HomeMy WebLinkAboutFluoridation, Public Comment from Sean Fife 6-5-14From:Sean - Fluoride Free Lethbridge
To:Stacy Ulmen; Aimee Brunckhorst; Chris Kukulski; Chuck Winn; Agenda; Jeff Krauss; Carson Taylor; Chris Mehl;Cyndy Andrus; I-Ho Pomeroy
Cc:citydesk@dailychronicle.com; jon@krtv.com; jsherer@kbzk.com; Z7tips@kbzk.com;
abcfoxmt@cowlesmontana.com; tom.ciprari@cowlesmontana.com; maureen.lang@cowlesmontana.com
Subject:FW: Public Health or Mass Medication?
Date:Wednesday, June 04, 2014 9:07:26 PM
Attachments:FFL Rebuttal of AHS Memo.pdf
Good day Mayor Krauss, Commissioners and officials of Bozeman.
The following letter was sent to the city government of Missoula in light of therecent KAJ18 News story: “Should we fluoridate our water?”
From: Sean - Fluoride Free Lethbridge [mailto:sean@fluoridefreelethbridge.com] Sent: June-03-14 10:35 PMTo: bvonlossberg@ci.missoula.mt.us; jwiener@ci.missoula.mt.us; ahertz@ci.missoula.mt.us;jhess@ci.missoula.mt.us; ataft@ci.missoula.mt.us; ebentley@ci.missoula.mt.us;jwilkins@ci.missoula.mt.us; ccopple@ci.missoula.mt.us; ahedahl@ci.missoula.mt.us;moherron@ci.missoula.mt.us; echilders@ci.missoula.mt.us; mmarler@ci.missoula.mt.usCc: news@kpax.com; bob@kpax.com; kajnews@kpax.com; online@kpax.comSubject: Public Health or Mass Medication?
Good Day Mayor Engen & Councillors of Missoula,
Recently, the Good Question on KAJ18 News was “Should we fluoridate our water?
” In municipalities all across North America this has been a heated topic ofdebate, one where misinformation and falsehoods abound. Example 1: The news piece begins, “Almost all water contains some naturally
occurring fluoride, usually at levels too low to prevent tooth decay on its own; somany communities choose to add it to their city water.” Such language impliesthat artificial water fluoridation entails adding naturally occurring fluoride
(calcium fluoride) to municipal drinking water. Such is not the case. The chemical
of choice for most cities that fluoridate is hydrofluorosilicic acid, a toxic wasteproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry.
Water fluoridations supporters employ bait and switch tactics. Go to almost any
website endorsing fluoridation and they will start off by talking about fluoride as“naturally occurring.” Example 2: Dr. Brett Felton, DDS, says: "When we ingest the fluoride it helps in
the development of teeth, we think of that when pediatricians recommend themfor children.”
Many pediatricians, including the Canadian Pediatric Society, recommend NO
fluoride for children under 6 months. To learn more, watch: A Pediatrician SpeaksOut on Fluoridation (http://fluoridealert.org/fan-tv/dr-whyte/). Example 3: Dr. Tom Roberts says, “None of that is true. Fluoride has never been
shown to have those adverse effects (cancers, low IQ's, and Alzheimer’s).” Dr. Dean Burk, head of the National Cancer Institute’s Cytochemistry Division,
compared 10 fluoridated cities to 10 not fluoridated and concluded, “Fluoridated
water is public murder on a grand scale.”
If nothing else, doesn’t this call for employing the Precautionary Principle – If in
doubt, don’t? Do those promoting artificial water fluoridation really know thescience?
We here in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada are one of the few remaining communities
in southern Alberta that still fluoridates its drinking water. However, we areconfident this is about to change. As a catalyst to change, we have issued arigorous scientific rebuttal that proves the incompetence and deception of ourfluoride-promoting health authority. The same arguments and tactics are used
everywhere, so this information is of utmost importance and relevance to you aswell. Please carefully review the rebuttal attached as a PDF.
The trend in Canada and the USA is away from the misguided, harmful practice of
fluoridating drinking water. As an example, just last month the city of Saint John,New Brunswick, Canada voted to cease fluoridating their drinking water, joining30 other Canadian communities ending the practice in the last three years.
With the hope that Missoula will remain fluoride free, Sean Fife
sean@fluoridefreelethbridge.com
www.fluoridefreelethbridge.comFind us on Facebook at Fluoride Free Lethbridge
The Fallacies of
Alberta Health Services Position on
Artificial Water Fluoridation
Exposed
By Fluoride Free Lethbridge
March 2014
FluorideFreeLethbridge.com
info@fluoridefreelethbridge.com
Leaked Memo Exposes Incompetence of Alberta Health Services
An anonymous source leaked to Fluoride Free Lethbridge an internal Alberta Health
Services memo (in blue), which was distributed to front-line staff of AHS South Zone,
instructing them on how to answer questions in defense of fluoridation. The following
document is a comprehensive rebuttal (in black) exposing the gross incompetence of
AHS on artificial water fluoridation.
How is it possible Alberta Health Services and Health Canada are so fundamentally
wrong on such an important issue?
At the expense of their professional careers, many former proponents1 of fluoridation
are now its fiercest opponents. Why? Because they have thoroughly examined the
evidence and found it preponderantly against artificial water fluoridation.
This is in stark contrast to AHS Medical Officers James Talbot,2 Richard Musto,3 Vivien
Suttorp,4 Ada Bennett,5 Gerry Predy,6 Luke Shwart,7 Digby Horne8 and others who lack
even a basic understanding of the issue. They continue to publicly disseminate
misinformation, giving false assurances to an unsuspecting public that looks to them
for authoritative guidance on these matters. (Clicking on an endnote number will take you to
the endnotes at the bottom of this document.)
Western European nations investigated fluoridation 40 years ago and rejected it. 97%
of Western Europe does NOT artificially fluoridate its water, nor do several other
prominent nations such as Russia, Japan and China. In the last 3 years alone, 30
Canadian communities have rejected fluoridation.
The question to be asked is, “How is it that Alberta and Canada continue to fluoridate
when 95% of the world has chosen not to?”
“I am aware that many object to the severity of my language; but is
there not cause for severity? I will be as harsh as truth, and as
uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think, or to
speak, or write, with moderation. No! No! Tell a man whose house is on
fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife
from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate
her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; — but urge me not to
use moderation in a cause like the present. I am in earnest — I will not
equivocate — I will not excuse — I will not retreat a single inch — AND I
WILL BE HEARD.”
- William Lloyd Garrison (1805 – 1879)
May 2013
Fluoridation FAQ for AHS Staff
When a public health measure causes confusion or concern, the responsible action is to review
research and learn the facts. Alberta Health Services (AHS) is committed to reviewing the
evidence about water fluoridation and making appropriate recommendations for public health
and safety. It is our duty.
In alignment with Health Canada's recent detailed review of the research endorsing safety and
effectiveness, AHS and Alberta Health strongly support water fluoridation as a public health
measure. This FAQ adds depth to the Fluoridation in Alberta public information page.
AHS and Health Canada are not reviewing the facts responsibly or fulfilling their
duty as they claim. They cite only industry-funded pro-fluoride literature and ignore
the hundreds of peer-reviewed, INDEPENDENT studies that unequivocally indict water
fluoridation as the cause of many grave health problems.9
1. Is water fluoridation safe?
Safety is established by toxicological studies and human trials. No study has ever
shown fluoridation to be safe,10 but many have shown harm. Is it any wonder AHS
and HC have never provided evidence of safety?
2. Is water fluoridation effective?
Effectiveness is established by double-blind randomized controlled trials. No such
studies exist. On the contrary, numerous studies indicate cavity rates have
declined after water fluoridation was halted.11
Even fluoridation promoters, such as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and
American Dental Association (ADA) admit fluoride is beneficial in topical application
only. It makes no sense whatsoever to ingest what is only effective topically.12
3. So why did Health Canada’s recent review endorse the “safety and
effectiveness” of fluoridation?
In the review endorsing fluoridation, of the six panellists, four were dentists,
well-known promoters of fluoridation. The other two were involved in compiling
a pro-fluoride report at the time of their selection. Health Canada chose not one
dissenting voice, though highly qualified candidates existed.13
In contrast to Health Canada’s self-fulfilling review, the twelve-member panel
selected for the National Research Council Report (2006) was composed of
scientists actively promoting fluoridation, those opposed to it, and still others
who had no stated position. This most comprehensive and balanced review ever
done on fluoridation found many serious health effects.14
4. If water fluoridation is safe and effective, why have health departments in
many other countries thoroughly examined and decided against the practice?
In Western Europe, 97% of the population drinks non-fluoridated water. This is
what European health officials have to say about fluoridation.15
To date, 14 Nobel Laureates in medicine and chemistry have unequivocally
opposed fluoridation;16 over 4,600 professionals have signed the Professionals
Statement to End Water Fluoridation;17 and 1500 scientists, lawyers, engineers
and other professional employees of the EPA Headquarters Union in Washington,
D.C. have opposed fluoridation since 1985.18
The vast majority of the international community rejects water fluoridation
as neither safe nor effective.
Evidence screams for the precautionary principle, “When in doubt, don’t.”
What type of fluoride is used to fluoridate water?
The most commonly used compound to fluoridate water is fluorosilicic acid, a co-product of the
phosphate fertilizer industry. Apatite rock is ground up and treated to produce several products
including a gas which is recovered and condensed into a solution called hydrofluosilicic acid or
fluorosilicic acid. In concentrated form almost all of the water treatment chemicals used at a
water plant, such as chlorine gas and the fluoride compounds, are toxic to humans. Added to
the drinking water in very small amounts, the fluoride chemicals break apart virtually 100
percent into their various components (ions) and are very stable, safe and non-toxic.
This statement is incredibly misleading on several points:
1. Fluorosilicic acid (FSA) is not an intentional “co-product”; it is toxic hazardous
waste, scrubbed from the smokestacks of fertilizer plants by law because it is a
lethal pollutant. In fact, it’s been called “the most damaging environmental
pollutant of the Cold War.”19
2. Even though chlorine is toxic, municipal water disinfection is necessary to prevent
life-threatening illness and infection. On the other hand, water fluoridation
contributes nothing to public safety. Indeed, science has proven fluoridation
detrimental to public health and cannot be remotely justified.
3. Suggesting that diluting toxic substances renders them “non-toxic” or even
beneficial is absurd. Dilution of bio-accumulative toxins20 such as fluoride only
delays the onset of toxicity symptoms. Dilution does not magically render fluoride
non-toxic.
4. The fact that FSA breaks apart into ions is NOT at all a point of safety assurance
as AHS states. Dissociation is precisely the principal reason it causes so much
harm.21 Furthermore, it is what results in the acidic environment of the stomach
that matters. There, fluoride ions largely become a component of hydrofluoric
acid, which crosses the stomach lining, entering the bloodstream and circulating
throughout the body.
“If the stuff [FSA] gets out into the air, it’s a pollutant; if
it gets into the river, it’s a pollutant, if it gets into a lake,
it’s a pollutant; but if it goes right straight into your
drinking water system, it’s not a pollutant. That’s
amazing!”
- Dr. J. William Hirzy, Senior EPA Chemist and VP of the US EPA Headquarters Union
Is fluorosilicic acid contaminated with toxins?
Fluorosilicic acid may contain traces of metal compounds and other impurities. However, it
cannot be added to water unless it meets the strict quality standards of NSF International, a
non-profit, non-governmental agency.
This is a dangerous false assurance.
1. The National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) was forced to admit in a court
deposition the necessary toxicological studies required for Standard 60
certification of FSA were never performed.22
2. Due to this lack of toxicological analysis, in April 2013, Utah passed a law
requiring suppliers to provide certificates of analysis detailing all contaminants in
fluoridation chemicals. This law followed several FSA spills where contaminants
were discovered to be significantly in excess of allowable limits for safe drinking
water.23
3. Although it is incredible and outrageous, no requirement for disclosure of
analysis exists in Canada. Those responsible for fluoridation don’t know what is
being added to our water, though they are morally and legally obligated to know
and to provide “safe, clean and reliable drinking water.”24 25
Arsenic is a common concern. NSF quality testing has revealed that most fluoride additive
samples do not have detectable levels of arsenic2. For fluoride samples that do test positive for
arsenic, the average consumer would ingest approximately 1% of the allowable amount over an
entire year. The 2012 November Consumer Reports magazine reviewed supermarket products
and found that many common foodstuffs contain much more arsenic than would ever be found
in fluoridated water.
Arsenic is a toxic and bio-accumulative carcinogen. Adding it to the water in any
amount is totally unacceptable.
1. The American Water Works Association’s goal for arsenic levels in drinking water
is 0 parts per billion.26
2. No regular testing is done on FSA deliveries to Canadian water treatment plants.
However, when “NSF Certified” analyses of FSA were taken, they showed arsenic
levels to be highly variable - in some instances at harmful levels.27
3. The same Consumer Reports article that AHS quotes also states arsenic is a
“potent human carcinogen” and can “set up children for other health problems
in later life.”28
How can AHS justify adding arsenic to our water using the excuse that our food is
already contaminated with arsenic? This is absurd logic.
How much does it cost to fluoridate?
On average, water fluoridation costs Canadian communities between $0.77 and $4 per
household per year. It is estimated that every $1 invested in water fluoridation saves $16 - $38
in dental treatment costs.
The method of cost analysis used in the Griffin study (above) is manipulative and
deceptive, making unjustifiable assumptions.
1. It excludes the major costs of water fluoridation while including factors like loss
of pay for the time parents spend taking their children to the dentist.29 Isn’t this
an obvious attempt to skew the data in favour of fluoridation?
2. The study says, “We assumed that the costs of dental fluorosis attributable to
water fluoridation are negligible.” An unwise and deceptive assumption given that
millions of North Americans have some form of dental fluorosis (mottling, staining
or pitting of tooth enamel), with rates in fluoridated cities as high as 75%!30
“The cost of repairing teeth damaged by fluorosis is not
trivial; moderate to severe effects can require $15,000
or more in dental fees.”
- From the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment
(CAPE) Position on the Fluoridation of Drinking Water
3. Fluoridation is anything but cost effective. A mere 1% of municipal water is
consumed while the rest is used for showering, flushing toilets and watering
lawns. Who in their right mind would dump 99% of a purchased commodity down
the drain?
The study referred to by AHS is pure spin. Public water fluoridation is costly in all
respects. Why not just dump 99% of this toxin straight into the river? Isn’t this
exactly what is happening?
If I live in a fluoridated area and use fluoride toothpaste, am I getting too much fluoride?
Health Canada recommends fluoride at only 0.7 mg/L1 or 0.7 ppm (parts per million). This takes
into account fluoride from other sources such as toothpaste, food, and mouthrinses. The 0.7
ppm concentration provides optimal dental health benefits with minimal risk of dental fluorosis.
This is a reckless assurance of safety by Health Canada.31
1. Health Canada fails to differentiate between concentration and dosage. If two
people were to drink different amounts of fluoridated water, they both receive
the same concentration, but they receive a different dose and dosage.
2. Health Canada fails to account for vulnerable sub-groups adversely affected by water
artificially fluoridated at 0.7 ppm. Concentration does not equal dosage!
a. Babies fed formula mixed with fluoridated water receive 200% of the U.S.
EPA’s safe dosage.32 By their own admission, Health Canada deliberately OMITS
data on what they call the "worst case scenario" for infants: "the exclusive
consumption of powdered infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated
drinking water.”33
The Canadian Paediatric Society recommends infants under six months should
not be exposed to any supplemental fluoride.34
b. Children receive a greater dose of fluoride per body weight, incorporate more
into their tissues, have lower kidney excretion and their developing brain is
much more susceptible to fluoride toxicity.35
A 2 – 3 year-old child brushing with fluoridated toothpaste can far exceed the
recommended daily intake for fluoride from toothpaste alone.36
Particularly vulnerable youngsters such as blacks,37 diabetics,38 and nutrient-
deficient children39 are more susceptible to fluoride toxicity.
Why doesn't Health Canada understand there are children affected by several of
these factors at once, receiving many times its ill-advised recommendation?
c. Vulnerable Groups
In her radio interview, Medical Officer for Alberta South Zone, Dr. Ada
Bennett, made the outrageous statement that Lethbridge water would need
10 to 15 times more fluoride in the water before it became an issue. This
concentration of fluoride (7 - 13.5 ppm) would cause crippling skeletal
fluorosis40 in healthy adults, acute fluoride toxicity in the elderly, children,
diabetics and those suffering thyroid disorders, and would be deadly for
people with kidney disease.41
3. Health Canada does not account for several additional fluoride sources:
fluoride-leaching Teflon cookware,42 anaesthetics,43 pesticides, food fumigants,
fluorinated drugs,44 mechanically-deboned meat,45 chemically-treated furniture
and fabrics,46 and industrial workplace exposure - all significant sources of
fluoride contamination. Fluoride is ubiquitous.
If AHS officers are so ignorant on the facts of fluoridation toxicity, how can they be
trusted as the authority by municipal councils? And how can city councillors be
trusted while being complicit with irresponsible authorities?
Evidence screams for the precautionary principle, “When in doubt, don’t.”
What health concerns did Health Canada review?
Health Canada reviewed the available science, conducted a total diet study to understand
exposure to fluoride from food, and consulted with international experts. The review included
fluoride absorption, distribution/metabolism, excretion, musculoskeletal effects, fractures, bone
mineral density, cancer, mutagenicity/genotoxicity, reproductive/developmental effects,
neurotoxicity/neurobehavioural effects, gastrointestinal symptoms, otosclerosis, urolithiasis and
parathyroid hormone levels.
Health Canada did not responsibly review the “available science.”
Instead, they ignored studies with the evidence proving the systemic harm of FSA. Peer-
reviewed scientific journals have hundreds of studies47 showing the link between water
fluoridation and many serious health conditions including, but not limited to:
• Arthritis (which is often a misdiagnosis of stage II skeletal fluorosis)48
• Cancer (bone,49 bladder50 and lung51)
• Dental52 and skeletal53 fluorosis
• Diabetes54
• Endocrine disruption55 (pancreas, thyroid56 and pineal gland57)
• Increased rates of bone fracture58 (especially hip fracture in the elderly)
• Higher levels of lead59 and lowered IQ60 in children
• Kidney disease61
If Health Canada has a study proving the safety and efficacy of FSA, we challenge
them to provide it.
What are the adverse effects from fluoride?
Like many things, fluoride can be toxic in very high concentrations. At the level recommended
for optimal dental health (0.7 ppm) the reviews find no adverse health effects from fluoride1.
However, children in areas with high natural levels of fluoride in the water (>1.5 ppm) have an
elevated risk for developing dental fluorosis (occurs only before teeth erupt). Most dental
fluorosis is very mild-to-moderate whitish patches on enamel, considered a cosmetic concern
and is often not noticed by the individual. Severe dental fluorosis is very rare in Canada7.
Ingesting extremely high fluoride concentrations over extended periods of time, (i.e. > 10ppm for
10 years) increases risk for skeletal fluorosis, a disease rarely if ever seen in Canada.
This is a gross misrepresentation of the toxic impact of FSA.
1. Fluoride is toxic even at current concentrations because it accumulates in the
body. This is why it is officially classified by Environment Canada as “persistent,”
“bio-accumulative” and “toxic.”62
2. Severe dental fluorosis may be rare, but mild and moderate fluorosis is tragically
common, particularly in fluoridated communities.63
3. Dental fluorosis is not merely a “cosmetic concern,” but a whole body health
issue.64 The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment says:
“[Dental] fluorosis is simply a visible representation of an effect on the entire
bony skeleton.”65
In other words, if fluorosis is evident on the teeth, then the structure of the
entire skeleton has already been compromised.
4. The threshold for crippling skeletal fluorosis is much lower than the 10 ppm cited
by AHS. It has been observed at water levels of 1.35 -1.5 ppm.66
Evidence screams for the precautionary principle, “When in doubt, don’t.”
Does water fluoridation increase the risk of hip fractures and osteoporosis in the elderly?
The research does not support a link between water fluoridation and hip fractures or
osteoporosis. In fact, exposure to fluoride at concentrations between 1-1.5 mg/L have shown to
have a positive effect on bone density and in some cases, high doses of fluoride have been
used in the treatment of osteoporosis.
Where’s the research? This is more false and misleading information.
1. Several studies on hip fracture and fluoride exposure clearly show a dose-related
increase in fracture rates.67
2. Fluoride used in treatment of osteoporosis increases fractures of all kinds.68
3. Fluoride does not have a “positive effect on bone density.” While fluoride
exposure does increase bone density, this denser bone is proven to be weaker,
more brittle, and structurally inferior to normal bone.69
Is water fluoridation the same as administering medication without consent?
No. In its analysis of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 7 (re: security of the person),
Canada’s Supreme Court ruled (2004) that adding fluoride, which is a naturally occurring
substance in water, is different from adding a drug or medication that does not naturally occur in
water. Fluoride is considered a beneficial nutrient for optimal growth and development of dental
health, not a medication.
This is blatantly deceptive bait-and-switch.
1. Fluorosilicic acid and calcium fluoride (the natural form of fluoride found in
source water) are completely different compounds: FSA is 25 times more toxic
than naturally occurring calcium fluoride.70 While FSA is classified as “extremely
toxic,” calcium fluoride is “almost insoluble” and “moderately toxic.”71
2. Studies alluded to by AHS defending the safety of fluoridation are based on
sodium or calcium fluoride. These compounds are significantly less toxic than
FSA. No studies show sodium or calcium fluoride to be safe or effective, much
less FSA.
3. The deliberately deceptive claim that fluoride is a nutrient has no scientific
basis. It is not required for any biological function, including the formation of
tooth enamel.72 73
4. Any substance used to treat a disease is a medication.74 FSA is used as a
medication in that it is purported to prevent cavities.
Water fluoridation is medication without prescription, without control
over dosage and without informed consent.
What about freedom of choice?
Adequate and appropriate oral health care remains inaccessible for many children and families
– they have little personal choice when it comes to their dental health. Both adding fluoride, and
not adding it, might disadvantage some groups of people – either by limiting personal choice or
by preventing individuals from receiving health benefits. The most appropriate way of deciding
whether fluoride should be added to water supplies is to rely on democratic decision-making
procedures (e.g. elected officials, plebiscites). These should be implemented at the local and
regional, rather than national level, because the need for, and perception of, water fluoridation
varies in different areas.
The preceding paragraph is utterly contradictory to the point of being bizarre. Every
sentence is ridiculous.
1. Water fluoridation tramples on the rights of those who DON’T want to be
fluoridated, and denies the freedom to choose the source and dosage for those
who DO want fluoride. Fluoridation is unnecessary, undemocratic, unethical,
even immoral.
2. Decision by plebiscite is a manipulative strategy. It is audacious for AHS to
suggest this decision should be made democratically while applying heavy
pressure to city councils to maintain water fluoridation:
• During Calgary’s battle to end fluoridation, AHS spent $250,000 of taxpayer
money on one color ad campaign alone, aiming to influence this “democratic
decision-making” process. How can private citizens compete with their tax-
funded “caregivers” and why should they be forced to do so?
• When water fluoridation was brought before Lethbridge City Council for a vote
in 2011, Health Canada’s Chief Dental Officer, Dr. Peter Cooney, was flown in
from Ottawa to champion fluoridation. His appearance unfairly influenced the
council’s vote. And this heavy-handed interference is called “democracy”?
• In the October 2013 Lethbridge municipal elections, Dr. James Talbot,
Alberta’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, sent a letter to each of the council
candidates “strongly urging” them to support water fluoridation.
Are these actions “democratic decision-making,” respecting the common citizen? Or is
it political tyranny?
Universally-administered medication is NEVER appropriate. No municipal
government or percentage of voters has the right to force-medicate even
one person.
Oral health is central to an individual’s overall health. By improving the oral health of community
residents, fluoridation improves the overall health of the community.
Oral health IS critical to overall health; however, artificial water fluoridation has
NEVER been scientifically proven to have any benefit.
In fact, many communities suffering from oral health crises have been fluoridated for
decades.75 The real problem stems from lack of oral hygiene and poor diet, both of
which make people more vulnerable to cavities.76
While AHS blindly promotes fluoridation’s alleged dental benefits, it irresponsibly
ignores the serious, adverse whole-body effects. If AHS was concerned about the
“overall health of the community,” it would promptly condemn water fluoridation,
as have 30 other Canadian communities77 and 134 worldwide78 since 2010.
When 95% of the world has chosen not to fluoridate water, why do Health
Canada and Alberta Health Services insist on poisoning us? Are they really
interested in our health?
SOURCES
1 Dr. John Colquhoun, Former Principal Dental Officer, Auckland, New Zealand - Colquhoun J. (1997).
Why I changed my mind about fluoridation. Perspectives in Biology & Medicine 41(1): 29-44. http://fluoridealert.org/articles/colquhoun/, http://fluoridealert.org/fan-tv/colquhoun/
Dr. Hardy Limeback, BSc, PhD, DDS | Former President, Canadian Association for Dental Research -
Limeback, H. (2000). Why I am now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water http://fluoridealert.org/articles/limeback/
Dr. William Marcus, Former Senior Science Advisor in US EPA’s Office of Drinking Water -
http://fluoridealert.org/content/marcus-interview/
Dr. Phyllis Mullinex, Former Toxicologist at Forsythe Dental Center - Mullinex, P. http://fluoridealert.org/content/mullenix-interview/ , Christopher Bryson, The Fluoride Deception, New
York: (Seven Stories Press, 2004) xxiv. Dr. J. William Hirzy, Senior EPA Chemist and VP of the US EPA Headquarters Union - http://fluoridealert.org/fan-tv/hirzy/
Dr. Paul Connett, PhD. Chemistry - The Absurdities of Water Fluoridation
http://fluoridealert.org/articles/absurdity/ Dr. James Beck, MD, PhD. Biophysics - Connett P, Beck J, Micklem, HS. The Case Against Fluoride, White River Junction, VT: (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2010): 357.
2 On October 2, 2013, Dr. James Talbot, Alberta’s Chief Medical Officer of Health wrote a letter to all the
candidates of the municipal election in Lethbridge in which he “strongly urge(d) the mayoral and council candidates to support water fluoridation.” The letter, which can only be described as political interference,
was full of misinformation and falsehoods that have been rebutted point by point at the following link: http://www.fluoridefreelethbridge.com/news/press_release.html#October11_2013.
3 In a June 2013 radio interview with Jim Brown of the CBC’s 180, Dr. Richard Musto, Lead Medical
Officer of Health for Calgary, stated that Europe was largely fluoridated. This is contrary to easily accessed information showing that 97% of Western Europe drinks unfluoridated water. He made several
more erroneous and ill-informed statements, which have been rebutted at the following link: http://www.fluoridefreelethbridge.com/news/180_Rebuttal.pdf
4 In her March 5, 2013 guest column in the Lethbridge Herald, Dr. Vivien Suttorp, Lead Medical Officer
of Health South Zone, made several ignorant or deliberately misleading statements: 1) comparing the highly toxic hydrofluorosilicic acid used to fluoridate Lethbridge water to naturally occurring calcium
fluoride, 2) claiming that for every dollar spent on fluoridation, $38 in dental costs are saved, 3) claiming that Health Canada, the World Health Organization and the CDC “monitor all scientific evidence.” Nothing
could be further from the truth as we have proven in this rebuttal. 5 On February 12, 2013, Dr. Ada Bennett, Medical Officer of Health South Zone, was interviewed by Lethbridge radio station Country 95. Amongst other falsehoods, she claimed that “Lethbridge water would need another 10 to 15-times more fluoride in it before it would start to become an issue.” This and her other dangerous false assurances are addressed in the following document:
http://www.fluoridefreelethbridge.com/news/Rebuttal_to_Dr_Ada_Bennett.pdf
6 In 2010, Dr. James Beck asked Dr. Gerry Predy, Senior Medical Officer of Health, to stop the promotion of “nursery water” occurred in Alberta hospitals. A private company selling this fluoridated water for infants was giving advertising to mothers leaving hospital after giving birth. Dr. Predy said he
would stop it. Dr. Beck hoped that meant in all hospitals, not just the one he was complaining about. Dr. Predy then added that there is no evidence of harm from fluoride in water.
An exchange of messages ensued between Dr. Predy and Dr. Beck. Dr. Predy continued to deny risk from fluoridation and failed to respond to questions on the basis of his statements claiming benefits and
safety of fluoridation. In the end Dr. Beck sent him two hundred citations of papers on just one risk - a risk more important than that of dental fluorosis - to the development of the nervous system. Dr. Predy had no
response.
7 On more than one occasion, Dr. Luke Shwart has stated before town and city councils that the York Review (2000) concluded fluoridation of public water supplies is safe for human consumption and
effective in preventing cavities. Dr. James Beck informed Dr. Shwart after the first such incident that his statement was not true: the York review panel stated in their report that evidence was not sufficient to
conclude fluoridation was safe or effective. Dr. Beck sent Dr. Shwart a published statement by the
supervisor of the York Review, Professor Trevor Sheldon, where he asked fluoridation promoters to stop misrepresenting the report. Yet Dr. Shwart continued to give this misinformation.
8 Dr. Digby Horne, Medical Officer of Health Central Zone, represented Alberta Health Services in two
public meetings on the same day in Red Deer. The first was at midday, open to the public. The second
was in the evening with all members of city council present.
In comments on the paper Developmental Fluoride Neurotoxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-
Analysis from the Harvard School of Public Health, Dr. Horne stated that the result showed, in the aggregate, a difference of -0.45 IQ points between the high exposure group and the low-exposure group.
It is possible Dr. Horne was relying on a brief news item on the website of the Harvard School of Public Health in which such a statement was made erroneously. The error was corrected in an “update” on the
website. Dr. Horne did not mention this correction.
If this were all there was to the story, then perhaps Dr. Horne was only guilty of irresponsibly reading and
improperly evaluating the full paper, which was easily obtainable. Or possibly he didn’t know the difference between an IQ point and a fraction of the standard error. That -0.45 is the difference in the
means of high and low exposed groups expressed as fraction of the standard error. It corresponds to a difference of -6.9 IQ points.
If a population has an IQ distribution approximating a normal curve, then such a change would be accompanied by far more than a doubling of the number of persons with IQs less than 70 (below which
psychologists consider a person mentally retarded) and by far more than a 50% reduction in the number of persons with IQs over 130 (above which psychologists consider a person a genius).
Dr. Robert Dickson, who was present at this presentation, informed Dr. Horne of his misinforming the council and public in attendance and suggested he correct it. Dr. Horne said that he would consider doing
so, but he did not. What was possibly a mistake, ignorance or a failure to properly evaluate the scientific result became a lie.
9 http://fluoridealert.org/researchers/fan-bibliography/
10 “No randomised controlled trials of the effects of water fluoridation were found. . . . None of the included
studies were of evidence level A. The reason for this among the studies evaluating dental caries was that none addressed three or more confounding factors.”
The York Review: Fluoridation of Drinking Water: a Systematic Review of its Efficacy and Safety, 2000 http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/fluores.htm
11 Caries trends 1992-1998 in two low-fluoride Finnish towns formerly with and without fluoridation,"
Caries Research, Nov-Dec 2000 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11093019&dopt=Ab
stract
Caries prevalence after cessation of water fluoridation in La Salud, Cuba," Caries Research Jan-Feb. 2000 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10601780&dopt=Ab
stract
Decline of caries prevalence after the cessation of water fluoridation in the former East Germany,"
Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, October 2000 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11014515&dopt=Abstract
The effects of a break in water fluoridation on the development of dental caries and fluorosis," Journal of Dental Research, Feb. 2000
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10728978&dopt=Abstract
Patterns of dental caries following the cessation of water fluoridation," Community Dentistry and Oral
Epidemiology, February 2001 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11153562&dopt=Ab
stract
Caries experience of 15-year-old children in The Netherlands after discontinuation of water fluoridation," Caries Research, 1993
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8519058&dopt=Abstract
12 “The concentration of fluoride in ductal saliva, as it is secreted from salivary glands, is low ---
approximately 0.016 parts per million (ppm) in areas where drinking water is fluoridated and 0.006 ppm in nonfluoridated areas (27). This concentration of fluoride is not likely to affect cariogenic activity.”
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm
Note: This concentration is over 90,000 times lower than fluoridated toothpaste at 1,500 ppm. 13 Connett P, Beck J, Micklem, HS. The Case Against Fluoride, White River Junction, VT: (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2010) 242 - 243.
14 National Research Council. (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s
Standards. National Academies Press, Washington D.C., p. 2,3,170-1
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=030910128X&page=170
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=030910128X&page=171
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=030910128X&page=3
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11571&page=2
15 http://fluoridealert.org/content/europe-statements/
16 http://www.nofluoride.com/presentations/Nobel%20Prize%20Winners.pdf
17 http://fluoridealert.org/researchers/professionals-statement/
18 http://www.nteu280.org/Issues/Fluoride/NTEU280-Fluoride.htm
19 Christopher Bryson, The Fluoride Deception, New York: (Seven Stories Press, 2004) xxiv.
20 Sauerheber R. (2013) Physiologic Conditions Affect Toxicity of Ingested Industrial Fluoride.
Journal of Environmental and Public Health http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/439490
21 “Most of the long-term health effects resulting from exposure to various forms of inorganic fluorides may
be attributed to the actions of the fluoride ion per se.” http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/contaminants/psl1-lsp1/fluorides_inorg_fluorures/index-eng.php Under 1.0 Introduction
22 The deposition of Stan Hazan was taken in a San Diego County Superior Court case titled Macy v. City
of Escondido, case no. GIN015280, on March 9, 2004. The lawsuit sought to have the addition of hexafluorosilicic acid (HFSA) to the water declared unconstitutional under California law.
23 http://le.utah.gov/~2013/bills/hbillenr/hb0072.pdf Safe Drinking Water Disclosure Act, 2013 General
Session, State of Utah, H.B. 72, Section 1, Subsection 9. 24 http://environment.gov.ab.ca/info/library/8553.pdf 25 http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/water-eau/drink-potab/index-eng.php 26 http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/arsenic/ 27 Letter from Stan Hazan, general manager, National Sanitation Foundation international’s Drinking Water Additives Certification Program, to Ken Calvert, chairman, Subcommittee on Energy and the
Environment, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives, July 7, 2000, http://www.keepers-of-the-well.org/gov_resp_pdfs/NSF_response.pdf See Table 1.
28 http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2012/11/arsenic-in-your-food/index.htm
29 Griffin SO, Jones K, Tomar SL. An economic evaluation of community water fluoridation. J Public
Health Dent 2001; 61(2):78-86 30 “Current studies support the view that dental fluorosis has increased in both fluoridated and non-
fluoridated communities. North American studies suggest rates of 20 to 75% in the former and 12 to
45% in the latter.”
Locker, D. (1999). Benefits and Risks of Water Fluoridation. An Update of the 1996 Federal-Provincial
Sub-committee Report. Prepared for Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.
“The prevalence of fluorosis in permanent teeth in areas with fluoridated water has increased from about 10-15% in the 1940s to as high as 70% in recent studies…”
Marshall TA, et al. (2004). Associations between Intakes of Fluoride from Beverages during Infancy and Dental Fluorosis of Primary Teeth. Journal of the American College of Nutrition 23:108-16.
31 "Estimation of the amount of fluoride ingested from all environmental and dietary sources is important
so that rational and scientifically sound decisions can be made when guidelines for the use of fluorides
are reviewed periodically and modified." Pang D. (1992). Fluoride Intake from Beverage Consumption in
Sample of North Carolina Children. Journal of Dental Research; 71: 1382-1388.
32 The EPA RfD (reference dose) is 0.08 mg/kg/day. An infant weighing 5 kg, receiving 1 L of formula mixed with Lethbridge tap water at a concentration of 0.7 – 0.9 mg/L would receive 0.14 – 0.18
mg/kg/day). Connett P, Beck J, Micklem, HS. The Case Against Fluoride, White River Junction, VT: (Chelsea Green Publishing, 2010) 9-10.
33 http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/2011-fluoride-fluorure/index-eng.php#fn_t1bd (See
34 Canadian Paediatric Society Position Statement on the Use of Fluoride in Infants and Children:
www.cps.ca/documents/position/fluoride-use 35 http://fluoridealert.org/fan-tv/dr-whyte/ 36 Levy SM, Guha-Chowdhury N. (1999). Total fluoride intake and implications for dietary fluoride supplementation. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 59: 211-23.
37 Martinez-Mier EA, Soto-Rojas AE. (2010). Differences in exposure and biological markers of fluoride
among White and African American children. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 70:234-40.
Beltran-Aguilar ED et al. (2005). Surveillance for dental caries, dental sealants, tooth retention,
edentulism, and enamel fluorosis — United States, 1988–1994 and 1999—2002. MMWR Surveillance Summaries 54(3): 1-44.
Kumar JV, Swango PA. (1999). Fluoride exposure and dental fluorosis in Newburgh and Kingston, New
York: policy implications. Community Dentistry & Oral Epidemiology 27:171-80.
Kumar JV, Swango PA. 2000. Low birth weight and dental fluorosis: is there an association? Journal of Public Health Dentistry 60(3):167-71.
Williams JE, Zwemer JD. (1990). Community water fluoride levels, preschool dietary patterns, and the
occurrence of fluoride enamel opacities. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 50:276-81.
Butler WJ, et al. (1985). Prevalence of dental mottling in school-aged lifetime residents of 16 Texas communities. American Journal of Public Health 75:1408-1412.
National Research Council. (1993). Health effects of ingested fluoride. National Academy Press,
Washington DC. p. 44. 38 Seow WK, Thomsett MJ. (1994). Dental fluorosis as a complication of hereditary diabetes insipidus: studies of six affected patients. Pediatr Dent. 16(2):128-32.
Klein H. (1975). Dental fluorosis associated with hereditary diabetes insipidus. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 40(6):736-41.
Greenberg LW, et al. (1974). Nephrogenic diabetes insipidus with fluorosis. Pediatrics. 54(3):320-2.
39 Vasant RA, Narasimhacharya AV. (2013). A multigrain protein enriched diet mitigates fluoride toxicity.
Journal of Food Science Technology 50(3):528-34.
Massler M, Schour I. (1952). Relation of endemic dental fluorosis to malnutrition. JADA. 44: 156-165.
Marier J, Rose D. 1977. Environmental Fluoride. National Research Council of Canada. Associate Committe on Scientific Criteria for Environmental Quality. NRCC No. 16081.
Hong F, et al. (2001). Research on the effects of fluoride on child intellectual development under different
environments. Chinese Primary Health Care 15(3):56-7. [Republished in Fluoride 2008; 41(2):156–60.]
Pandit CG, et al. (1940). Endemic fluorosis in South India. Indian Journal of Medical Research 28: 533-558.
Marier J, Rose D. 1977. Environmental Fluoride. National Research Council of Canada. Associate Committee on Scientific Criteria for Environmental Quality. NRCC No. 16081.
40 “Endemic fluorosis in rural India occurs because of prolonged ingestion of water with excess fluoride
(water F > l ppm) resulting in significant skeletal morbidity.” Tiwari S, et al. (2004). Simultaneous
exposure of excess fluoride and calcium deficiency alters VDR, CaR, and calbindin D 9 k mRNA levels in
rat duodenal mucosa. Calcified Tissue International 75: 313-20
“It was initially claimed that crippling fluorosis required water levels of more than 10 ppm before it
occurred. More studies, however, have demonstrated that in many populations, crippling occurs above 3
ppm, and can occur at water levels of 1.35- 1.5 ppm, given the presence of predisposing factors.”
Littleton J. (1999). Paleopathology of skeletal fluorosis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 109:
465-483.
41 B. D. Gessner, M. Beller, J. P. Middaugh, and G. M. Whitford, “Acute fluoride poisoning from a public
water system,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 330, no. 2, pp. 95–99, 1994.
Ayoob S, Gupta AK. (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Review on the Status and Stress Effects.
Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 36:433–487
Gary Wieby, “Fluoride Blamed in 3 Deaths: Traces found in Blood of U. of C. Dialysis Patients” CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, July 31, 1993. Article online at: http://fluoridealert.org/articles/chicago-accident/
Mary Ann Kryzankowicz, “Fluoride Linked to Death” EVENING CAPITAL (Annapolis, Maryland),
November 29, 1979. Article online at: http://fluoridealert.org/studies/annapolis/ 42 Full CA, Parkins FM. (1975). Effect of cooking vessel composition on fluoride. Journal of Dental Research 54: 192.
http://fluoridealert.org/content/teflon/
43 Hoemberg M, et al. (2012). Plasma fluoride concentrations during prolonged administration of isoflurane to a pediatric patient requiring renal replacement therapy. Paediatric Anaesthia 22(4):412-3.
Oc B, et al. (2012). The effects of sevoflurane anesthesia and cardiopulmonary bypass on renal function in cyanotic and acyanotic children undergoing cardiac surgery. Renal Failure 34(2):135-41.
44 Some organofluoride drugs, such as Cipro, metabolize into the fluoride ion, greatly increasing a person’s daily fluoride exposure.
Pradhan KM, et al. (1995). Safety of ciprofloxacin therapy in children: magnetic resonance images, body fluid levels of fluoride and linear growth. Acta Paediatrica 84(5):555-60.
45 http://fluoridealert.org/content/chicken/
46 “According to the Environmental Working Group, PFOA is not only used to manufacture Teflon, but is also a breakdown product of chemicals used to coat food packaging, including fast food like McDonald's, and stain-resistant coatings for couches, carpets, and clothing. PFOA is broadly toxic.”
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/pesticides/pfoa.pfos.intro.html
47 http://fluoridealert.org/researchers/fan-bibliography/ 48 Bao W, et al. (2003). Report of investigations on adult hand osteoarthritis in Fengjiabao Village, Asuo
Village, and Qiancheng Village. Chinese Journal of Endemiology 22(6):517-18. Savas S, et al. (2001). Endemic fluorosis in Turkish patients: relationship with knee osteoarthritis.
Rheumatology International 21: 30-5. Czerwinski E, et al. (1988). Bone and joint pathology in fluoride-exposed workers. Archives of
Environmental Health 43(5):340-3.
Luo R, et al. (2012). Total knee arthroplasty for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis caused by endemic
skeletal fluorosis. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research. Available online at: http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-XDKF201209015.htm
Petrone P, et al. (2011) Enduring Fluoride Health Hazard for the Vesuvius Area Population: The Case of AD 79 Herculaneum. PLoS ONE 6(6): e21085.
49 Bassin EB. (2001). “Association Between Fluoride in Drinking Water During Growth and Development
and the Incidence of Osteosarcoma for Children and Adolescents,” DMSc thesis, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Bassin EB et al. (2006). Age-specific Fluoride Exposure in Drinking Water and Osteosarcoma (United
States). Cancer Causes and Control. 17 (4): 421–28.
Cohn PD. 1992. An epidemiologic report on drinking water and fluoridation. New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton, NJ. 18. National Toxicology Program.
Takahashi K, et al. (2001). Regression analysis of cancer incidence rates and water fluoride in the U.S.A.
based on IACR/IARC (WHO) data (1978-1992). International Agency for Research on Cancer. Journal of Epidemiology 11(4):170-9.
Waldbott GL, Burgstahler, AW, McKinney, HL. 1978. Fluoridation: the great dilemma. p. 219-232.
Yiamouyiannis J, Burk D. Fluoridation and Cancer. Age-Dependence of Cancer Mortality Related to
Artificial Fluoridation. Fluoride, 10: 102·123, 1977. 50 “These findings amplify our previous observation of increased bladder cancer rates among cryolite workers… We therefore believe that fluoride should be considered a possible cause of bladder cancer and a contributory cause of primary lung cancer.”
Grandjean P, Olsen J. (2004). Extended Follow-up of Cancer Incidence in Fluoride-Exposed Workers. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 96: 802-803.
Grandjean P, et al. (1992). Cancer incidence and mortality in workers exposed to fluoride. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 84:1903-9.
Grandjean P, et al. (1985). Mortality and cancer morbidity after occupational fluoride exposure. American Journal of Epidemiology 121: 57-64.
“Most of the removal of fluoride that occurs from the body (approximately 50% of daily intake) is done by renal excretion. The kidney cells are therefore a possible target of fluoride toxicity because they can be exposed to high concentrations of fluoride.” Collins TFX, Sprando RL. (2005). Fluoride–toxic and pathologic effects: Review of current literature on
some aspects of fluoride toxicity. Reviews in Food and Nutrition Toxicity. 105-41. “Human kidneys… concentrate fluoride as much as 50-fold from plasma to urine. Portions of the renal system may therefore be at higher risk of fluoride toxicity than most soft tissues.”
National Research Council. (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. National Academies Press, Washington D.C., p. 236 “Further research on a possible effect of fluoride on bladder cancer risk should be conducted.”
National Research Council. (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. National Academies Press, Washington D.C., p. 288.
51 Grandjean P, Olsen J. (2004). Extended Follow-up of Cancer Incidence in Fluoride-Exposed Workers. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 96: 802-803. 52 The British Government’s York Review estimated that up to 48% of children in fluoridated areas worldwide have dental fluorosis in all forms, with 12.5% having fluorosis of aesthetic concern.
McDonagh M, et al. (2000). A Systematic Review of Public Water Fluoridation. NHS Center for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, September 2000.
Beltrán-Aguilar ED et al. (2010). Prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis in the United States, 1999-2004. NCHS DataBrief No. 53. U.S. DHHS, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics.
Hong L, Levy SM, et al. (2006b). Timing of fluoride intake in relation to development of fluorosis on maxillary central incisors. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 34:299-309.
Marshall TA, et al. (2004). Associations between Intakes of Fluoride from Beverages during Infancy and
Dental Fluorosis of Primary Teeth. Journal of the American College of Nutrition 23:108-16. 53 Johnson W, et al. (1979). Fluoridation and bone disease in renal patients. In: E Johansen, DR Taves, TO Olsen, Eds. Continuing Evaluation of the Use of Fluorides. AAAS Selected Symposium. Westview
Press, Boulder, Colorado. pp. 275-293.
Juncos LI, Donadio JV. (1972). Renal failure and fluorosis. Journal of the American Medical Association 222:783-5.
Schiffl H. (2008). Fluoridation of drinking water and chronic kidney disease: absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 23:411. 54 “any role of fluoride exposure in the development of impaired glucose metabolism or diabetes is potentially significant.”
National Research Council. (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. National Academies Press, Washington D.C., p. 217.
Garcia-Montalvo EA, et al. (2009). Fluoride exposure impairs glucose tolerance via decreased insulin
expression and oxidative stress. Toxicology 263: 75-83.
Rigalli A, et al. (1990). Inhibitory effect of fluoride on the secretion of insulin. Calcif Tissue Int 46:333-8. 55 “In summary, evidence of several types indicates that fluoride affects normal endocrine function or response…”
National Research Council. (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. National Academies Press, Washington D.C., p. 266.
56 As recently as the 1950s, sodium fluoride was used medicinally to treat hyperthyroidism.
The Merck Index: An Encyclopedia of Chemicals and Drugs, 8th Ed., (1968). “Sodium Fluoride,” Merck & Co. Rahway, N.J., p. 959.
Galletti P, Joyet G. (1958). Effect of fluorine on thyroidal iodine metabolism in hyperthyroidism. Journal of
Clinical Endocrinology 18(10):1102-1110.
Susheela AK, et al. (2005). Excess fluoride ingestion and thyroid hormone derangements in children living in New Delhi, India. Fluoride 38:98-108.
57 “fluoride is likely to cause decreased melatonin production and to have other effects on normal pineal function, which in turn could contribute to a variety of effects in humans” (NRC, 2006, p. 256).
Luke J. (2001). Fluoride deposition in the aged human pineal gland. Caries Res. 35(2):125-128.
Luke J. (1997). The Effect of Fluoride on the Physiology of the Pineal Gland. Ph.D. Thesis. University of
Surrey, Guildford.
Schlesinger ER, et al. (1956). Newburgh-Kingston caries fluorine study. XIII. Pediatric findings after ten
years. J Am Dent Assoc. 52(3):296-306. 58 Cooper C, et al. (1991). Water fluoridation and hip fracture. Journal of the American Medical Association 266: 513-514.
Keller C. (1991) Fluorides in drinking water. Unpublished results. In: Gordon SL, Corbin SB. (1992)
Summary of Workshop on Drinking Water Fluoride Influence on Hip Fracture on Bone Health. Osteoporosis International 2: 109-117.
Danielson C, et al. (1992). Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah’s elderly population. Journal of the
American Medical Association 268: 746-748.
Jacobsen SJ, et al. (1992). The association between water fluoridation and hip fracture among white women and men aged 65 years and older; a national ecologic study. Annals of Epidemiology 2: 617-626.
59 Sawan RM, Leite GA, Saraiva MC, Barbosa F Jr, Tanus-Santos JE, Gerlach RF. Fluoride increases
lead concentrations in whole blood and in calcified tissues from lead-exposed rats. Toxicology. 2010 Apr 30;271(1-2):21-6. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2010.02.002. Epub 2010 Feb 25.
60 http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ehp.1104912.pdf
61 “[A] fairly substantial body of research indicates that patients with chronic renal insufficiency are at an
increased risk of chronic fluoride toxicity. Patients with reduced glomerular filtration rates have a decreased ability to excrete fluoride in the urine. These patients may develop skeletal fluorosis even at 1 ppm fluoride in the drinking water.” Schiffl H. (2008). Fluoridation of drinking water and chronic kidney disease: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
23:411.
“It seems probable that some people with severe or long-term renal disease, which might not be advanced enough to require hemodialysis, can still experience reduced fluoride excretion to an extent
that can lead to fluorosis, or aggravate skeletal complications associated with kidney disease.” Groth, E. (1973), Two Issues of Science and Public Policy: Air Pollution Control in the San Francisco Bay
Area, and Fluoridation of Community Water Supplies. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, May 1973.
Waldbott GL, et al. (1978). Fluoridation: The Great Dilemma. Coronado Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas.
pp. 155-156.
62 Environment Canada Toxic Substances List - Schedule 1 (Scroll down to, and click on, item #40.)
www.ec.gc.ca/lcpe-cepa/default.asp?lang=En&n=0DA2924D-1&wsdoc=4ABEFFC8-5BEC-B57A-F4BF-11069545E434
63 “Current studies support the view that dental fluorosis has increased in both fluoridated and non-
fluoridated communities. North American studies suggest rates of 20 to 75% in the former and 12 to 45%
in the latter.”
Locker, D. (1999). Benefits and Risks of Water Fluoridation. An Update of the 1996 Federal-Provincial
Sub-committee Report. Prepared for Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.
“The prevalence of fluorosis in permanent teeth in areas with fluoridated water has increased from
about 10-15% in the 1940s to as high as 70% in recent studies…”
Marshall TA, et al. (2004). Associations between Intakes of Fluoride from Beverages during Infancy and
Dental Fluorosis of Primary Teeth. Journal of the American College of Nutrition 23:108-16.
“The prevalence of fluorosis at a water fluoride level of 1.0 ppm was estimated to be 48% and for
fluorosis of aesthetic concern it was predicted to be 12.5%.”
McDonagh, M. et al. (2000). A Systematic Review of Public Water Fluoridation. NHS Center for Reviews
and Dissemination, University of York.
64 “Though dental mottling and pigmentation is one of the earliest signs of chronic fluoride intoxication, its absence does not exclude the affection of the skeletal system.” Teotia M, Teotia SPS,
Kunwar KB. Endemic skeletal fluorosis. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 1971 October; 46(249): 686–691. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1647839/
65 http://www.cape.ca/res_cardfile.shtml?cmd[227]=i-227-
e29cb89dc0610f57e31e5f550b936ed4&cmd[252]=i-252-e29cb89dc0610f57e31e5f550b936ed4 66 “It was initially claimed that crippling fluorosis required water levels of more than 10 ppm before it
occurred. More studies, however, have demonstrated that in many populations, crippling occurs above 3 ppm, and can occur at water levels of 1.35 -1.5 ppm, given the presence of predisposing factors.”
Littleton J. (1999). Paleopathology of skeletal fluorosis. American Journal of Physical Anthropology.
http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/krigbaum/4468/Littleton_AJPA_1999_fluorosis.pdf
Wang L, Huang J. (1995). Outline of control practice of endemic fluorosis in China. Soc Sci Med
41:1191–1195 67 Sogaard CH, et al. (1994). Marked decrease in trabecular bone quality after five years of sodium fluoride therapy–assessed by biomechanical testing of iliac crest bone biopsies in osteoporotic patients.
Bone 15: 393-99.
Hedlund LR, Gallagher JC. (1989). Increased incidence of hip fracture in osteoporotic women treated with sodium fluoride. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 2:223-5.
Gerster JC, et al. (1983). Bilateral fractures of femoral neck in patients with moderate renal failure
receiving fluoride for spinal osteoporosis. British Medical Journal (Clin Res Ed). 287(6394):723-5.
Inkovaara J, et al. (1975). Phophylactic fluoride treatment and aged bones. British Medical Journal 3: 73-74.
Bayley TA, et al. (1990). Fluoride-induced fractures: relation to osteogenic effect. Journal of Bone and
Mineral Research 5(Suppl 1):S217-22. 68 “The peripheral fracture rate during treatment was three times that in untreated osteoporosis.”
Schnitzler CM, et al. (1990). Bone fragility of the peripheral skeleton during fluoride therapy for
osteoporosis. Clinical Orthopedics (261):268-75. “Fluoride treatment was “associated with a significant three-fold increase in the incidence of
nonvertebral fractures, both incomplete and complete…This increased rate of fracturing suggests that
bone formed during fluoride therapy has increased fragility.”
Riggs BL, et al. (1990). Effect of Fluoride treatment on the Fracture Rates in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis. New England Journal of Medicine 322:802-809.
Gutteridge DH, et al. (2002). A randomized trial of sodium fluoride (60 mg) +/- estrogen in postmenopausal osteoporotic vertebral fractures: increased vertebral fractures and peripheral bone loss
with sodium fluoride; concurrent estrogen prevents peripheral loss, but not vertebral fractures. Osteoporosis International 13:158-70.
Haguenauer D, et al. (2000). Fluoride for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporotic fractures: a meta-
analysis. Osteoporosis International 11:727-38. 69 D. Chachra, H. Limeback,T.L. Willett, and M.D. Grynpas (2010). The Long-term Effects of Water Fluoridation on the Human Skeleton. J Dent Res 89(11):1219-1223.
70 Simonin, P and Pierron A. Toxicite brute des derives fluores. C.R. Seances Soc. BioI. Fil., 124:133-
134, 1937. 71 Roholm, K. Fluorine Intoxication: A Clinical Hygienic Study. 1937, p.264.
72 Letters to and from Dr. Bruce Alberts, National Academy of Science published in Fluoride 1998; 31,(3):
153-157 and Fluoride 1999;32(3):187-198. http://www.fluoridation.com/fraud.htm#NASIOM,%20November%2020,%201998%20letter
73 Although Health Canada has classified fluoride as an essential element in the past, it now recommends
that fluoride requirements should "only be based on the beneficial effect on dental caries" and notes that "attempts to demonstrate its essentiality for growth and reproduction in experimental animals have not been successful." Similarly, the U.S. National Research Council considers fluoride to be a "beneficial element for humans." http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/fluoride-fluorure/index-
eng.php#a51 74 “A therapeutic agent: any substance, other than food, used in the prevention, diagnosis, alleviation, treatment, or cure of disease in man and animal.” Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, 24th Edition
75 Hawaii and California, the least fluoridated US states (13.0% and 15.7%, respectively) have residents who are the least likely to be toothless, according to the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report. Yet Kentucky and West Virginia, 100% and 82.1% fluoridated, have the most toothless residents.
http://www.cdc.gov/aging/pdf/State_of_Aging_and_Health_in_America_2004.pdf p. 26
76 Burt, et al. Dietary Patterns Related to Caries in a Low-Income Adult Population, Caries Research
2006:40:473-480 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1626651/
77 http://cof-cof.ca/2013/01/canadas-growing-list-of-communities-rejecting-fluoridation-of-their-drinking-water/ 78 Worldwide, over 130 communities, representing nearly 6,000,000 people, have rejected artificial water
fluoridation since 2010: http://fluoridealert.org/content/communities_2010/