Debris in Fluoride Chemicals

The CDC  finally informs us that some fluoridation chemicals were contaminated with black particles, a bird’s nest, plastic bags,  waxy material, iodine and 1,2-dichlorobenzene.  That’s in addition to the lead, arsenic and other toxins the CDC welcomes in the fluoridation chemicals added to public water supplies even though the safe level of lead and arsenic is zero.

The CDC updated its “waterfluoridation additives” page, on March 31, 2016, and directs our attention to “Trace contaminants in water treatment chemicals: sources and fate” by MacPhee, et al. published in the December 2004 peer-reviewed Journal of the American Water Works Association (AWWA).

The authors tell us they used the same information in an earlier published article but in more detail ( MacPhee et al in 2002) which was funded by the AWWA Research Foundation.

After surveying 266 water treatment plants in 38 states, the MacPhee 2002 research regarding hydrofluorosilicic acid and sodium fluorosilicate, commonly used fluoridation chemicals, revealed the following:

-- Frequent low levels of black particles in hydrofluorosilicic acid deliveries attributed to breakdown of tank liner in delivery vehicle.  One respondent characterized frequency of occurrence as “always”.

-- Bird’s nest and dead bird in solid sodium fluorosilicate jammed and broke feed equipment. Fluoride feed was disrupted for several days during repairs. No microbial contamination of finished water was detected, though utility was concerned since this organic material was fed to the system after chlorine addition.

-- One incident where plastic bags clogged feed lines during delivery of sodium fluorosilicate. Bagged material was used to supplement delivery because vendor did not have enough bulk material on hand.

-- One incident of hydrofluorosilicic acid delivery with layer of waxy material of indeterminate composition.

-- One facility traced the occurrence of 1,2-dichlorobenzene in the finished water to contaminated hydrofluorosilicic acid.

-- Iodine contamination was identified in some fluoridation chemicals

The researchers write “Four commercially available hydrofluorosilicic acid products were analyzed during this study. One product contained 3.3 percent hydrofluoric acid, well in excess of the AWWA Standard of one percent. Therefore, this product would not be suitable for drinking water use....Arsenic was the only trace metal found above detection limit in all three products…Titanium, vanadium zinc, and cadmium were found in one product…”

The researchers report that, because it’s so corrosive, hydrofluorosilicic acid is routinely delivered in specially lined tanker trucks.

We are left to wonder why more recent information isn't made public or if  any federal agency is bothering to look.  And what would be the results if every water treatment plant in the country were surveyed. According to the CDC's recently released 2014 fluoridation statistics, there are 5,956 Community Water Systems "adjusting" fluoride - which means adding contaminated and artificial fluoride chemicals into your bodies.  This is down from 5,999 from its 2012 statistics' report.

The CDC says, the EPA gave authority to a private company, NSF International, to determine fluoridation chemical safety. So, NSF doesn't have to answer our questions or release any documents under the freedom of information laws.

Although the safe levels of lead and arsenic are zero, the CDC and EPA allows the use of lead- and arsenic-laced fluoridation chemicals to be added into public water supplies.  Testing equipment used by water employees on the finished product often can’t detect these small lead and arsenic contaminants that probably meet standards, not for ingestion, but for acceptable levels in water. Acceptable to whom, we are left to wonder.

Remember there is no safe level of lead for ingestion.  Children shouldn’t be fed any lead because it can especially damage the brain and accumulates in the body. See: http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/

NSF tested just 216 hydrofluorosilicic acid samples, from 2007 to 2011, to reveal 50% were contaminated with arsenic. NSF also lists contamination by lead, barium, chromium , copper, lead, radionuclides, radionuclides beta, and thallium. See:  http://www.nsf.org/newsroom_pdf/NSF_Fact_Sheet_on_Fluoridation.pdf

Results from 2000-2006 using  245 samples showed similar results but also include mercury and cadmium and selenium

Children are forced to imbibe this chemical stew which masquerades as fluoride, to satisfy the political ambition and financial interests of  organized dentistry and fluoride-selling corporations and the government officials they influence (See:  Fluoridation: Follow the Money) ,

Silence means acceptance.  Whether you approve of fluoride ingestion or not, tell your local, state and federal legislators to cease fluoridation to stop this chemical attack on our children.  Dosing babies with fluoride should be a parent's job - not your lobbied legislator's job. 

Fluoride is neither a nutrient nor essential for healthy teeth - meaning consuming a fluoride-free diet does not cause tooth decay.  Rotten diets make rotten teeth and no amount of fluoride will change that.

Further, studies show that fluoridation chemicals themselves can leach lead from water pipes. Other studies show that fluoridation chemicals can  cause children to absorb more lead when lead is anywhere in their environment (air pollution, lead paint, toys, etc.), according to a report from the Fluoride Action Network

                                                  END FLUORIDATION

Arkansas Fluoridation Study Fraudulent?

In 2011,  Arkansas enacted a state-wide law requiring fluoridation, which some say was enacted to over-ride those Arkansas cities which voted repeatedly against fluoridation. The new law was sold, in part, with an Arkansas Morrilton/Perry County study which was said to prove  that children in fluoridated Morrilton  have less cavities than children in non-fluoridated Perry County.  It's repeated by many pro-fluoridation groups as fact. The problem is the study doesn't seem to exist. 

Repeated  requests  to the Arkansas Department of health, Dr. Lynn Mouden, who spearheaded the ill-advised fluoridation mandate law,  the Pew Foundation which financed the effort, and others haven't unearthed the alleged study.

However, when the Pew Foundation apparently asked for the evidence, they and I were sent what appears below from the Arkansas Department of Health.  The "study" begins on page 12.

It's actually a compilation of incomplete and possibly selective data that has so many easily identifiable flaws to render it junk-science.

 .

For example:

1) There is no indication of age just of school grade.  Children generally lose teeth in kindergarten. Yet, some kindergartners are missing permanent teeth due to decay which begs the question “how old were the examinees?”

2)  Dr. Mouden reported  that this data is especially “compelling because the screenings involved virtually every kindergarten child in the area.” However, it’s odd that so many kindergarten classes had a very small number of children, e.g. 6 – 12 children in Ann Watson Elementary School’s Kindergarten classes; 4 – 9 children in Casa Elementary  Kindergarten classes. There is no explanation for this.  Were they small classes, children unavailable for examination, or was there a high refusal rate?  This information is usually provided in tooth decay studies.

3) The data isn’t presented by socio-economic-status (SES).  Poverty is strongly  linked to more tooth decay whether water is fluoridated or not.  Tooth decay studies usually put students in at least two SES categories (those who do and don’t get free lunch)  and studies usually also report by race since minorities also have the most tooth decay, according to government reports.   Morrilton, which Dr. Mouden says has less tooth decay because it is fluoridated, also is a higher income area than the schools chosen in Perryville which doesn’t make this a legitimate comparison study at all.

4) I’ve never heard of schools asking to be part of a study.  Dr. Mouden wrote, “In October of 2002, all kindergarten students from the City of Morrilton also received a dental screening at the request of the school.” 

5)  There are several pages detailing Perryville; but only one chart on Morrilton which  puts children in 7 undefined groups with no identifying details. 

6)  Despite being fluoridated, Morrilton’s children’s primary teeth don’t look so good either:

71% of group 3 had caries

64% of group 2 had caries

59% of group 7 had caries

56% of group 2 had caries

Several non-fluoridated Perryville Kindergarten classes have lower rates than the above.

I am left to assume this massaged data was used solely to pass the Arkansas state-wide fluoridation mandate. It's clear, scientific integrity was not an objective.

Neither Dr. Mouden nor Rhonda Sledge who conducted the "study" have replied to my requests for an explanation.

If the below doesn't work for you, try this link https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-3-v9GxfN2JU3VwVnpWSVZMaFE/view?ts=56c1bcee