+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 3
Results 41 to 58 of 58

Thread: The Fluoride Thread

  1. Link to Post #41
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Statements From Professionals Opposed to Fluoridation
    FAN Part 2
    DECEMBER 6, 2018

    "In this bulletin we provide another 30 statements from the list of doctors, dentists, nurses, scientists, water treatment operators, and others who have signed the New Professionals' statement calling for an end to fluoridation worldwide. Some of these statements have been edited to avoid repetition.

    Declan Waugh, Ireland
    As a scientist and risk management consultant, I have read the science and reviewed the evidence regarding water fluoridation and fluoride intoxication. As a published author who has also undertaken risk assessment of fluoride intake I am aware that you cannot control the dose of exposure when you contaminant the public water supply with this toxin. Evidence suggests that Fluoride works topically in reducing dental caries but ingesting fluoride is harmful to the body, the soft organs including the brain, liver, kidneys, heart, lungs and immune system. I do not consent to mandatory fluoridation both on scientific and ethical grounds. It is a flawed policy that needs to stop immediately. The science is clear, fluoride is a neurotoxin, a metabolic and enzymatic poison and it should not be ingested, particularly by pregnant women or infants or persons who are susceptible to its toxic effects such as individuals who are iodine deficient, chloride deficient, individuals with kidney disease or compromised immunity.

    Michael May, BSc Eng, CEng
    …Fluoridation of our water supply impacts the young and poor disproportionately more since the young often obtain it in higher concentrations than adults and the poor can`t afford the Reverse Osmosis filtration required to remove it.

    Eve-Marie Arcand, DDS
    My 18 years of experience as a dentist have showed me that eating habits and oral hygiene are the key factors to prevention of dental decay. My examination of the literature regarding water fluoridation has convinced me that even though the intention behind this practice is good, the risks largely exceed the potential benefits (that appear to be much lower than expected initially)… It is unsafe for many people; it can harm babies that are bottle fed and it can make it worse for individuals with impaired thyroid function. Toxins are very abundant in our environment and we need to reduce them whenever it is possible, so adding a known toxin to water makes no sense.

    April Hurley, MD
    I oppose dosing developing children with neurotoxins under the guise of "treating" them. I oppose damaging all body tissues to address dental damage which can be prevented by wiser, safer, and nutritional means. I oppose harming people to "protect" them…

    Emily Matthews, RN
    It works better applied directly to teeth. Anybody who wants it can have it applied at their visit to the dentist. It is medication without consent when put in drinking water…

    Jeffrey Sutherland, Ph.D.
    The latest research shows that even in amounts commonly found in doctored water it reduces the IQ of children significantly. As a research scientist with significant expertise in the effects of radiation exposure I know that small amounts of toxins such as mercury, fluoride, and even chlorine can significant increase negative health effects.

    Heidi Ward- McGrath, BVSc
    Fluoride has detrimental effects on the health of pets that are supplied with fluoridated water. Fluoride affects the functionality of their thyroid gland and subsequently hormonal status. Our renal patients are negatively affected by this addition. I am concerned about fluoride uptake into bone. There is scant pet animal research in this area, however I suspect similar levels of fluoride in dog and cat joints is contributing to pain, inflammation and disease. Many pet owners are unaware of the impact this unnecessary addition to their pets vital water supply is having on their pets overall health. It must end.

    Carol Wells, RDH, Canada
    …Every single ounce of artificially fluoridated water consumed, while drinking and eating foods that have been rinsed, washed or cooked …with hexafluorosilicic acid – a neurotoxin - no amount is safe.

    Lashawn Bollenbach, RN
    Fluoride is toxic and…has damaged my daughter’s teeth as diagnosed by our traditional dentist in Oklahoma. Studies show that it lowers IQ significantly, and it's criminal to continue this antiquated practice in modern America.

    David McRae, Australia
    Water fluoridation is poor medicine/public health in that it doses all citizens with a strong chemical substance regardless of need, sensitivity, medical conditions and other risk factors.

    Tina Kimmel, Ph.D., MSW, MPH
    Fluoridation chemicals (including unavoidable contaminants) are neurotoxic, in addition to dozens of other harms to the body. They pose the worst risks to fetuses and infants…Despite all this, fluoridation is being imposed on local water districts by unelected government officials.

    Richard Taylor, M.A. Psychology, licensed psychologist
    Fluoride accumulates in brain and bone and causes lowered IQ and ADHD like symptoms, and has been implicated in causing osteosarcoma in juvenile males.

    Michael Fadell, MD
    It is a toxin! I am a grandfather and am concerned for the health of my granddaughter!

    Obiora Embry, BS, Industrial Engineering, EIT
    I have been against water fluoridation for over 20 years and am dismayed that even with the knowledge of how toxic it is to humans (the born and unborn) it is still used within most communities within the United States…

    George Eichholzer, BASc, P. Eng
    There are far better ways to help teeth without poisoning the water supply.

    Reverend Jonathan Singleton, MA, MDiv
    It's not healthy.... It's not a vitamin.... It's not needed in the human body.... It's IMMORAL!

    Kevin O'Donnell
    I was diagnosed with osteoporosis at age 53, and have avoided drinking tap water for the past several years, drinking only bottled water formulated by reverse osmosis.

    Gary Fortinsky, DDS, HOM
    …if the benefits of fluoride are supposedly topical, then why is it in our water?

    George Fairfax, MD
    There is much evidence of adverse effects that is occurring in humans.

    Alan Feuer, MPME
    …It only serves to financially benefit the sellers of fluoride.

    Mary Sanda, RN, BSN, CCRC
    I believe it is extraordinarily irresponsible to add fluoride to public water supplies. Even if you agree that fluoride is beneficial topically to the teeth, it is not meant to be absorbed by all of the cells in our bodies, especially brain cells…From the tiniest of newborn babies to the largest adults, all of us are exposed to the same concentration of fluoride in the water. I am a nurse and there is absolutely no such thing as prescribing a drug in the same concentration for everyone universally. One does not need to be in the medical field to understand how wrong it is to add any substance to our water supply to treat people, not knowing how different people could be affected.

    Hugh Davoren, RD, PGDipSci, PGDipDiet
    From a human nutrition perspective, Fluoride is not required for any purpose. It is not a nutrient. Sure, when applied topically Fluoride does seem to have a positive effect in delaying the onset of decay. In NZ the average dietary intake of Fluoride is at least 2 mg daily via the food supply alone (not including fluoridated water), a lot more if you're a tea drinker. There is simply no need to have it added to our water supply any longer.

    Richard Mills, MD
    Fluoride is a toxic inorganic ion that plays no part in normal human biochemistry.

    Christopher Christianson (Utilities Operations Supervisor, grade IV Wastewater, T3 Treatment, D3 Distribution)
    It is unnecessary to add this chemical to the water supply. It does not treat water, and what benefit it may have is administered ineffectively at uncontrolled dosage in the wrong method. Most fluoridated drinking water does not even enter a human's mouth--possibly 99%. It's flushed down the toilet, watered onto a lawn, washed onto a car, or flows down the drain with the dishwater and the laundry water. Thus, it becomes an environmental waste, as wastewater treatment plants do not remove fluoride.

    David Ball, DDS, MAGD, AIAOMT
    Fluoride is a toxin with effects at ppm, we don't need it, you can't control the dose people get.

    John Holden, DOM
    As a natural medicine physician, I have known for years that the fluoride added to drinking water has toxic effects on the body, and environment. Fluoride stores up in the body over time, and displaces necessary nutrients like calcium and iodine, disrupting bone, glandular, and brain function, and has been shown to contribute to cardiovascular disease and low IQ…

    According to Dr. Charles Gordon Heyd, Past President of the American Medical Association (AMA):"I am appalled at the prospect of using water as a vehicle for drugs. Fluoride is a corrosive poison that will produce serious effects on a long-range basis. Any attempt to use water this way is deplorable."

    It is human nature to resist change to ideas that have been believed for a long time, regardless of their validity. The scientific evidence against fluoridation of drinking water is overwhelming.
    Dominic Berry, Ph.D.
    First of all, it is an obvious and flagrant violation of medical ethics because it constitutes medication without consent. Second, I am a professional research scientist, have spent quite some time going through the literature on the subject, and am absolutely shocked by the dishonesty of the people promoting the practice.

    Stephen Taylor, DNP
    We should have clean drinking water and water treatment plants should provide this, not attempt to be our pharmacy.

    Kristie Lavelle, OTR/L, CHT
    The health risks from fluoridation to the brain, bones, thyroid, and kidneys far outweigh any benefits to teeth. It is unethical to force exposure to fluoridation chemicals on entire populations without consent.

    Debbie Rhyner, RN
    Internal ingestion of fluoride is unnecessary for dental cavity prevention & can be harmful to the human body … Any substance or drug that is utilized as a preventative or curative treatment plan, should always be individualized to each person. Adding fluoride to the public water supply isn't individualized dosing, but it is a careless 'one size fits all' approach. It doesn't take into account the weight, age, gender or health status of each person or the quantity of water that each person drinks per day. Therefore, it should NOT be added to the public water supply! Topical application of fluoride is an appropriate treatment choice that can be offered to patients on an as needed basis for dental cavity prevention. "

    Thank you,
    Paul Connett, Ph.D.
    Director
    Fluoride Action Network
    http://fluoridealert.org/about/archi...fan-bulletins/
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  2. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (6th December 2018), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), conk (1st February 2019), Franny (6th September 2019), Paul (6th December 2018), peterpam (13th February 2019)

  3. Link to Post #42
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    New Study: Potential Role of Fluoride in the Etiopathogenesis of Alzheimer’s Disease
    https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/19/12/3965
    12/6/18
    (From FAN's email update today)
    Abstract
    "The etiopathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease has not been fully explained. Now, the disease is widely attributed both to genetic and environmental factors. It is believed that only a small percentage of new AD cases result solely from genetic mutations, with most cases attributed to environmental factors or to the interaction of environmental factors with preexistent genetic determinants. Fluoride is widespread in the environment and it easily crosses the blood–brain barrier. In the brain fluoride affects cellular energy metabolism, synthesis of inflammatory factors, neurotransmitter metabolism, microglial activation, and the expression of proteins involved in neuronal maturation. Finally, and of specific importance to its role in Alzheimer’s disease, studies report fluoride-induced apoptosis and inflammation within the central nervous system. This review attempts to elucidate the potential relationship between the effects of fluoride exposure and the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease. We describe the impact of fluoride-induced oxidative stress and inflammation in the pathogenesis of AD and demonstrate a role for apoptosis in disease progression, as well as a mechanism for its initiation by fluoride. The influence of fluoride on processes of AD initiation and progression is complex and warrants further investigation, especially considering growing environmental fluoride pollution.
    View Full-Text: https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/19/12/3965/htm
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (8th January 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), peterpam (13th February 2019)

  5. Link to Post #43
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    STUDIES ON TOOTH DECAY RATES AFTER WATER FLUORIDATION IS STOPPED
    https://fluoridealert.org/studies/caries05/
    "For decades, the American Dental Association (ADA) has long warned that if communities end their water fluoridation programs, the rate of tooth decay will increase. In it’s “Fluoridation Facts” brochure, the ADA states:

    “Dental decay can be expected to increase if water fluoridation in a community is discontinued for one year or more, even if topical products such as fluoride toothpaste and fluoride rinses are widely used.”

    At the turn of the 21st century, however, a flurry of 4 published studies reported that tooth decay rates did not increase in communities that had ended fluoridation. In fact, in each of the studies, the rate of tooth decay continued to decrease.

    The fact that tooth decay decreased following the end of fluoridation is consistent with the fact that tooth decay rates in all western nations have sharply declined over the past 50 years irrespective of whether the country fluoridates its water, or not.

    Fluoridation Cessation Studies
    1. CANADA:

    “The prevalence of caries decreased over time in the fluoridation-ended community while remaining unchanged in the fluoridated community.”
    SOURCE: Maupome G, Clark DC, Levy SM, Berkowitz J. (2001). Patterns of dental caries following the cessation of water fluoridation. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 29: 37-47.

    2. FINLAND

    “The fact that no increase in caries was found in Kuopio despite discontinuation of water fluoridation and decrease in preventive procedures suggests that not all of these measures were necessary for each child.”
    SOURCE: Seppa L, Karkkainen S, Hausen H. (2000). Caries Trends 1992-1998 in Two Low-Fluoride Finnish Towns Formerly with and without Fluoridation. Caries Research 34: 462-468.

    3. GERMANY

    “In contrast to the anticipated increase in dental caries following the cessation of water fluoridation in the cities Chemnitz and Plauen, a significant fall in caries prevalence was observed.”
    SOURCE: Kunzel W, Fischer T, Lorenz R, Bruhmann S. (2000). Decline of caries prevalence after the cessation of water fluoridation in the former East Germany. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 28: 382-9.

    4. CUBA

    “In 1997, following the cessation of drinking water fluoridation, in contrast to an expected rise in caries prevalence, DMFT and DMFS values remained at a low level for the 6- to 9-year-olds and appeared to decrease for the 10/11-year-olds. In the 12/13-year-olds, there was a significant decrease, while the percentage of caries-free children of this age group had increased…”
    SOURCE: Kunzel W, Fischer T. (2000). Caries prevalence after cessation of water fluoridation in La Salud, Cuba. Caries Research 34: 20-5. "
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (8th January 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Paul (11th January 2019), peterpam (13th February 2019)

  7. Link to Post #44
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    U.S. Water Fluoridation: A Forced Experiment that Needs to End (Can it be clearer than this?)
    JANUARY 09, 2019
    By the Children’s Health Defense Team
    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/n...urce=mailchimp

    "The United States stands almost entirely alone among developed nations in adding industrial silicofluorides to its drinking water—imposing the community-wide measure without informed consent. Globally, roughly 5% of the population consumes chemically fluoridated water, but more people in the U.S. drink fluoride-adulterated water than in all other countries combined. Within the U.S., just under a third (30%) of local water supplies are not fluoridated; these municipalities have either held the practice at bay since fluoridation’s inception or have won hard-fought battles to halt water fluoridation.

    Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet—have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic and lowers children’s IQ.
    The fluoride chemicals added to drinking water are unprocessed toxic waste products—captured pollutants from Florida’s phosphate fertilizer industry or unregulated chemical imports from China. http://fluoridealert.org/issues/wate...ion-chemicals/ The chemicals undergo no purification before being dumped into drinking water and often harbor significant levels of arsenic and other heavy metal contamination; one researcher describes this unavoidable contamination as a “regulatory blind spot that jeopardizes any safe use of fluoride additives.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4090869/

    Dozens of studies and reviews—including in top-tier journals such as The Lancet https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...278-3/fulltext —have shown that fluoride is neurotoxic https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/ and lowers children’s IQ. Fluoride is also associated with a variety of other health risks https://files.iaomt.org/wp-content/u...man-Health.pdf in both children and adults. However, U.S. officialdom persists in making hollow claims that water fluoridation is safe and beneficial, choosing to ignore even its own research! A multimillion-dollar longitudinal study https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp655 published in Environmental Health Perspectives in September, 2017, for example, was largely funded by the National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences—and the seminal study revealed a strong relationship between fluoride exposure in pregnant women and lowered cognitive function in offspring. Considered in the context of other research, the study’s implications are, according to the nonprofit Fluoride Action Network, “enormous”—“a cannon shot across the bow of the 80 year old practice of artificial fluoridation.”

    According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.
    A little history
    During World War II, fluoride (a compound formed from the chemical element fluorine) came into large-scale production and use as part of the Manhattan Project. According to declassified government documents summarized by Project Censored, Manhattan Project scientists discovered early on that fluoride was a “leading health hazard to bomb program workers and surrounding communities.” https://www.projectcensored.org/18-m...ride-toxicity/
    In order to stave off lawsuits, government scientists “embarked on a campaign to calm the social panic about fluoride…by promoting its usefulness in preventing tooth decay.” https://www.chelseagreen.com/product...inst-fluoride/

    To prop up its “exaggerated claims of reduction in tooth decay,” https://www.chelseagreen.com/product...inst-fluoride/ government researchers began carrying out a series of poorly designed and fatally flawed community trials of water fluoridation in a handful of U.S. cities in the mid-1940s. In a critique decades later, http://fluoridealert.org/articles/50-reasons/ a University of California-Davis statistician characterized these early agenda-driven fluoridation trials as “especially rich in fallacies, improper design, invalid use of statistical methods, omissions of contrary data, and just plain muddleheadedness and hebetude.” As one example, a 15-year trial launched in Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1945 used a nearby city as a non-fluoridated control, but after the control city began fluoridating its own water supply five years into the study, the design switched from a comparison with the non-fluoridated community to a before-and-after assessment of Grand Rapids. Fluoridation’s proponents admitted that this change substantially “compromised” the quality of the study. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2627472/

    In 1950, well before any of the community trials could reach any conclusions about the systemic health effects of long-term fluoride ingestion, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) endorsed water fluoridation as official public health policy, strongly encouraging communities across the country to adopt the unproven measure for dental caries prevention. Describing this astonishingly non-evidence-based step as “the Great Fluoridation Gamble,” the authors of the 2010 book, The Case Against Fluoride, argue that:

    “Not only was safety not demonstrated in anything approaching a comprehensive and scientific study, but also a large number of studies implicating fluoride’s impact on both the bones and the thyroid gland were ignored or downplayed” (p. 86).

    In 2015, Newsweek magazine not only agreed that the scientific rationale for putting fluoride in drinking water was not as “clear-cut” as once thought but also shared the “shocking” finding of a more recent Cochrane Collaboration review, https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr....pub2/abstract namely, that there is no evidence to support the use of fluoride in drinking water.

    Bad science and powerful politics
    The authors of The Case Against Fluoride persuasively argue that “bad science” and “powerful politics” are primary factors explaining why government agencies continue to defend the indefensible practice of water fluoridation, despite abundant evidence that it is unsafe both developmentally and after “a lifetime of exposure to uncontrolled doses.” Comparable to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak, which summarizes studies that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and “credulous journalists swear don’t exist,” The Case Against Fluoride is an extensively referenced tour de force, pulling together hundreds of studies showing evidence of fluoride-related harm. https://www.alternet.org/2015/04/thi...science-speak/

    … death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease.
    The research assembled by the book’s authors includes studies on fluoride biochemistry; cancer; fluoride’s effects on the brain, endocrine system and bones; and dental fluorosis. With regard to the latter, public health agencies like to define dental fluorosis as a purely cosmetic issue involving “changes in the appearance of tooth enamel,” but the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (IAOMT)—a global network of dentists, health professionals and scientists dedicated to science-based biological dentistry—describes the damaged enamel and mottled and brittle teeth that characterize dental fluorosis as “the first visible sign of fluoride toxicity.” https://iaomt.org/resources/fluoride...-health-risks/

    The important 2017 study https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp655 that showed decrements in IQ following fluoride exposure during pregnancy is far from the only research sounding the alarm about fluoride’s adverse developmental effects. In his 2017 volume, Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix, https://pregnancyandfluoridedonotmix.com/index.html John D. MacArthur pulls together hundreds of studies linking fluoride to premature birth and impaired neurological development (93 studies), preelampsia (77 studies) and autism (110 studies). The book points out that rates of premature birth are “unusually high” in the United States. At the other end of the lifespan, MacArthur observes that death rates in the ten most fluoridated U.S. states are 5% to 26% higher than in the ten least fluoridated states, with triple the rate of Alzheimer’s disease. A 2006 report by the National Research Council warned that exposure to fluoride might increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s.http://fluoridealert.org/news/letter...imers-disease/

    The word is out
    Pregnancy and Fluoride Do Not Mix shows that the Institute of Medicine, National Research Council, Harvard’s National Scientific Council on the Developing Child, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and National Toxicology Program all are well aware of the substantial evidence of fluoride’s developmental neurotoxicity, yet no action has been taken to warn pregnant women. Instead, scientists with integrity, legal professionals and the public increasingly are taking matters into their own hands. A Citizens Petition
    http://fluoridealert.org/researchers...ainst-u-s-epa/
    submitted in 2016 to the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act requested that the EPA “exercise its authority to prohibit the purposeful addition of fluoridation chemicals to U.S. water supplies.” This request—the focus of a lawsuit to be argued in court later in 2019—poses a landmark challenge to the dangerous practice of water fluoridation and has the potential to end one of the most significant chemical assaults on our children’s developing bodies and brains."
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  8. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (10th January 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Franny (6th September 2019), Paul (11th January 2019), peterpam (13th February 2019)

  9. Link to Post #45
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    World expert on lead now warns of fluoride's neurotoxicity
    NEWS PROVIDED BY
    Fluoride Action Network
    Jan 31, 2019, 08:00 ET
    https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...300787432.html

    "NEW YORK, Jan. 31, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- A major review article in the journal Pediatric Medicine by Dr. David Bellinger includes fluoride in a list of chemicals known or suspected to interfere with the neurodevelopment of children, reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).
    http://fluoridealert.org/studytracker/32944/

    Bellinger, recognized as one the leading experts in the world on the neurotoxicity of lead, holds three important positions in Boston: two at Harvard and one at Boston Children's Hospital.

    In his review of fluoride's neurotoxicity, Bellinger cites the meta-analysis of 27 IQ studies from China and Iran (Choi et al., 2012); a follow-up study in China he co-authored (Choi et al., 2015) and the more recent US-government funded mother-offspring studies from Mexico City (Bashash et al., 2017 and 2018). These latter studies, which controlled for many possible confounders, found a very strong association between fluoride levels in the pregnant mothers' urine and lowered IQ in their offspring. These fluoride urine levels from the mothers in Mexico City correspond to the fluoride levels in pregnant women in fluoridated communities in Canada (Till et al., 2018).

    While the mainstream media covered the Choi meta-analysis from 2012, they have ignored all the major neurotoxicity studies published since then. Meanwhile, they continue to go overboard on low-quality studies that focus on tooth decay.

    According to Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Director, "We hope that when more pediatricians read about these important neurotoxicity studies –especially the mother-offspring studies– that they will warn women of child-bearing age to avoid all sources of fluoride during pregnancy and parents not to bottle-feed their infants with formula prepared with fluoridated tap water."

    Connett added, "There are over 350 published studies on fluoride's effect on the brain: 130 human studies, over 200 animal studies, and 33 cell studies." "

    SOURCE Fluoride Action Network

    Related Links
    fluorideaction.net
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  10. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (1st February 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Constance (4th February 2019), JRS (1st February 2019), mountain_jim (3rd February 2019), Paul (1st February 2019), peterpam (13th February 2019), what is a name? (1st February 2019)

  11. Link to Post #46
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    All “silver” dental filling are poisoned with mercury and it was covered up for 30 years
    Nov 22, 2018
    https://www.getholistichealth.com/78...ry-covered-up/

    "As part of a lawsuit settlement with several consumer groups, the F.D.A. was finally forced to publicly admit that all “silver” dental filling are poisoned with mercury, which attacks the brain as it is absorbed into the blood, and fumes that are emitted whenever one of its victims chews. These facts have been known, and covered up, for 30 years.
    Quote “Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses. When amalgam fillings are placed in teeth or removed from teeth, they release mercury vapor. Mercury vapor is also released during chewing… Pregnant women and persons who may have a health condition that makes them more sensitive to mercury exposure, including individuals with existing high levels of mercury bioburden, should not avoid seeking dental care, but should discuss options with their health practitioner.”

    www.fda.gov
    After this article was published, the F.D.A. removed the web page (http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/consumer/amalgams.html) that the above quotes were taken from, which is very likely in flagrant violation of the court order. The court had required them to post this information publicly.

    Notice that in spite of the court; they still wrote that mercury “may” have neurotoxic effects, as if toxicologists are not really sure about it yet, and they even went so far as to pretend that brain poisonings should only be an issue to consider for infants.

    Of course, this is just another one of their attempts to confuse the issue, since the real issue that we are being distracted from is members of the older population with dental fillings, and who are suffering from mercury-induced Alzheimer’s disease.

    They are truly disgusting people, who go into spasms whenever something truthful gets too close to them. The court has mandated that F.D.A. officials take action against the practice of using “silver” dental fillings in 2009, or risk being held in contempt of the court.

    Unfortunately, we realize that this illegitimate, presidentially-appointed agency will continue to do what it always has done — operate outside the law.

    Anyone at risk of mercury poisoning should supplement his diet with selenium, which is a natural neutralizer of mercury. We strongly recommend the high-quality selenium that is found at health food stores, but not general retailers.

    Selenium neutralizes some toxic heavy metals; especially mercury and aluminum. Our research shows that selenium alone will prevent most so-called “age-related” degenerative brain diseases. These diseases are, in most cases, lifelong heavy metal accumulation and toxicity.

    They are simple cases of poisoning, and the victims are not really diseased. Preventing the brain damage with selenium is tremendously easier than reversing it, which can be impossible. People should be aware that taking excessive amounts of selenium can be dangerous. A typical dose for an adult is 100 mcg., and 400 mcg. should never be exceeded.

    Of course, anyone with enough time and money should have his so-called “silver” fillings replaced with safer materials, along with undergoing a good detoxification program. Ironically, if they really were pure silver fillings, then they would improve health, and have no toxic effects.

    View “Smoking Teeth”

    See it for yourself: Here is a video from the University of Calgary, and it shows poison gasses coming from old dental fillings, and a weak mercury solution corroding brain neurons via a microscope."

    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (12th February 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Dennis Leahy (13th February 2019), mountain_jim (13th February 2019), Paul (14th February 2019), peterpam (13th February 2019)

  13. Link to Post #47
    United States Avalon Member Dennis Leahy's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2011
    Location
    Duluth, Minnesota
    Age
    65
    Posts
    6,140
    Thanks
    35,007
    Thanked 41,724 times in 5,211 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    The fluoride thread had been invaded by mercury!

    Speaking of fluoride, you have to tell your dentist ahead of time to get non-fluoride composite (they may have to order it.) You have to tell them that you don't want any fluoride in the composite filling material. Some of it has fluoride, and some has timed-release fluoride. Some has no fluoride.


  14. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Dennis Leahy For This Post:

    avid (13th February 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Flash (22nd March 2019), Franny (6th September 2019), mountain_jim (13th February 2019), onawah (13th February 2019), Paul (14th February 2019), peterpam (13th February 2019), Valerie Villars (13th February 2019)

  15. Link to Post #48
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    I don't know why I posted that article about mercury on this thread, but I guess I will leave it, since it's somewhat related.
    Quote Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
    The fluoride thread had been invaded by mercury!

    Speaking of fluoride, you have to tell your dentist ahead of time to get non-fluoride composite (they may have to order it.) You have to tell them that you don't want any fluoride in the composite filling material. Some of it has fluoride, and some has timed-release fluoride. Some has no fluoride.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  16. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (16th February 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Philippe (16th February 2019)

  17. Link to Post #49
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Iodine Medicine
    Published on March 8, 2019
    by Dr, Mark Sircus
    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-m...371d87924f83a6
    "Doctors and their teachers at medical school have forgotten all about iodine and its importance in health and medicine. Their stubborness, arrogance and complete ignorance of iodine creates unimaginable pain and suffering that for many ends with death from cancer. If you want someone to die from cancer do not give them iodine. That means most oncologists have a death wish for their patients wanting to maximize the chances that their treatments will not work.

    I have learned a lot about iodine from Dr. David Brownstein, who recently wrote, “In medical school, I was taught that iodine deficiency was a thing of the past. It took me a short time into my holistic practice of medicine to realize that what I was taught about iodine was incorrect. In fact, I have been writing about iodine and its importance to health for nearly 15 years. When I started researching iodine in the late 1990s, I was shocked to discover that iodine deficiency was still occurring across the United States. When I began testing my patient’s iodine levels I found the vast majority—over 97%–were iodine deficient and most were severely iodine deficient.”

    He tells us that “Iodine deficiency epidemic was increasing because of our increasing exposures to toxic halides fluoride and bromide. These toxic elements competitively inhibit iodine in the body. Our water supply has been contaminated with fluoride and our food supply has been adulterated with bromine in the form of brominated flour and vegetable oils. Bromide is also found in many commonly used consumer items as a fire retardant.”

    Dr. Brownstein also reports about research from Texas Women’s University just released in 2019, an article titled, “A Review of Iodine Status of Women of Reproductive Age in the USA.” The report reads, “Despite the USA being considered iodine sufficient for the general population, the US dietary iodine intakes have decreased drastically since the 1970s, with iodine deficiency reemerging in vulnerable groups such as women of reproductive age. …a majority of the articles reviewed demonstrate emergent iodine deficiency in this population of women of reproductive age, indicating alarm for a public health concern needing immediate attention.”

    Iodine is one of the most important medicines that exists today, more important and certainly more basic to life than everything one can find in their pharmacy except for magnesium and bicarbonate. Iodine is essential for the life of every cell and in certain glands like the thyroid, breasts, ovaries and prostate glands iodine sufficiency is necessary to protect against cancer.

    Before doctors got swept away by the pharmaceutical companies and their sales people iodine was one of the most commonly prescribed medicines. Now in the age of antibiotic resistant infections, it is more important than ever to remember iodine because it kills viruses, bacteria and fungus cells that antiobitics no longer can.

    Healing with Hydrogen! You are just about to discover how brilliant, safe and effective modern medicine can be.
    GET STARTED
    The entire edifice of modern medicine is likely to collapse when antibiotcs become totally useless because then it will be impossible to walk into a hospital without literally taking your life in your hands. Doctors will no longer be able to protect their patients from infections unless they remember iodine and what they can do with it.

    If one wants to prepare against this eventuality that is actually now in progress stock up on iodine. I buy a liter at a time of Lugol’s and always recommend Nascent Iodine for iodine sensitive patients and children though after one cleans their thyroid and restores it to health I switch people to the less expensive Lugol’s.

    Breast cancer patients should always paint their breasts with iodine. Iodine can be taken at high dosages if enough selenium is used with it. When one gets a cold or flu one should use both iodine and selenium at high dosages if a safe selenium is used.

    For those who have not supplemented with iodine before it is my strong recommendation that they start at a low dose and slowly work higher because iodine will flush out the toxins from the thyroid gland and this can case a strong detoxification reaction.

    If you want to become an expert on iodine read the below links and if you have compassion for your doctors and want to rescue them from their iodine ignorance send them this newsletter.

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/sources-...ine-to-rescue/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-s...s-and-dosages/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/main-rea...ion-essential/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-t...tion-exposure/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-t...events-cancer/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-deficiency-symptoms/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-b...cer-treatment/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-s...-heart-health/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/iodine-s...-heart-health/

    https://drsircus.com/heavy-metals/io...ia-salt-truth/

    https://drsircus.com/cancer/thyroid-cancer-iodine/

    https://drsircus.com/iodine/pediatric-iodine/
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  18. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    avid (8th March 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Franny (11th August 2019), Houman (9th March 2019), Hym (8th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), mountain_jim (10th March 2019), Paul (8th March 2019)

  19. Link to Post #50
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,166 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    Iodine Medicine
    Yes, to iodine!

    For those getting chlorine and/or fluorine in their water, along with bromine in their bread and many plastics and fabrics ... the need for iodine is even greater.

  20. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Houman (9th March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), onawah (8th March 2019)

  21. Link to Post #51
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,729
    Thanks
    59,939
    Thanked 94,676 times in 15,439 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Facebook just suspended Natural News for 7 days for posting this rather ho-hum fluoride infographic

    By Mike Adams on March 21, 2019
    Mike Adams — Natural News March 19, 2019


    The insanity of the tech giants’ censorship continues to expand by the day. With Twitter having permanently banned the Health Ranger account several weeks ago (@HealthRanger) after I criticized Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey for his involvement in a shady crypto scheme, Facebook has now decided to suspend Natural News for seven days for posting the educational fluoride infographic you see below.

    Entitled, “Fluoride… Did You Know?” the educational infographic presents fact-based historical information about fluoride, such as the fact that Crest toothpaste introduced fluoride into its products in 1955. Overall, it’s a rather ho-hum infographic and doesn’t even stand out as sensational in any way at all.

    Now, when Natural News attempts to post anything on Facebook, we are greeted with this message that claims we violated “Facebook community standards.” (Apparently, Facebook community standards don’t allow teaching people to avoid toxic chemicals such as fluoride.)


    Here’s the full infographic that earned the 7-day suspension from Facebook. As you view this, remind yourself that this is exactly the kind of information Facebook and the other tech giants have determined you are not allowed to see.

    The infographic that got Natural News banned. Click to enlarge

    As Facebook now demonstrates on a daily basis, we are all living in the era of techno-fascism. Next, the tech giants are going to start banning all posts about nutrition and anti-cancer foods. (Trust me, that’s coming any day now…)

    Watch my commentary video to understand more, and visit Brighteon.com* for even more uncensored videos that dare to tell the truth about everything:
    Learn more truth about fluoride and water contamination at Fluoride.news.
    * See this post (<---) and this thread: Who Owns the US Congress, Really?
    Last edited by Hervé; 21st March 2019 at 18:54.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  22. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (21st March 2019), Baby Steps (21st March 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Franny (6th September 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), mountain_jim (22nd March 2019), onawah (23rd March 2019), Paul (21st March 2019), RunningDeer (21st March 2019)

  23. Link to Post #52
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    71
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,166 times in 20,634 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    Facebook has now decided to suspend Natural News for seven days for posting the educational fluoride infographic you see below.
    Good grief.

  24. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    avid (21st March 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Hervé (21st March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), mountain_jim (22nd March 2019), onawah (23rd March 2019)

  25. Link to Post #53
    Avalon Member avid's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th March 2010
    Location
    NW UK
    Posts
    2,228
    Thanks
    28,785
    Thanked 9,447 times in 1,998 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    But I shared everywhere..., as West Cumbria has been poisoned by this stuff for years, an immense amount of dementia, alzheimers, obesity, reliance on drugs, and a usually lovely place having behavioural problems. Despicable forcing of toxicity into a ‘locale’ long term, who are now really suffering obvious side-effects. Despite pleading with those who shall be nameless, it is still going on - even a new major water pipeline, and will we still be poisoned?
    The love you withhold is the pain that you carry
    and er..
    "Chariots of the Globs" (apols to Fat Freddy's Cat)

  26. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to avid For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Hervé (21st March 2019), justntime2learn (21st March 2019), mountain_jim (22nd March 2019), onawah (23rd March 2019), Paul (22nd March 2019)

  27. Link to Post #54
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Connecting the Dots — A Statement Opposing Fluoride
    by Dr. Joseph Mercola
    May 23, 2019
    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a..._rid=622560733
    "STORY AT-A-GLANCE
    Steven Gilbert, Ph.D., founder and director of the Institute of Neurotoxicology and Neurological Disorders (INND), works to bring awareness about the health effects of toxic substances, water fluoridation included
    In his “Connecting the Dots for Health” paper, he summarizes how connecting the dots between the science, history and ethics of water fluoridation clearly supports the action to discontinue water fluoridation in order to significantly reduce fluoride ingestion
    Fluoride has been proven harmful to the brain and may lower IQ in children; it’s also an endocrine-disrupting chemical linked to thyroid disorders and cancer
    Adding fluoride to U.S. drinking water is akin to drugging the majority of a population without its consent; about 95 percent of the world’s population drinks unfluoridated water
    More than 70% of U.S. water supplies have industrial-grade fluoride chemicals added under the guise of preventing tooth decay.1 The problem is that fluoride, a toxin, is linked to an increasing list of health damages, while the usefulness of ingesting it to prevent cavities is highly questionable.

    Steven Gilbert, Ph.D., founder and director of the Institute of Neurotoxicology and Neurological Disorders (INND), works to bring awareness about the health effects of toxic substances, water fluoridation included.

    In his "Connecting the Dots for Health" paper, he summarizes how connecting the dots between the science, history and ethics of water fluoridation clearly supports the action to discontinue water fluoridation in order to significantly reduce fluoride ingestion.2

    The History of Water Fluoridation
    If you've ever wondered how a neurotoxic chemical came to be added to U.S. water supplies, Gilbert states:3

    "The history of community water fluoridation is a reflection of the post WWII era of the 1950's when many thought chemicals in one form or another could solve almost any problem. Our gaze was focused on the beneficial properties of the chemicals, not on the potential hazards. A classic example is DDT, that in addition to being a potent pesticide, almost killed off predatory birds and more recently was found to be harmful to humans."

    In 1945, fluoride was given the green light by the U.S. government following the release of a large amount of hydrogen fluoride from DuPont's Deepwater, New Jersey, plant. A massive quantity of toxic hydrogen fluoride was produced as a byproduct of industry, and its disposal was an inconvenient and costly problem.

    To avert lawsuits, industry came up with the clever idea of revamping fluoride's image — they told people fluoride was good for their teeth and began adding it to public water supplies. Initially, fluoride waste from the aluminum industry is what went into drinking water.

    But by the late 1940s, they'd found a cheaper source — the phosphate industry, a byproduct of making fertilizer. According to a paper in Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective, a production of The Ohio State University and Miami University departments of history:4

    "Many are surprised to learn that unlike the pharmaceutical grade fluoride in their toothpaste, the fluoride in their water is an untreated industrial waste product, one that contains trace elements of arsenic and lead.

    Without the phosphate industry's effluent, water fluoridation would be prohibitively expensive. And without fluoridation, the phosphate industry would be stuck with an expensive waste disposal problem."

    Gilbert also explains that the decision to fluoridate U.S. drinking water was based on two studies comparing cavity rates in a city with fluoridated water (Grand Rapids/Muskegon, Michigan) with those in one without (Newburgh/Kingston, New York).

    They were supposed to run for 10 years, but when some cavity reduction was seen in early reports, the U.S. Public Health Service approved water fluoridation after only five years — with no data on long-term toxicity.5

    Science Shows Fluoride Is Harmful to the Brain
    More than 300 studies have shown fluoride's toxic effects on the brain,6 including a 2006 National Research Council review that suggested fluoride exposure may be associated with brain damage, endocrine system disruption and bone cancer.7

    In 2012, Harvard researchers also revealed that children living in high-fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low-fluoride areas8 and suggested high fluoride exposure may have an adverse effect on children's neurodevelopment.

    A study of Mexican women and children also raised concern, showing that higher exposure to fluoride while in utero is associated with lower scores on tests of cognitive function in childhood, both at the age of 4 and 6 to 12 years.9

    Each 0.5 milligram per liter increase in pregnant women's fluoride levels was associated with a reduction of 3.15 and 2.5 points on the children's scores on the General Cognitive Index (GCI) of the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities and the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI), respectively.

    Fluorosilicic acid, which is the fluoride chemical added to drinking water, may also be contaminated with additional harmful compounds, including lead and arsenic. Children, in particular, are at risk from ingesting fluoride, but they are exposed to the same levels in drinking water as adults. According to Gilbert:10

    "From the 1950s the PHS [Public Health Service] recommendation for the concentration of fluoridated water has been 1.0 mg/L (milligrams per liter or ppm) for most of the U.S., with a range of 0.7 to 1.2 mg/L. In 2015, this recommendation was lowered to 0.7 mg/L to reduce the toxic side effects of fluoride ingestion while attempting to maintain its beneficial effects.

    For toxicological assessment, ingested doses are typically adjusted by body weight. Kids eat more, breathe more, and drink more than adults on a body weight basis so they will have higher fluoride doses than adults. Moreover, child organ systems such as the brain and bones are still developing, making them more vulnerable to the toxic effects of fluoride."

    More Ways Fluoride Harms Human Health
    In terms of overall toxicity, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) describes acute fluoride exposure as more toxic than lead but slightly less toxic than arsenic.11 In fact, fluoride is a common ingredient in pesticides used to kill rodents and insects. Chronically, exposure to low levels of fluoride is also harmful, not only to your brain but to your body as a whole.

    Fluoride is an endocrine-disrupting chemical, and studies have linked it to the rising prevalence of thyroid disease,12 which in turn can contribute to obesity, heart disease, depression and other health problems. Fluoride was once used to reduce thyroid function in people with hyperthyroidism (overactive thyroid), and even low doses of 2 to 5 mg may be enough to affect thyroid function.13

    "This dose is well within the range (1.6 to 6.6 mg/day) of what individuals living in fluoridated communities are now estimated to receive on a regular basis," FAN notes.14 A 2012 study also found a link between fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma, a rare type of bone cancer.15 A 2006 study also found a link between fluoride exposure in drinking water during childhood and the incidence of osteosarcoma among men.16

    Such a link is biologically plausible, according to FAN, because bones are a principle site of fluoride accumulation, fluoride can be mutagenic at high enough concentrations and fluoride stimulates the proliferation of osteoblasts (bone-forming cells), which could increase the risk of malignancy.17

    Increasing Dental Fluorosis Points to Harm
    The majority of U.S. kids suffer from dental fluorosis, a discoloration and mottling of teeth caused by overexposure to fluoride in drinking water. While often brushed off as a cosmetic concern, this mottling is a sign of increased porosity of the enamel, and it's permanent. If the tooth-forming cells are being harmed by fluoride, it's likely that other cells in the body are too.

    Research has found impairment in cognitive abilities among children with fluorosis (even mild fluorosis) compared to children with no fluorosis, for example.18 Studies have also found that children with higher levels of fluorosis have increased rates of cavities19 — a finding that suggests more is definitely not better, even when it comes to protecting against cavities.

    According to Gilbert, "At a very mild or mild level, it causes white splotches or stripes on teeth. At moderate or severe levels, the mottling is more pronounced and can cause yellow or brown stains and pitting of the enamel, which can increase cavities."20

    According to the most recent data, the dental fluorosis rate in the U.S. is now a staggering 65 percent, with researchers stating, "The results of this study greatly increase the evidence base indicating that objectionable dental fluorosis has increased in the United States. Dental fluorosis is an undesirable side effect of too much fluoride ingestion during the early years of life."21

    Another study also revealed a more than 31% increase in the prevalence of dental fluorosis among 16- and 17-year-olds from 2011-2012 to 2001-2002. "The continued increase in fluorosis rates in the U.S. indicates that additional measures need to be implemented to reduce its prevalence," those researchers concluded.22

    Ethical Concerns: Fluoride Is a Drug
    The third piece of Gilbert's puzzle is ethics, and from this perspective adding fluoride to U.S. drinking water is akin to drugging the majority of a population without its consent. Gilbert notes:23

    "Physicians prescribe drugs on an individual's needs, ensuring that it's pharmaceutical grade (not contaminated) and requiring a specific dose for a specific length of time. They also must inform their patients of potential harmful side effects. However, the final decision on whether to take the drugs rests with the patient. With fluoridation, all these safety protocols are violated, taking away the individual's right of informed consent."

    People who are more vulnerable to fluoride's effects, such as infants, pregnant women or those with kidney disease and diabetes, have no way of avoiding this drug in their drinking water if they live in an area with fluoridated water.

    While it's possible to install a water filter, such as reverse osmosis, to remove fluoride from your drinking water, or obtain a separate source of drinking water, this puts low-income families, who may not be able to obtain these alternatives, at a disadvantage.

    Considering there are many studies showing fluoride's toxicity, the Precautionary Principle, which states that preventive measures should also be put in place to avoid exposure if there's evidence of a substance causing harm, should be put into place.

    "For these and other reasons, a growing number of public health professionals are recommending that fluoridation of drinking water be discontinued," Gilbert says, supporting his recommended action to "discontinue water fluoridation so that ingestion of fluoride is greatly reduced." This is the norm in most of the world, as about 95 percent of the world's population drinks unfluoridated water.24

    Finally, fluoride is not the answer to healthy teeth. A comprehensive oral care plan should include addressing your diet, reducing your net carb (total grams of carbohydrates minus your grams of fiber) intake and, if needed, taking nutritional supplements that support your oral health, such as vitamins C and K2, and coenzyme Q10.

    Regular brushing with fluoride-free toothpaste and flossing are also important, as are regular professional cleanings with a mercury-free biological dentist.



    On May 19 to 26, we launch Fluoride Awareness Week. We set aside an entire week dedicated to ending the practice of fluoridation. There's no doubt about it: Fluoride should not be ingested. Even scientists from the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory have classified fluoride as a "chemical having substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.”

    Furthermore, according to screenings conducted for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 65% of American adolescents now have dental fluorosis — unattractive discoloration and mottling of the teeth that indicate overexposure to fluoride—up from 41% a decade ago. Clearly, children are continuing to be overexposed, and their health and development put in jeopardy. Why?

    The only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of artificial water fluoridation in the first place. Fortunately, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), has a game plan to END fluoridation worldwide. Clean pure water is a prerequisite to optimal health. Industrial chemicals, drugs and other toxic additives really have no place in our water supplies. So please, protect your drinking water and support the fluoride-free movement by making a tax-deductible donation to the Fluoride Action Network today.

    TOGETHER, LET'S HELP FAN GET TO THE FINISH LINE
    This is the week we can get FAN the funding it deserves. I have found very few NGOs as effective and efficient as FAN. Its team has led the charge to end fluoridation and will continue to do so with our help!

    So, I am stepping up the challenge. We are turning the tide against fluoride, but the fight is not over. I’m proud to play my part in this crucial battle. For the eighth year in a row, a portion of sales from purchases made on the Mercola online store, up to $25,000, will be donated to Fluoride Action Network. Please make a donation today to help FAN end the absurdity of fluoridation."
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  28. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Franny (11th August 2019), mountain_jim (28th May 2019), Paul (23rd May 2019), Satori (23rd May 2019)

  29. Link to Post #55
    Administrator Cara's Avatar
    Join Date
    12th February 2014
    Location
    Dubai, United Arab Emirates
    Language
    English
    Posts
    1,308
    Thanks
    8,909
    Thanked 6,381 times in 1,223 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Press release from Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

    Quote Fluoride may diminish kidney and liver function in adolescents, study suggests
    Mount Sinai Health System

    New York, NY (August 08, 2019) - Fluoride exposure may lead to a reduction in kidney and liver function among adolescents, according to a study published by Mount Sinai researchers in Environment International in August.

    The study examined the relationship between fluoride levels in drinking water and blood with kidney and liver health among adolescents participating in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a group of studies that assess health and nutritional well-being in the United States. The findings showed that exposure to fluoride may contribute to complex changes in kidney and liver function among youth in the United States, where 74 percent of public water systems add fluoride for dental health benefits. Fluoridated water is the main source of fluoride exposure in the U.S.. The findings also suggest that adolescents with poorer kidney or liver function may absorb more fluoride in their bodies.

    While fluoride exposure in animals and adults has been associated with kidney and liver toxicity, this study examined potential effects of chronic low-level exposure among youth. This is important to study because a child's body excretes only 45 percent of fluoride in urine via the kidneys, while an adult's body clears it at a rate of 60 percent, and the kidneys accumulate more fluoride than any other organ in the body.

    "While the dental benefits of fluoride are widely established, recent concerns have been raised regarding the appropriateness of its widespread addition to drinking water or salt in North America," said the study's first author Ashley J. Malin, PhD, postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Environmental Medicine and Public Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. "This study's findings suggest that there may be potential kidney and liver health concerns to consider when evaluating fluoride use and appropriate levels in public health interventions. Prospective studies are needed to examine the impact of chronic low-level fluoride exposure on kidney and liver function in the U.S. population."

    The study analyzed fluoride measured in blood samples of 1,983 adolescents and the fluoride content of the tap water in the homes of 1,742 adolescents. Although the tap water fluoride concentrations were generally low, there are several mechanisms by which even low levels of fluoride exposure may contribute to kidney or liver dysfunction.

    This study's findings, combined with previous studies of childhood exposure to higher fluoride levels, show there is a dose-dependent relationship between fluoride and indicators of kidney and liver function. The findings, if confirmed in other studies, suggest it may be important to consider children's kidney and liver function in drafting public health guidelines and recommendations.

    Potential health side effects include renal system damage, liver damage, thyroid dysfunction, bone and tooth disease, and impaired protein metabolism.

    Study co-authors included Corina Lesseur, MD, PhD, Stefanie A. Busgang, MPH, Paul Curtin, PhD, Robert O. Wright, MD, MPH, and Alison P. Sanders, PhD. This study was supported in part by funding from the Mount Sinai Children's Center Foundation and grants from the National Institutes of Health's National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R00ES027508, R01ES014930, R01ES013744, R24ES028522, P30ES023515).
    From: https://www.mountsinai.org/about/new...study-suggests
    *I have loved the stars too dearly to be fearful of the night*

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cara For This Post:

    avid (11th August 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), mountain_jim (13th August 2019)

  31. Link to Post #56
    United States Avalon Guide: Here to help
     
    RogueEllis's Avatar
    Join Date
    23rd July 2019
    Posts
    274
    Thanks
    593
    Thanked 1,614 times in 265 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    From: lightonconspiracies.com

    Research Confirms Fluoride Lowers Children’s IQ

    Source: Mercola

    By: Doctor Joseph Mercola
    September 3, 2019



    STORY AT-A-GLANCE

    *A U.S. and Canadian government-funded observational study found that drinking fluoridated water during pregnancy lowers children’s IQ

    *A 1 milligram per liter increase in concentration of fluoride in mothers’ urine was associated with a 4.49-point decrease in IQ among boys only, while a 1-mg higher daily intake of fluoride was associated with a 3.66 lower IQ score in both genders between ages 3 and 4

    *The findings were hotly criticized by pro-fluoride agents, including the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) and the Science Media Centre (SMC), two well-known front groups for the chemical industry

    *There are at least 60 other studies showing fluoride exposure damages children’s brains and lowers IQ. There are also more than 2,000 other studies detailing other health effects

    *Research published in 2017 found that, compared to a mother who drinks fluoride-free water, a child of a mother who drinks water with 1 part per million of fluoride can be predicted to have an IQ that is 5 to 6 points lower. They also found there was no threshold below which fluoride did not affect IQ

  32. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to RogueEllis For This Post:

    avid (6th September 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Franny (6th September 2019), Hervé (29th September 2019), mountain_jim (29th September 2019)

  33. Link to Post #57
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,729
    Thanks
    59,939
    Thanked 94,676 times in 15,439 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Study Shows Massive IQ Decrease in Males with Fluoride: JAMA Pediatrics Journal Editors Stunned

    By jameslyonsweiler in aluminum, autism, Cures
    September 24, 2019 759 Words

    In reference to a study, entitled “Association Between Maternal Fluoride Exposure During Pregnancy and IQ Scores in Offsprings in Canada”[1], published in JAMA Pediatrics, the journal editors were stunned by a finding that fluoridated water exposure in mothers during pregnancy reduces the IQ of their sons.

    The study found that in boys, a 1 mg/L increase in the maternal urine fluoride concentration led to a 5-point decrease in boys’ IQs.

    Dimitri Christakis and Frederick Rivara of JAMA Pediatrics, in a podcast, compare the findings as overturning decades-old presumptions of safety of fluoridated water.
    Christakis: “Before they were anti vaxxers, there were sort of anti fluoriders. Right. And like the traditional teaching, when I was going through residency and early in my early professional career was that there was fluoride is completely safe. All these people that are trying to take it out of the water are nuts. It’s the best thing that’s ever happened for children’s dental health. And we just need to push back and get it into every water system.”

    Christakis: “In fact, before there were anti-vaxxers, there were, sort-of, anti-fluoriders, and the traditional teaching when I was going through residency was that fluoride was completely safe, all these people that are trying to take it out of the water are nuts, it’s the best thing that ever happened…”

    Christakis: “So when I first saw this title, my initial reaction was ‘What the hell?'”
    Rivara had referenced the title of the study as “shocking” and later said, when discussing biological plausibility, citing animal models,
    Christakis: “Even in the animal models, weirdly enough… the effect is seen in male than female rats, I don’t know to think about that… There have been other observational studies that have shown this, and there have been animal models as well, showed that fluoride was a neurotoxin, which, again, was totally news to me, I thought it was ‘junk science’…

    Rivara: “That’d be like antivaxxers saying ‘Fluoride is bad for your brains, so let’s not do it.’ You know, that same kind of thing.”
    The editors discussed how surprised they were to learn that only 3% of cities in Europe fluoridate their water.

    The philosopher Karl Popper called this shock-reaction “Surprise”, and held that the more unlikely a robust result from a critical test appears to be, the higher the degree of corroboration that should be afforded the unlikely.

    The comparison in this discussion to anti-vaxxers is ironic, given that fluoride and aluminum have known synergistic neurotoxicity[2], just like mercury and aluminum have known synergistic neurotoxicity[3].

    The obvious question is: when will a major pediatrics journal have this level of healthy cognitive disequilibrium about vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders, and vaccines and autoimmunity?

    These editors’ reactions to this news about fluoride was the precise reaction I had upon reading all of the studies for my book on autism – the studies I had no idea about, the ones that were “totally news to me”. The animal model studies showing plausibility of vaccination and autism (e.g., chronic microglial activation), the observational studies that DID find association (e.g., Gallagher and Goodman), and, of course the studies I could not read because they were never conducted, diswarranting the generalization that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”. I agree 100% with Christakis when he said that “Science is an iterative process”.

    It is very good to see an opening of the eyes and minds explicitly represented by this podcast. It is also good to see that that “those crazy Xr’s” model of science is dying. Christakis is going to recommend bottled or filtered water. His colleague correctly points out that bottled water is not affordable for all families.

    Perhaps we really should rethink the wisdom of fluoridation given the apparent effects on autism rates [4] and lifelong effects on dementia as well[5]. Science is, after all, for asking questions.

    Here’s the podcast file: JAMA Editors Shocked.mp3

    I thank Bruce Lanphear for sending the studies and the podcast file along. He’s working on a new book, which I think is on the effect of low-dose toxicity and synergism among toxins that we think, or thought, were safe.


    References and Full “Shocking” Pubmed Searches
    [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30788699

    [2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...um+synergistic

    [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...ry+synergistic

    [4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31527457

    [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30868981

    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  34. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    avid (29th September 2019), Bill Ryan (29th September 2019), Franny (29th September 2019), mountain_jim (29th September 2019), onawah (22nd October 2019)

  35. Link to Post #58
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,984
    Thanks
    26,822
    Thanked 47,003 times in 9,567 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Fluoridated Water May Soon Be Outlawed
    Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
    October 22, 2019
    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a..._rid=734431915

    "STORY AT-A-GLANCE
    In 2016, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and coalition partners filed a petition asking the EPA to ban water fluoridation in U.S. drinking water under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
    Under the TSCA, the EPA evaluates risks from new and existing chemicals and is supposed to act to address any “unreasonable risks” such chemicals may pose to human health and the environment
    The EPA dismissed FAN’s petition, prompting the consumer advocacy group and partners to file a lawsuit challenging the EPA’s denial
    Since then, a number of victories have occurred that are moving us closer to the goal of getting fluoride out of U.S. drinking water
    In September 2019, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied a request by the EPA to delay the lawsuit’s upcoming trial date of February 3, 2020, instead maintaining the trial timeline
    In 2016, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and coalition partners filed a petition asking the EPA to ban the deliberate addition of fluoridating chemicals to U.S. drinking water under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

    Under the TSCA, the EPA evaluates risks from new and existing chemicals and is supposed to act to address any “unreasonable risks” such chemicals may pose to human health and the environment.1

    However, the EPA has maintained that because fluoride supposedly prevents cavities — a “benefit” that’s been disproven — it justifies adding the chemical to water, even though scientific research shows it poses significant risks.2

    The EPA dismissed FAN’s petition, prompting the consumer advocacy group and partners to file a lawsuit challenging the EPA’s denial. Since then, a number of victories have occurred that are moving us closer to the goal of getting fluoride out of U.S. drinking water.

    Most recently, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied a request by the EPA to delay the lawsuit’s upcoming trial date of February 3, 2020, instead maintaining the trial timeline. According to FAN:3

    “Not only does the victory keep the EPA from increasing the cost of the lawsuit by adding more evidence to examine and another expert witness to depose at the last minute, it also adds to the momentum our legal team has gained from four previous legal victories.”

    Fifth Victory Moves Water Fluoridation Ban Closer to Reality
    The court’s ruling denying the EPA’s request to delay the trial is the fifth victory in the TSCA lawsuit. Four notable victories have already occurred, beginning in December 2017, when a court denied the EPA’s initial motion to dismiss the case.

    A second victory occurred just weeks later when the EPA attempted to block FAN from obtaining internal EPA documents and using new research on fluoride’s toxicity in the trial. Stuart Cooper, FAN’s campaign director, explained:

    “Two and a half weeks later, on February 7, 2018, we won a second major legal victory. This time, the EPA tried to put up another roadblock by limiting the scope of discovery. In other words, EPA worked to prohibit our attorneys from obtaining internal EPA documents, and to prohibit our experts from relying upon recently published studies.

    … Had the EPA prevailed we would have been prohibited from including any new fluoride neurotoxicity study published after our petition was submitted in November 2016, including the landmark U.S. government-funded 12-year study by Bashash et al. published in September 2017.”

    The court again denied the EPA’s motion, which meant the 12-year study could be used in the case. “This study is critical in demonstrating that fluoride is neurotoxic and has no place in the public water supply,” Cooper added. The study in question showed that higher exposure to fluoride while in utero is associated with lower scores on tests of cognitive function in childhood, both at the age of 4 and 6-to-12 years.4

    The study involved 299 pairs of women and their babies. Mexico does not fluoridate their drinking water, but the study participants were exposed to fluoride via fluoridated salt and varying levels of naturally occurring fluoride in drinking water.

    While previous studies have used measurements of fluoride levels in drinking water to estimate a population’s exposure, the featured study used urine samples — in both the mothers and their children — to determine fluoride exposure.

    The researchers then compared fluoride levels with each child’s intelligence, assessed using the General Cognitive Index (GCI) of the McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities at age 4 and again between the ages of 6 and 12 years using the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI).5

    While the children’s fluoride levels at ages 4 and 6-to-12 were not associated with their intelligence, the study found that exposure that occurs prenatally was linked to lower intelligence scores. In fact, women with higher levels of fluoride in their urine during pregnancy were more likely to have children with lower intelligence.

    Specifically, each 0.5 milligram per liter increase in pregnant women’s fluoride levels was associated with a reduction of 3.15 and 2.5 points on the children’s GCI and WASI scores, respectively.

    Third and Fourth Victories Leading to Landmark Trial
    After the EPA lost its request to block FAN attorneys from obtaining internal documents or using pertinent new research in the trial, the agency then objected to sharing internal documents or allowing employees to be deposed about EPA’s fluoride safety standards. In October 2018, a court again ruled against the EPA, stating that this internal information had to be shared.6

    “The EPA’s documents and correspondence relating to the specified studies are relevant to the ultimate issue the Court must decide — whether the ingestion of fluoride in drinking water causes neurotoxic harm,” the ruling stated.7

    In the fourth victory, which occurred in April 2019, the court ordered the EPA to produce additional documents and scientists for deposition.8 With the fifth victory denying the EPA’s attempt to delay the trial for 65 days, the lawsuit is scheduled to begin as originally scheduled on February 3, 2020.

    In November 2019, the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) draft review of fluoride’s neurodevelopmental effects on humans is set to be released, and the EPA had attempted to use this as reason to delay the trial, but the judge disagreed. FAN’s attorneys, in a brief response to the EPA’s request for delay, stated:9

    “EPA has been aware of the NTP’s … monograph for the entirety of this litigation. EPA is not only a member of NTP’s Executive Committee but provided comments to the NTP about the review prior to the review’s commencement in late 2016. At no point, however, during the 2+ years of this litigation has EPA expressed any concern that the NTP review could affect the scheduling of this case.”

    The NTP’s research report on the effects of fluoride on learning and memory in animals was released in July 2016, and found a low to moderate level of evidence suggesting exposure to fluoride at concentrations higher than 0.7 parts per million (ppm) may have adverse effects on learning and memory.

    The exposure level of 0.7 ppm is the recommended level for water fluoridation in the U.S., and the review found “very few studies assessed learning and memory effects” in animals at exposure levels near 0.7 ppm.10 However, as noted by FAN’s Cooper:

    “ … [I]t is worrying that the NTP specified that an animal study should be conducted at 0.7 ppm — which is a ridiculous provision for an animal study on fluoride.

    For example, it is well-known that rats need a much higher dose of fluoride in their water to reach the same plasma levels in humans. Moreover, it is standard practice in toxicology to use much higher doses in animals to tease out effects.”

    Don’t Sacrifice Your Brain for Your Teeth
    A U.S. and Canadian government-funded observational study published in JAMA Pediatrics found that drinking fluoridated water during pregnancy lowers children's IQ.11 As reported by FAN:12

    "They found that a 1 mg per liter increase in concentration of fluoride in mothers' urine was associated with a 4.5-point decrease in IQ among boys, though not girls. When the researchers measured fluoride exposure by examining the women's fluid intake, they found lower IQs in both boys and girls: A 1 mg increase per day was associated with a 3.7 point IQ deficit in both genders."

    The findings were deemed so controversial, the study had to undergo additional peer-review and scrutiny before publication, making it one of the more important fluoride studies to date. Anticipating the controversy the findings would generate among public health agencies, fluoride proponents and the media, extra data checks were undertaken prior to publishing. FAN noted:13

    “Making the publication of this study even more impactful is that it is accompanied by an editor’s note, a podcast featuring the journal’s editors, and an editorial from world-renowned neurotoxicity expert Dr. David Bellinger. This reaction by the JAMA editors shows just how important the study is, as most studies in their journal don’t receive this treatment.

    For the first time in his career, the editor of Pediatrics included an editorial note, knowing fluoridation proponents would attack the study without justification. He noted the study’s rigor, triple-checking of the data, and definitive nature of the evidence.”

    More than 300 studies have shown fluoride’s toxic effects on the brain,14 including a 2006 National Research Council review that suggested fluoride exposure may be associated with brain damage, endocrine system disruption and bone cancer.15

    In 2012, Harvard researchers also revealed that children living in high-fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low-fluoride areas16 and suggested high fluoride exposure may have an adverse effect on children’s neurodevelopment.

    Drinking fluoridated water, which poses risks to your brain and overall health when ingested, makes little sense, especially since any benefits it provides to your teeth occur from topical exposure. When you drink fluoridated water, 99% of the fluoride goes down the drain and into the environment.17

    If you want fluoride for your teeth, use fluoridated toothpaste — don’t drink fluoridated water, trading your brain health for your teeth. That being said, I don’t recommend fluoridated toothpaste either, as there are ways to keep your teeth healthy that don’t involve neurotoxic agents like fluoride.

    How to Keep Your Teeth Healthy — Without Fluoride
    Fluoride is not the answer to healthy teeth. A comprehensive oral care plan should include addressing your diet, reducing your net carb (total grams of carbohydrates minus your grams of fiber) intake and, if needed, taking nutritional supplements that support your oral health, such as vitamins C and K2, and coenzyme Q10.

    Regular brushing (with fluoride-free toothpaste) and flossing is also important, as are regular professional cleanings with a mercury-free biological dentist.

    Considering there are many studies showing fluoride’s toxicity, the Precautionary Principle, which states that preventive measures should also be put in place to avoid exposure if there’s evidence of a substance causing harm, should be put into place — and the EPA should take action to remove this toxic chemical from drinking water.

    Let’s hope that come February 2020, FAN and partners get their sixth victory in the form of fluoridated water finally being outlawed.

    Help End the Practice of Fluoridation
    There's no doubt about it: Fluoride should not be ingested. Even scientists from the EPA's National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory have classified fluoride as a "chemical having substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.”

    Furthermore, according to screenings conducted for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 65% of American adolescents now have dental fluorosis — unattractive discoloration and mottling of the teeth that indicate overexposure to fluoride—up from 41% a decade ago. Clearly, children are continuing to be overexposed, and their health and development put in jeopardy. Why?

    The only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of artificial water fluoridation in the first place. Fortunately, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), has a game plan to END fluoridation worldwide.

    Clean pure water is a prerequisite to optimal health. Industrial chemicals, drugs and other toxic additives really have no place in our water supplies. So please, protect your drinking water and support the fluoride-free movement by making a tax-deductible donation to the Fluoride Action Network today.

    Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More
    I encourage you to visit the website of the Fluoride Action Network and visit the links below:

    Like FAN on Facebook, follow on Twitter and Instagram, and sign up for campaign alerts.
    10 Facts About Fluoride: Attorney Michael Connett summarizes 10 basic facts about fluoride that should be considered in any discussion about whether to fluoridate water. Also see 10 Facts Handout (PDF).
    50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation: Learn why fluoridation is a bad medical practice that is unnecessary and ineffective. Download PDF.
    Moms2B Avoid Fluoride: Help spread the word to expecting parents to avoid fluoride during pregnancy due to potential harm to the fetus.
    Health Effects Database: FAN's database sets forth the scientific basis for concerns regarding the safety and effectiveness of ingesting fluorides. They also have a Study Tracker with the most up-to-date and comprehensive source for studies on fluoride's effects on human health.
    Together, Let's Help FAN Get the Funding They Deserve
    In my opinion, there are very few NGOs that are as effective and efficient as FAN. Its small team has led the charge to end fluoridation and will continue to do so with our help! "
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  36. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Bill Ryan (22nd October 2019), Hervé (22nd October 2019), mountain_jim (23rd October 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 3

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts