded about fluoride use and believed that his patients were getting too much.

Cole said he had never once prescribed fluoride supplements to his patients.

He cited studies from the past decade that have linked excess fluoride to not only fluorosis but to higher instances of bone cancer in the test subjects. He also said osteoporosis was an additional concern, since ingested fluoride is known to sit in a person's bones.

"Ingesting fluoride in any form does nothing for your teeth," he said. In cases of "rampant" tooth decay, applying a topical fluoride can improve dental health, but only minimally.

Fluoride, Cole said, molds to the tooth's enamel. So while it will aid in preventing decay, it can also make teeth brittle.

"When you see a case of somebody coming in with bad fluorosis, to restore those teeth you either have to crown them completely or at least do a veneer," he said. "So it's a very costly thing to fix."

Depending on the dentist and the region of the country, restoration could cost between $900 and $1,600 a tooth.