+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 4
Results 61 to 65 of 65

Thread: The Fluoride Thread

  1. Link to Post #61
    Croatia Administrator Franny's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd January 2011
    Island Time
    Thanked 6,059 times in 1,015 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Back in 1997 or 1998 I went to a Christmas Faire with a friend. There was entertainment, food and drink, music and booths selling handcrafted gifts and giving out informational brochures.

    Two still stand out. One had information on the dangers and history of microwave use, the other was about the dangers and history of fluoride. I searched for more information, stopped using fluoride toothpaste and never bought a microwave oven.

    It's interesting how long the information on both products has been available to the public and yet, both are still in use and so few do any open minded research though it's becoming more of the public are becoming ore aware of it.

    People who I have spoken to in the past on either subject would become annoyed, even hysterically angry about any negative information on these products. It was one of the early lessons in cognitive dissonance without knowing the term yet!

    The tide seems to be turning with fluoride, fortunately, although the damage it created remains.
    A million galaxies are a little foam on that shoreless sea. ~ Rumi

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Franny For This Post:

    ariel70 (22nd December 2019), mountain_jim (23rd December 2019), onawah (21st December 2019)

  3. Link to Post #62
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Thanked 50,626 times in 10,251 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Fluoride Action Network | Bulletin |
    January 17, 2020

    "We are going to trial in April. This will be the first time that any citizen group will go to trial under Section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA -pronounced like the opera Tosca!). TSCA was passed in 1976 by the U.S. Congress and is administered by the Environmental Protection agency (EPA).

    The official name of the lawsuit is: Food and Water Watch et al v. EPA. As most of you know, Michael Connett, JD, is the lead attorney who has directed this incredible effort from the beginning. He works with the law firm Waters Kraus & Paul in Los Angeles.

    On December 30, the Court released an Order Denying Motions for Summary Judgment. This means that our case will go forward. Trial is scheduled to begin on April 20 and will run for two weeks. Read this good article for a broader perspective: Judge Again Rejects EPA’s Motion To End Landmark TSCA Citizen Suit by Maria Hegstad of Inside EPA.

    The Background:

    PLAINTIFFS: On November 22, 2016, a coalition of non-profit groups (Fluoride Action Network, Food & Water Watch, Moms Against Fluoridation, and others including individuals) submitted a Citizens’ Petition under Section 21 of TSCA to the EPA, requesting a ban on the addition of fluoridation chemicals to water in order “to protect the public and susceptible subpopulations from the neurotoxic risks of fluoride.”

    DEFENDANTS: On February 27, 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency denied the petition “primarily because EPA concluded that the petition has not set forth a scientifically defensible basis to conclude that any persons have suffered neurotoxic harm as a result of exposure to fluoride in the U.S. through the purposeful addition of fluoridation chemicals to drinking water or otherwise from fluoride exposure in the U.S.”

    THE LAWSUIT: After EPA denied the Petition, the plaintiffs filed this lawsuit seeking judicial review of EPA’s determination with the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco. On December 17, 2017, the court issued an Order denying EPA’s Motion to Dismiss. The court noted,

    “The purpose of citizen petitions is to ensure the EPA does not overlook unreasonable risks to health or the environment.” It cited a 1990 case, Env. Def. Fund v. Reilly, “Citizen participation is broadly permitted [under the TSCA] to ensure that bureaucratic lethargy does not prevent the appropriate administration of this vital authority.”

    The Court stated,

    The EPA’s interpretation [to dismiss the case] would undermine the purpose of Section 21 by permitting it to deny even a petition that successfully identifies an unreasonable risk of harm to health or to the environment … That a known unreasonable risk could be ignored by the EPA is contrary to the TSCA’s very purpose as well as the statute’s express command that the EPA “shall” promulgate regulations when “an” unreasonable risk is found.

    The Court cited Rollins Env. Servs. (FS), Inc. v. St. James Parish, 775 F.2d 627, 632 (5th Cir. 1985):

    The overall purpose of the Toxic Substances Control Act was to set in place a comprehensive, national scheme to protect humans and the environment from the dangers of toxic substances.

    There have been over one hundred hours of depositions from experts for both sides, and multiple motions by the Defendants, Plaintiffs, and the Court – see the timeline. Approximately $400,000 has been raised to fund this lawsuit from the supporters of the Fluoride Action Network. All in all, it has been an incredible effort on all fronts, with everyone helping as much as they could.

    In December 2017, the EPA petitioned the court to Limit Review to the Administrative Record . This meant that no new studies would be allowed into the case. The studies would be limited to those contained in the Nov 22, 2016, Petition.

    On January 15, 2018, the Court issued an Order Denying Defendant’s (EPA) motion to limit review. The Court ruled:

    The EPA moves for a protective order limiting the scope of review in this litigation to the administrative record1, a request that would effectively foreclose Plaintiffs from introducing any evidence in this litigation that was not attached to their administrative petition. The text of the TSCA, its structure, its purpose, and the legislative history make clear that Congress did not intend to impose such a limitation in judicial review of Section 21 citizen petitions. The Court therefore DENIES the EPA’s motion.

    Because of this ruling, many new studies were introduced into the case, including 14 new IQ studies. These IQ studies reported an association of fluoride exposure and reduced IQ in children: Aravind 2016, Jin 2017, Valdez Jimenez 2017, Bashash 2017, Razdan 2017, Yu 2018, Pang 2018, Mustafa 2018, Induswe 2018, El Sehmawy 2018, Cui 2018, Wang 2019, Till 2019, and Green 2019. There are now 64 fluoride-IQ studies reporting a lowering of IQ, and 8 studies that found no effect.

    During this same time period, three Mother-Offspring fluoride studies, funded by U.S. government agencies, were published. After 75 years of fluoridation in the U.S. and Canada, these studies represent the first time that either country investigated fluoride’s effect on the fetus. They did this by testing the urinary fluoride levels in pregnant women (Bashash 2017, Till 2019, Green 2019) and performing cognitive tests with the offspring. The Till and Green studies reported significant IQ loss at fluoride levels found in women in fluoridated communities in Canada, while the Bashash study, performed in Mexico City, reported similar urinary fluoride levels. There have been 7 Mother-Offspring studies.

    Here’s a little on the run up to the trial

    November 15: A pre-trial hearing. Read more about this hearing: Federal Judge Asked to Let Fluoride-in-Water Case Go to Trial (1) published by Bloomberg News.

    December 19: We submitted 425 Proposed Findings of Fact.

    December 19: EPA submitted 31 Undisputed Facts; 2 Disputed Facts; and 6 Legal Disputed Issues, in a Joint Pretrial Conference Statement.

    Thank you for your continued support of our lawsuit and FAN’s efforts to end fluoridation throughout the world."


    Ellen Connett
    Managing Director
    Fluoride Action Network

    See all FAN bulletins online:
    Each breath a gift...

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

    Houman (22nd January 2020), mountain_jim (22nd January 2020)

  5. Link to Post #63
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Thanked 50,626 times in 10,251 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    More Studies Show Fluoride Affects Brain and Disrupts Sleep
    Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
    January 23, 2020

    More than 400 animal and human studies show fluoride is a neurotoxic substance, and many have found harm at, or precariously close to, the levels millions of American pregnant women and children receive
    A 1 mg-per-day increase in the fluoride a mother gets from drinking water may lower the IQ of her child by 3.7 points
    Infants fed baby formula made with fluoridated water have lower IQs than those fed formula made with unfluoridated water. An increase of 0.5 mg/L of fluoride corresponds with a 4.4 point lower IQ score at age 3 to 4
    Fluoride may have an adverse impact on sleep by preferentially accumulating in the pineal gland, thereby inhibiting the production of melatonin

    While water fluoridation was never adopted or has been eliminated in many areas around the world, including most of western Europe,1 many U.S. water systems2 still add fluoride chemicals such as fluorosilicic acid3 (also known as hydrofluorosilicic acid) to their municipal water supplies.

    As detailed in Christopher Bryson’s book, “The Fluoride Deception,”4 water fluoridation as a public health measure (ostensibly to improve dental health) was invented by brilliant schemers who needed a way to get rid of toxic industrial waste.

    They duped politicians with fraudulent science and endorsements, and sold them on a “public health” idea in which humans are essentially used to filter this poison through their bodies, while the vast majority simply goes down the drain.

    Since the inception of water fluoridation in 1945, fluorosilicic acid suppliers have been making hundreds of millions of dollars each year5 selling a hazardous industrial waste for use as a water additive rather than having to pay for toxic waste disposal.

    “Toxic Treatment: Fluoride’s Transformation from Industrial Waste to Public Health Miracle” in the March 2018 issue of Origins,6 a joint publication by the history departments at The Ohio State University and Miami University, notes:

    “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.”

    Fluoride Is a Neurotoxic Endocrine Disruptor
    We now know fluoride — which serves no essential biological function7 — actually acts as an endocrine disruptor.8 Exposure has been linked to thyroid disease,9 which in turn can contribute to obesity, heart disease, depression and other health problems.

    More disturbingly, fluoride has been identified as a developmental neurotoxin that impacts short-term and working memory, and contributes to rising rates of attention-deficit hyperactive disorder10 and lowered IQ in children.11

    In all, there are more than 400 animal and human studies showing fluoride is a neurotoxic substance.12 Many of these studies have found harm at, or precariously close to, the levels millions of American pregnant women and children receive.

    Government-Funded Research Confirms Fluoride Lowers IQ
    One of the most recent studies highlighting these dangers was a U.S. and Canadian government-funded observational study published in the August 19, 2019, issue of JAMA Pediatrics,13 which found that drinking fluoridated water during pregnancy lowers children’s IQ.

    The research, led by a Canadian team of researchers at York University in Ontario, looked at 512 mother-child pairs living in six Canadian cities. Fluoride levels were measured through urine samples collected during pregnancy.

    They also estimated the women’s fluoride consumption based on the level of fluoride in the local water supply and how much water and tea each woman drank. The children’s IQ scores were then assessed between the ages of 3 and 4. As reported by Fluoride Action Network (FAN):14

    “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 IQ’s 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.

    Its import is also demonstrated by the fact that it’s accompanied by an editor’s note15 explaining the journal’s decision to publish the study, and a podcast16 featuring the chief editors of JAMA Pediatrics and JAMA Network Open, in which they discuss the study.

    An additional editorial17 by David Bellinger, Ph.D., a world-renowned neurotoxicity expert, also points out that “The hypothesis that fluoride is a neurodevelopmental toxicant must now be given serious consideration.” Few studies ever receive all of this added treatment.

    Click here to find out why 5G wireless is NOT harmless
    Fluoride Exposure From Infant Formula Lowers IQ
    In October 2019, a Canadian study18 concluded that infants fed baby formula made with fluoridated water have lower IQs than those fed formula made with unfluoridated water. As explained by the authors:

    “Consumption of infant formula reconstituted with fluoridated water can lead to excessive intake of fluoride in infants. We examined the association between water fluoride concentration and intellectual ability (IQ) among preschool children who lived in fluoridated or non-fluoridated cities in Canada and were either formula-fed or breastfed during the first six months after birth.”

    Results revealed an increase of 0.5 milligrams of fluoride per liter (mg/L), which was the difference between the fluoridated and non-fluoridated regions, corresponded with a 4.4 point lower IQ score at age 3 to 4.

    Not surprisingly, the researchers urge parents to avoid fluoridated water when reconstituting infant formula.

    Fluoride Exposure Affects Sleep Patterns
    Other recent fluoride research has discovered it can have an adverse impact on sleep. The study,19,20 published in the Environmental Health journal in 2019, found that chronic low-level fluoride exposure altered the sleep patterns of adolescents aged 16 to 19.

    The hypothesis used to explain this effect is that fluoride is known to preferentially accumulate in the pineal gland, which might inhibit or alter the production of melatonin, the hormone that regulates sleep and wakefulness.

    The study used data from the 2015-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) that included plasma fluoride and water fluoride measurements. None of the included individuals were prescribed medication for sleep disorders.

    Each 0.52 mg/L increase in water fluoride was associated with a 197% higher odds21 of symptoms suggestive of sleep apnea, as well as a 24-minute later bedtime and 26-minute later waking time. According to the authors:22

    “Fluoride exposure may contribute to changes in sleep cycle regulation and sleep behaviors among older adolescents in the U.S. …

    The high accumulation of fluoride in pineal gland hydroxyapatite (among those chronically exposed) points to a plausible mechanism by which fluoride may influence sleep patterns. In adults, pineal gland fluoride concentrations have been shown to strongly correlate with degree of pineal gland calcification.

    Interestingly, greater degree of pineal calcification among older adolescents and/or adults is associated with decreased melatonin production, lower REM sleep percentage, decreased total sleep time, poorer sleep efficiency, greater sleep disturbances and greater daytime tiredness.

    While there are no existing human studies on fluoride exposure and melatonin production or sleep behaviors, findings from a doctoral dissertation demonstrated that gerbils fed a high fluoride diet had lower nighttime melatonin production than those fed a low fluoride diet. Moreover, their melatonin production was lower than normal for their developmental stage …

    It is possible that excess fluoride exposure may contribute to increased pineal gland calcification and subsequent decreases in nighttime melatonin production that contribute to sleep disturbances. Additional animal and prospective human studies are needed to explore this hypothesis.”

    Purify Your Water and Avoid Fluoride
    Water is the only beverage you cannot live without. Unfortunately, pure water is hard to come by these days, as water pollution, inadequate water treatment and the addition of fluoride render most municipal water supplies untrustworthy.

    To ensure purity, you really need to filter your own tap water. For guidance on selecting a suitable water filtration system for your home or apartment, see “How to Properly Filter Your Water.”

    Water filtration is particularly important if your water is fluoridated and you are combating chronic disease (especially thyroid disease), have young children or are using your tap water to reconstitute infant formula.

    Keep in mind that fluoride is very difficult to get out of the water once added. When shopping for a filtration system, make sure it’s specifically rated to filter out fluoride.

    According to the Water Quality Association23 and others,24 filters capable of removing fluoride include reverse osmosis, deionizers and activated alumina adsorption media such as Berkey filters. Distillation, while not a form of filtration, will also remove fluoride. Carbon filters such as PUR and Brita will not filter out fluoride, and neither will water softeners.

    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! Please make a donation today to help FAN end the absurdity of fluoridation."
    Each breath a gift...

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    mountain_jim (24th January 2020)

  7. Link to Post #64
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Thanked 50,626 times in 10,251 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    The ADA’s Bizarre Celebration
    Fluoride Action Network
    "The American Dental Association (ADA) is celebrating the 75th year of water fluoridation. This public health experiment began in Grand Rapids, Michigan on January 25th, 1945. According to Paul Connett, PhD, Director of the Fluoride Action Network, “The fact that this practice has continued for 75 years is reason to lament not celebrate and in this bulletin we explain why.”

    The ADA ignores both the ethics and poor science of fluoridation

    Zealous promoters of Fluoridation (like the ADA) not only continue to ignore the ethical arguments but also ignore the very solid scientific evidence (including US government funded studies) that show that fluoride can damage the fetus and the infant. Instead of carefully analyzing these studies the ADA and its allies continue to repeat the mantra that water fluoridation is “safe and effective.”

    Fluoridation is the biggest public health failure of the Twentieth Century

    Politics and public relations, not science keeps fluoridation alive. Fluoridation proponents, including the American Dental Association (ADA) and the Oral Health Division of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), spend millions on advertising and public relations to sell us fluoridation using half-truths, talking points and diversions. Dentists at the CDC claim that fluoridation is ‘one of the top public health achievements of the twentieth century,’ in reality it is one of greatest public health failures (some would say betrayals) of the twentieth century.

    Fluoridation is unethical

    The Fluoride Action Network and others have shown that the practice of adding fluoridation chemicals to the public’s drinking water is not safe for all residents, harming vulnerable subpopulations while also taking money away from more effective, safe, and less controversial oral health strategies. Unlike all other water treatment processes, fluoridation does not treat the water itself, but the person consuming it. It deprives the individual of his or her right to informed consent to treatment. It is delivered to everyone regardless of age, health, or nutritional status, without individual oversight by a doctor and without control of dose since people drink different amounts of water.

    The highest doses of fluoride are going to the fetus and going to bottle-fed babies.

    Dental fluorosis reaching epidemic proportions

    According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over 41% of adolescents in the U.S. now have visible signs of overexposure to fluoride, called dental fluorosis. Fluorosis is permanently damaged tooth enamel (white spots or pitted and stained enamel) caused by excessive fluoride intake during childhood, and appears to be an indicator of wider systemic damage. Fluoridated water is the primary source of fluoride for these individuals.

    Damage to the brain

    The Fluoride Action Network provides a large health database showing that fluoride can damage virtually all tissues in the body. All tissues are important but the most important organ to protect during fetal and infant development is the brain. Damage occurring to this organ during these early stages of life are permanent and cannot be undone later in life. A large body of government-funded research now indicates that fluoride is neurotoxic and is associated with lowered IQ in children and a significant increase in ADHD diagnosis and related behaviors in children at doses experienced in fluoridated communities. Experts in the field have likened the size of the effect to that from lead.

    This includes over 200 animal studies showing that prolonged exposure to varying levels of fluoride can damage the brain, 64 human studies linking moderately high fluoride exposures with reduced intelligence, 3 human studies linking fluoride exposure with impaired fetal brain development, and 7 Mother-Offspring studies linking fluoride exposure during pregnancy to reduced IQ in offspring.

    The recent draft systematic review by the National Toxicology Program of human studies of fluoride's neurotoxicity concluded that fluoride was a “presumed” neurotoxin based on the large number, quality, and consistency of brain studies.

    A 2006 report by the National Research Council called fluoride an endocrine disruptor, and a number of recent studies indicate that exposure to fluoridated water lowers thyroid function, particularly in women. Recent studies have also linked fluoridated water to kidney and liver impairment, as well as sleep apnea for adolescents.

    Fluoridation is not necessary

    The CDC Oral Health Division has acknowledged that the mechanism of fluoride’s benefits is primarily topical (CDC, 1999), not systemic, meaning there is no reason to swallow it. There is also no shortage of fluoride already available in many inexpensive over the counter and prescribed forms.

    Fluoridation is one of the most widely rejected health interventions in the world.

    Over 95% of the world’s population is fluoridation-free. WHO data indicates no difference in tooth decay in 12-year-olds between fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries. Despite 7 decades of fluoridation reaching a record number of Americans, official reports indicate that a tooth decay crisis exists in the U.S.

    The risks associated with fluoridation clearly outweigh the benefits.

    To ignore the significant potential harm and continue fluoridation would be a huge disservice to our children, especially when there are more effective programs to reduce dental inequities that communities can choose to implement, such as school sealant and education programs, increases to Medicaid reimbursement rates, and expansion of the use of mid-level dental providers.

    Fluoridation is a waste of money

    Fluoridation is a waste of money on many fronts. CDC’s PR claim that, for each $1 invested in fluoridation $38 is saved in dental costs, has been shown to be false by independent scientists. The analysis from the CDC Oral Health Division ignored the costs of treating dental fluorosis and the costs of other harm. The loss of IQ points leads to a HUGE loss in earning ability and over a large population amounts to a loss of billions of dollars.

    Continued promotion will cause an ever-increasing loss of the public’s trust in the agencies that are meant to protect them.

    Continuing this practice in the absence of sound science – and investing millions of dollars in PR to cover up that fact – will further erode the public’s trust in public health programs. Right now the only thing being protected is a failed policy and the reputation of those who refuse to accept that this program has been a massive failure both ethically and scientifically.


    Stuart Cooper
    Campaign Director
    Fluoride Action Network "
    Each breath a gift...

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    peterpam (26th January 2020)

  9. Link to Post #65
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Thanked 50,626 times in 10,251 posts

    Default Re: The Fluoride Thread

    Source: Press Release: Fluoride Action Network | February 10th, 2020 NEW YORK, Feb. 10, 2020 /PRNewswire/ —

    "According to Healthy People 2020, America’s poorest children suffer high tooth decay rates, double that of non-poor children. Seventy-five years of water fluoridation failed to narrow oral health disparities between haves and have nots. Cavities are linked to poverty, malnutrition and inability to get dental care; not to fluoride deficiency. Further, malnutrition, more prevalent in low-income families, is linked to more fluoride-induced tooth damage (dental fluorosis), reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

    Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Director says, “In honor of Children’s Dental Health Month, everyone reading this must contact their local and state legislators. Tell them to stop funding and/or implementing fluoridation. A large body of evidence shows fluoride is neurotoxic. We shouldn’t sacrifice children’s mental health to continue a failed dental health program.”

    Healthy People 2020, a project of the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, reports: 66% of 6-9 year-olds and 60% of 13-15 year-olds from the lowest income families experienced tooth decay compared to 33% of non-poor. The uninsured or publicly-insured suffer more from untreated decay because most dentists shun them.

    Connett says, “Most dentists prefer to treat the water rather than the teeth of low-income folks.”

    Current research (e.g. Irigoyen-Camacho 2015; Kajale 2015; Whitford 1990) supports a 1952 Journal of the American Dental Association (JADA) study linking poor nutrition, especially calcium intake, to increased prevalence and severity of dental fluorosis – factors also linked to cavities.

    Fluoridation began with the discovery that people consuming water naturally high in fluoride had discolored teeth with less cavities. Over-zealous dentists urged supplementation of “fluoride deficient” water supplies to equalize decay rates across America without safety studies. Instead, they spread dental fluorosis. Today over 70% of community drinking water supplies are fluoridated. Yet, tooth decay is now a national crisis along with dental fluorosis – which has skyrocketed.

    We need safer ways to protect children’s teeth, such as the Childsmile program in Scotland. A healthy diet, good oral hygiene, and access to dental care are prerequisites for healthy teeth. Consuming a fluoride-free diet doesn’t cause tooth decay.

    Lack of access to dental care is fueling a dental health crisis. Pew Charitable Trusts in 2012, reported that preventable dental conditions made up more than 830,000 emergency room visits in 2009 – up from 16% in 2006. JADA reported 101 deaths from the consequences of untreated tooth decay.

    *Original News Release online at PRNewsWire at https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...=eml_cleartime "
    Each breath a gift...

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    peterpam (11th February 2020)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 4

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