Our objections to fluoridation

1. New science proves there is no benefit from swallowing fluoride

2. Fluoridation creates more health problems than it is alleged to fix. It’s not safe.

3. Fluoridated water is particularly harmful to infants.

4. Most countries in the world do not fluoridate their water.

5. Fluoride impacts negatively on the environment.

6. Fluoride used in fluoridation is contaminated with heavy metals including lead.

7. Fluoridation is enforced medication without your consent.

1. New science proves there is no benefit from swallowing fluoride

“The understanding of how fluoride now works is that the vast and predominant effect is a topical one.” Says Dr Robin Whyman,consortium partner for the NZ Government’s National Fluoridation Information Service – Bay Buzz, Hawke’s Bay 9th May 2013.

“… When we drink or cook with fluoridated water it is in contact with the tooth and that is the first defence against decay. “ NZ dental researcher Kanagaratnum Herald on Sunday 31st March 2013.

When you observe the statistics of the world they clearly show tooth decay has declined in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas alike. This is a trend that is demonstrated when viewing the statistics across the States in America and in the smaller counties. See the charts and findings by Dr. Bill Osmunson in the video Professional Perspectives.

In New Zealand there have been two recent studies that showed there was no difference in dental decay for permanent teeth.  One was the Southland Study in 2005 and the other was the Auckland study in 2008. These, among many other studies, have proven water fluoridation to be ineffective.

The basic premise that swallowing fluoride prevents tooth decay has been disproved. When water fluoridation was first introduced en masse in the 1950s, dentists argued that fluoride needed to be ingested by children — while their teeth were developing — in order to be effective. The theory was that by swallowing fluoride it would accumulate in the teeth and make the enamel stronger and less susceptible to decay. However, since 1999 this theory has been rejected by all dental researchers (Featherstone 2000; Fejerskov 2004) and now the belief is that the primary benefit from fluoride is topical rather than systemic. That means it has to be applied to the teeth, not swallowed. Dentists continue to promote fluoridation as they say there is also a smaller benefit from swallowing fluoride because it gets into peoples saliva and helps to remineralise the teeth.

2. Fluoridation creates more health problems than it is alleged to fix

Many of the older studies undertaken on the effects of fluoride did not have the technological capabilities available today. Recent studies have more relevance as technology has advanced. From 2003 to 2006 America’s National Research Council’s (NRC) undertook a review called Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards. The panel members consisted of 12 of the top fluoride experts from northern America and is the most authoritive review of fluoride ever to be undertaken. The review was to look at the maximum contaminent level (MCL) of fluoride in drinking water. They concluded that the amount needed to lowered from 4ppm (in NZ the MCL is only 1.5ppm) but could not define at what level fluoride would be safe. Many of the studies they used to make their assessments had fluoride at much lower levels than 4ppm.

The Review expressed deep concern about the harmful effects of fluoridated water on the endocrine system, particularly the thyroid.

According to NRC Panel Member, Dr Hardy Limeback – “In my opinion, the evidence that fluoridation is more harmful than beneficial is now overwhelming and policy makers who avoid thoroughly reviewing recent data before introducing new fluoridation schemes do so at risk of future litigation.”

And another NRC Panel Member, Dr. Robert Isaacson, said the Report “should be a wake-up call.”

According to Dr John Doull, the pro-fluoride Panel Chair – “The thyroid changes do worry me. There are some things there that need to be explored. What the committee found is that we’ve gone with the status quo regarding fluoride for many years—for too long, really—and now we need to take a fresh look. In the scientific community, people tend to think this is settled. I mean, when the U.S. Surgeon General comes out and says this is one of the 10 greatest achievements of the 20th century, that’s a hard hurdle to get over. But when we looked at the studies that have been done, we found that many of these questions are unsettled and we have much less information than we should, considering how long this [fluoridation]has been going on.

3. Fluoridated water is particularly harmful to infants

Both the American Dental Association and US Public Health Services’ Centers for Disease Control have issued recommendations that fluoridated water not be given to infants nor used to make infant formula, because of the risk of developing dental fluorosis.  Dental fluorosis is an irreversible condition caused by excessive ingestion of fluoride during the tooth forming years. It is the first visible sign that a child has been overexposed to fluoride.

Fluoridation promoters in NZ claim that dental fluorosis is only a cosmetic effect, however, studies show that children and adults with dental fluorosis are at higher risk of bone fractures. Similarly, a thin blue line on the gum is a visible sign that a child has been overexposed to lead.  No-one would be unthinking enough to claim that this was only cosmetic.

Dental fluorosis

Fluoridated water contains 250 times more fluoride than breast milk. At six months of age, bottle-fed babies will be consuming about 1 ltr of formula a day, this equates to a dose of around .85 mg per day.  This exceeds what the NRC found to effect the thyroid.  It has also been found {Hong et al} that babies at 6 months of age are the most susceptible to developing dental fluorosis. New Zealand studies show that around 30% of children living in fluoridated areas have some form of dental fluorosis.  Obviously, babies in fluoridated areas are getting too much fluoride.

4. Most countries do not fluoridate their water

Most countries in the world do not fluoridation their water. The only countries that have more than 50% water fluoridation are the US, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Singapore, Hong Kong and Israel.

There is no water fluoridation in the whole of continental Europe. In Beliguim, where a lot of New Zealand’s fluoride comes from, they have even banned the tablets.

5. Fluoride impacts negatively on the environment

In 1989 it came to light that the Columbia River at John Day Dam was delaying migration of the Chinook salmon by as much as three times as long as migration in other areas of Canada, as well as causing loss of adult salmon.  [The North American Journal of Fisheries Management in 1989, 9:154-162]. Fluoride Emissions into the river from the local aluminum plant was the cause of this pollution. When there was a drop in fluoride discharges from the plant there was a corresponding decrease in interdam losses of adult salmon and fish passage. In New Zealand, Ravensdown was sued in Hawkes Bay because of fluoride emission into the environment because it was ruining the orchards. Yet in New Zealand there has been no comprehensive environmental impact study done on fluoridated water polluting our ecosystem. We don’t know how the toxic load in our environment is effecting our fisheries, soils, animals or fauna; but we do know fluoride affects our environment because it’s illegal for the substance to be emitted into the environment. Except of course when it is collected, repackaged and sold to municipalities and added to the general public’s water supply. This means of disposal is legal and mysteriously becomes safe for human consumption and the environment.

6. Fluoride used in fluoridation is contaminated with heavy metals including lead

Fluoridation was originally a corporate promoted solution for the aluminium industry to sell their toxic waste product for profit. Today fluoride for drinking water comes from the chimneys of the phosphate fertilizer industry. The fluoride used is contaminated with heavy metals (including lead a known neuro toxin). The phosphate industry use “scrubbers” to capture fluoride gases produced in the production of commercial fertilizer. This is because if they allowed too much of it to escape into the atmosphere they would be liable for being major polluters. If the fluoride acid was placed in a barrel with holes in it, and dumped in our rivers they would face heavy fines and criminal prosecution.

According to Chris Nokes, Senior Scientist Environmental Science and Research, HFA “is produced during the manufacture of super phosphate fertilizer and is also corrosive and hazardous.” The Material Safety Data Sheet says that fluoride is “Corrosive to metals. Reacts violently with bases, and organic chemicals”, it also says that “Avoid contaminating waterways. If contamination of sewers or waterways has occurred advise local emergency services.”

However a solution has been found whereby the fluoride acid (hydrofluorosilicic acid), a classified hazardous waste, is barrelled up and sold, unrefined, to communities across the world for the purpose of adding it to public water supply to mass medicate populations to prevent tooth decay in forming teeth. Mysteriously the substance becomes safe for the environment and humans once it’s sold in this regard. Even if you don’t live in a community where fluoride is added to water, you’ll still be getting a dose of it through cereal, soda, juice, beer and any other processed food and drink manufactured with fluoridated water. If it is illegal for these corporations to dump the waste in our rivers it certainly should be illegal for them to sell fluoride for the purpose of adding it to our drinking water.

7. Fluoridation is enforced medication without your consent

Fluoride is the only chemical added to drinking water for the purpose of medication (to prevent tooth decay). All other treatment chemicals are added to treat the water (to improve the water’s quality and safety – which fluoride does not do). This is one of the reasons why most of Europe has rejected fluoridation and it is now being questioned by professionals in the United States.

Dr. Charles Gordon Heyd, former President of the American Medical Association said “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.”

The British Medical Journal in 2007 announced it’s findings of a review of fluoridation and said the evidence underpinning water fluoridation is of “poor quality.” … “If fluoride is a medicine, evidence on its effects should be subject to the standards of proof expected of drugs, including evidence from randomized trials… There have been no randomized trials of water fluoridation.”

In Belgium, it is “the fundamental position of the drinking water sector that it is not its task to deliver medicinal treatment to people. This is the sole responsibility of health services.” (Chr. Legros, Directeur, Belgaqua, Brussels, Belgium, February 28, 2000).

In Luxembourg, “In our views, drinking water isn’t the suitable way for medicinal treatment and that people needing an addition of fluoride can decide by their own to use the most appropriate way.” (Jean-Marie RIES, Head, Water Department, Administration De L’Environment, May 3, 2000).

Furthermore, it is illegal for Doctors to prescribe medicine without a license or private consultation. Should Councillors, Dentists and Politicians in be prescribing without a license and private consultation? Even if you believe that fluoride taken systemically improves tooth decay rates, when scientific studies have disproved that theory, there are more ethical and moral ways or prescribing the medicinal treatment than a one size fits all, uncontrolled dose, approach.