| 
			
 
  
			by Mary Sparrowdancer4-11-2006
 
			from
			
			Rense Website 
			  
				
					
						| 
						Mary 
						Sparrowdancer is the author of The Love Song of the 
						Universe, (2001, Hampton Roads), and is a science and 
						health writer with training in clinical laboratory 
						sciences, including bacteriology, 
						electroencephalography, hematology and microscopic 
						evaluation.  
						Mary 
						co-authors a health newsletter with Dr. Luise Light, 
						author of "What to Eat," (2006, McGraw-Hill). Luise is 
						former USDA Director of Dietary Guidance and Nutrition 
						Education, and was the creator of the real fruit and 
						vegetable Food Pyramid.  |  
				
					
						
						"It is 
						crucial to note that this [NRC] report is NOT about 
						community water fluoridation." - The American Dental Association (caps theirs).
 
			When is toxic sludge 
			good for us? When profit can be made by selling it.  
			  
			The truth, of 
			course, never really changes, nor can the truth be altered by even 
			the most corrupt and outdated of advertising campaigns. No matter 
			how frequently a white-coated promoter presents himself as an 
			"expert" or an "official" and repeats the age-worn slogans and 
			distinctions given to this toxic sludge - i.e., that this product is 
			good for us, that it is "safe and effective," and that it is one of 
			the top ten public health wonders of the past century - toxic sludge 
			remains toxic sludge. It has not ever been "good for us."  
			  
			According to the 
			government's own databases it has not ever been "safe and effective" 
			despite their continued "official" misleading claims. It is time to 
			leave the last century behind along with its deliberate lies and 
			deceptions. It is time to enter a new century and learn the truth 
			about the lies - primarily the truth about fluoride and what 
			fluoride has truly cost the citizens of the United States of 
			America: According to newly published reports, fluoridation may have 
			cost some of them their lives and others their health. 
 Tens of millions of Americans throughout the US are now spending an 
			unprecedented amount of money each year purchasing pharmaceutical 
			products. These unprecedented billions of US dollars (approximately 
			$252 billion for prescription drugs in 2005) are being spent because 
			US citizens are attempting to purchase relief from an unprecedented 
			array of mysterious, nationwide symptoms. If one follows the money 
			and looks at the top ranking pharmaceutical sales, it quickly 
			becomes apparent that Americans appear to be collectively seeking 
			relief from similar symptoms. Three of the most common symptoms now 
			occurring in the US are thyroid malfunction, elevated cholesterol 
			and GI problems. (1, 2, 3)
 
 The billions of US dollars spent in the search for relief should be 
			speaking loudly to us. The money alone should be telling us that 
			something affecting most of the nation is affecting most of the 
			nation rather profoundly. We now find that it is certainly 
			reasonable to suspect that this "something" might well be the toxic 
			sludge that has been added to our drinking water for over 50 years.
 
			  
			This mass-medical 
			treatment has been done under the promise that it would guarantee 
			the prevention of dental cavities, yet the guarantee has never 
			delivered its promised claim. States with the highest percentage of 
			water fluoridation - such as Kentucky, which is just under 100% 
			"optimally fluoridated" - also have the highest percentage of caries 
			and dental problems. The CDC reports 42% of "optimally fluoridated" 
			Kentuckians had lost all of their teeth. (4) 
 As if this were not enough, we now learn that the substance being 
			used to medically "treat" two-thirds of the nation via drinking 
			water has never been tested, approved or found to be safe for human 
			consumption by any government agency, including the FDA and the 
			USDA. (5)
 
 Forget the "official" advertising slogans for fluoride; forget the 
			invented titles of grandeur and the emotion-charged suggestion that 
			we "must do this for the sake of the poor children." Forget the 
			false news alerts reassuring us that water fluoridation remains 
			"safe and effective" and forget the reminders that it has been 
			called one of the great wonders of the past century. Our focus 
			should now be upon the reports that surfaced just after the Ides of 
			March in 2006. After over 50 years of misleading glorification, 
			toxic sludge has been officially identified by a blue ribbon 
			researcher panel as toxic sludge. We now know we must keep this 
			sludge away from our children and out of our water - because our 
			lives and health depend upon it.
 
 On March 22, 2006, the National Academies' National Research Council 
			(NRC) issued a 500-page report looking at peer-reviewed studies on
			the side-effects of fluorides. The importance of this report is 
			profound not only in its findings and recommendations, but also 
			because the NRC advises government agencies such as the CDC, EPA and 
			others as to what research evidence is appropriate, timely and 
			relevant to their work.
 
 Despite the misleading comments now surfacing that the NRC report 
			dealt only with "naturally occurring fluoride," and that the report 
			was "NOT" about water fluoridation, etc., the NRC report clearly 
			states that fluoride exposure from all sources was considered. As 
			stated on page 19 of the NRC report, sources for internal fluoride 
			exposure include "food, water, beverages, dental products" and in 
			addition to ingestion, internal exposure to fluoride also occurs 
			from inhalation and dermal [skin] absorption.
 
				
				"Most fluorine added 
				to drinking water," the report states, "is in the form of 
				fluosilicic acid - or sodium fluosilicate - collectively 
				referred to as fluorosilicates."  
			On page 20, the report 
			states,  
				
				"The major dietary 
				source of fluoride for most people in the United States is 
				fluoridated municipal (community) drinking water."  
			The NRC study then 
			examined numerous reports, showing an association between fluoride 
			ingestion and an appalling range of physical side effects, disorders 
			and diseases. 
 Shortly after the above NRC study was published, a long-awaited 
			Harvard study led by Dr. Elise Bassin also surfaced after several 
			years of being shelved rather than released to the public. Dr. 
			Bassin's dissertation was completed in May of 2001. In her study she 
			found that boys who ingested fluoridated water between the ages of 6 
			to 8, were significantly more likely to later develop a deadly form 
			of bone cancer, osteosarcoma, than boys who did not drink 
			fluoridated water. (6)
 
 According to a letter from the Environmental Working Group (EWG) to 
			the National Toxicology Program, Report on Carcinogens, dated June 
			9, 2005, Dr. Bassin's study first came to the attention of the EWG,
 
				
				"as a result of a 
				failed attempt to obtain the full doctoral thesis by the staff 
				of the National Research Council committee on fluoride safety. 
				After being repeatedly denied a copy of the thesis, the NRC 
				committee instead sent a committee member to the Harvard 
				Countway Library of Medicine to read the entire document and 
				report back to the committee. Environmental Working Group 
				obtained a copy of the results section of the document from the 
				Fluoride Action Network, who sent two researchers to the 
				library, each of whom were allowed to copy 10 percent of the 
				document." (7)  
			The knowledge that we 
			have lost children, and children have lost limbs as a result of 
			mandated fluoride ingestion is nothing short of a national disgrace. 
			If there is anything more appalling than learning this, it is 
			perhaps in learning about the deliberate, ongoing suppression of 
			information linking fluoride ingestion to adverse health effects, 
			and the deliberate disinformation being dispensed to the 
			unsuspecting public by promoters. 
 As stated earlier, three of the most common, major problems 
			currently plaguing US citizens are thyroid malfunction, raised 
			cholesterol levels, and GI problems. As of the publication of the 
			NRC report, it becomes apparent that there are reports linking these 
			major problems to fluoride exposure.
 
 On page 225, the NRC study states that when fluoride is ingested it 
			combines with hydrogen ions, forming hydrogen fluoride (HF).
 
				
				"Upon entering the 
				interstitial fluid in the mucosa where the pH approaches 
				neutrality, HF dissociates to release fluoride and hydrogen ions 
				which can cause tissue damage."  
			The last four words will 
			perhaps be the most relevant and clearly stated words for most, 
			especially those suffering from chronic GI problems. According to a 
			March, 2005 News Release of the American Gastroenterological 
			Association, "Gastrointestinal disease is a growing U.S. health 
			problem, now affecting more than 65 million Americans." (8, 9) 
 It is in the NRC chapter pertaining to fluoride's "Effects on the 
			Endocrine System," that we learn about thyroid malfunction and its 
			corresponding effect on cholesterol levels. Many people do not yet 
			realize that when the thyroid is damaged, an extraordinarily wide 
			range of symptoms then occurs. In fact, one of the complaints that 
			fluoride promoters have had about fluoridation opponents, is that 
			the opponents have blamed fluoride for a "laundry list" of ailments. 
			It turns out that the laundry list was right on target - damage the 
			thyroid and the whole body and mind are affected.
 
 The NRC states,
 
				
				"Biondi et al. (2002) associate subclinical thyroid 
			dysfunction with changes in cardiac function and corresponding 
			increased risks of heart disease."  
			Other reports listed in the NRC 
			show thyroid malfunction is associated with,  
				
				"bone demineralization, 
			increased cholesterol, depression, cognitive dysfunction and reduced 
			IQ levels in offspring."  
			On page 197, the NRC states,  
				
				"Thus, several 
			lines of information indicate an effect of fluoride exposure on 
			thyroid function."  
			The NRC went on to state 
			that because of the complexity of thyroid function and other factors 
			including nutrition,  
				
				"it is difficult to 
				predict exactly what effects on thyroid function are likely at 
				what concentration of fluoride exposure and under what 
				circumstances."  
			Fluoride levels 
			associated with goiter prevalence in some areas studied were less 
			than "0.1 to 0.36 mg/L." According to the American Association of 
			Clinical Endocrinologists, approximately 27,000,000 Americans now 
			have thyroid disorders. (10) 
 In addition to all of this, we also have the numerous dental 
			problems clearly long-associated with fluoride. Because the dental 
			problems are so visible, they have been historically the only 
			problems acknowledged by the promoters as a link to fluoride 
			poisoning. Even in acknowledgement, however, these problems have 
			been downplayed. They are repeatedly referred to as mere "cosmetic 
			problems," and are therefore routinely dismissed as unimportant. It 
			would appear that in the official minds of the promoters, these 
			"cosmetic problems" go no further than the surface of the tooth - as 
			though the head is attached to a set of wheels rather than a living 
			body. As though it will be only the tooth enamel that will become 
			etched and stained and destroyed when the entire body is 
			systemically fluorosed on a daily basis at unknowable doses - and 
			that the rest of the body will somehow be miraculously spared.
 
 As outlined in the NRC report, the type of fluoride primarily used 
			in water fluoridation was identified as "fluorosilicates." Among the 
			most insulting of facts pertaining to fluorosilicates is their 
			source. This toxic sludge that is being disposed of in our drinking 
			water is nothing more than an unwanted waste product from the 
			phosphate fertilizer industry. (11)
 
 Voices of reason seem to be much in need at this time of many 
			questions. Dr Bob Carton is an environmental scientist who 
			worked for over 30 years in the federal government. From 1972-1992, 
			Dr. Carton worked at the headquarters of the U.S. Environmental 
			Protection Agency in Washington, D.C. writing regulations and 
			managing risk assessments on high priority toxic chemicals. In 1985, 
			as a union official, he became aware of the fraudulent nature of the 
			EPA standard for fluoride in drinking water, and fought to expose 
			it. In 1987, he led the union attempt to file an amicus brief in a 
			court case brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council against 
			the EPA, challenging the standards for fluoride in drinking water.
 
			  
			His seems to be a voice of reason.  
				
				"The NRC called for 
				testing of silicofluorides, the chemicals used to fluoridate 
				water in 92% of fluoridated water supplies," Dr Carton stated. 
				"This is a shocking admission that the real chemicals used to 
				fluoridate water have never been tested by the government." (12)
				 
			At this time, the voices 
			of reason have spoken, and the reports of March are now sitting upon 
			the table before us. Despite the contents of those reports, we hear 
			the familiar, perennial voices of the promoters - people known as 
			"officials" who are affiliated with collective bodies such as the 
			CDC and the American Dental Association, issuing confusing 
			statements about the NRC report, including as already seen,  
				
				"It is crucial 
					to note that this report is NOT about community water 
					fluoridation."  
				And, "This 
					report deals only with naturally occurring levels of 
					fluoride in water."  
				And, "This 
					report in no way examines or calls into question the safety 
					of community water fluoridation."  
			It appears that "public 
			health officials" from coast to coast are coming forward now with 
			similar statements and misleading or false news, saying things such 
			as,  
				
				"This report does 
				not apply to communities that adjust the fluoride in water 
				supplies at the lower levels effective for preventing tooth 
				decay."  
				And, "This report 
				does not examine the health risks or benefits associated with 
				fluoridated drinking water systems."  
				And, "This report 
				dealt only with naturally-occurring levels of fluoride in water, 
				and is not about community water fluoridation." (13)  
			For those who might try 
			to turn to the CDC for some decent, sage advice, we find that the 
			"official," statement on their website incomprehensibly compares 
			fluoride to "vitamins and minerals," and that despite any findings 
			to the contrary, fluoridation continues to be "safe and effective" 
			in their opinion. Still not satisfied that they have fully 
			vindicated the toxin that is now affecting all of us, they 
			misleadingly state,  
				
				"The findings of the 
				NRC report are consistent with CDC's assessment that water is 
				safe and healthy at the levels used for water fluoridation." 
				(See 13 list.)  
			When it becomes clear 
			that a great divide is appearing between the voices of reason and 
			the voices of the promoters, and when it appears that the voices of 
			the promoters care more about their product rather than the health 
			and safety of the general public, then it becomes imperative for 
			each American who values life, limb and health to stop relying upon 
			the confusing "official" statements, and do his or her own homework.
			
 Visit the National Academies Press page, as listed below and you 
			will find an index of eleven chapters, summaries, appendices, etc. 
			Select the chapters that you feel might pertain to the health and 
			well-being of you, your family and loved ones - i.e., choose from 
			teeth, musculoskeletal, reproductive, developmental effects, 
			neurotoxicity, neurobehavioral effects, effects on the endocrine 
			system, effects on gastrointestinal, renal, hepatic and immune 
			system, genotoxicity, carcinogenic effects. Or perhaps you might 
			feel all of these chapters could, indeed, pertain to you. Take the 
			time to read the chapters for yourself so you will see with your own 
			eyes what the NRC report studied, reviewed and is stating.
 
 This might be the most important reading you will ever do. It might 
			save the lives, as well as the health, of those you love.
 
 
			  
			References
 
				
				
				PRIMARY SUGGESTED 
				READING: National Academies Press - "Fluoride in Drinking 
				Water," Full Report. Table of Contents. 3/2006. April 2006 http://darwin.nap.edu/books/030910128X/html/
 
 Cited References
 1. US Drug Sales, 2005. $252 Billion. April, 2006.
 http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=38332
 
 2. RX List Top 300, 2004. Sales in Billions. April 2006.
 http://www.rxlist.com/top200_sales_2004.htm
 
 3. RX List Top 300, 2004. Prescriptions Dispensed. April 2006
 http://www.rxlist.com/top200.htm
 
 4. State of apparent dental emergency in "optimally fluoridated" 
				Kentucky. April 2006.
 http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5250a3.htm
 
 5. "The dose recommended for water fluoridation when adjusted 
				for weight is the same dose recommended for prescription 
				supplements. However, no clinical trials have been conducted and 
				submitted to the FDA to demonstrate the effectiveness of 
				ingesting fluoride." - NJ Assemblyman John Kelly. 8/14/2000. 
				April 2006
 http://www.fluoridealert.org/fda.htm
 
 6. Boston Herald: 4/6/2006 - "Young boys who drink fluoridated 
				tap water are at greater risk for a rare bone cancer, Harvard 
				researchers reported yesterday." April 2006.
 http://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=133828
 
 7. Environmental Group - Bone Cancer. April 2006
 http://www.ewg.org/issues/fluoride/20060405/index.php
 http://www.ewg.org/issues/fluoride/20050606/petition.php
 
 8. American Gastroenterological Association. April 2006
				
				
				http://www.fdhn.org/news/TAP_gift_release.pdf
 
 9. National Academies Press - "Fluoride in Drinking Water," Full 
				Report. Table of Contents. 3/2006. April 2006
 http://darwin.nap.edu/books/030910128X/html/
 
 10. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists - "Thyroid 
				Awareness Month, 2003." April 2006
 http://www.aace.com/public/awareness/tam/2003/facts.php
 
 11. Fluoride Action Network. Overview. Phosphate Fertilizer 
				Industry. Paul Connett. 5/2003. April 2006.
 http://www.fluoridealert.org/phosphate/overview.htm
 Photos, wastewater ponds, sinkhole in gypsum stacks.
 http://www.fluoridealert.org/phosphate/photographs2.htm
 
 and
 
 Letter from eleven EPA Unions to Gov. Schwarzenneger announcing 
				EPA Unions' call for Nationwide Moratorium on Fluoridation. 
				Fluoride originates from phosphate fertilizer production. 
				8/9/05. April 2006.
 http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/userletter/?id=2032&letter_id=463439566
 
 12. Dr. Robert Carton. Personal correspondence and 
				conversations. April, 2006.
 See also Amicus Brief, of which Dr. Carton was manager for the 
				EPA professionals union. Among the arguments presented in the 
				Amicus are, "The EPA Failed to Properly Ascertain the Acceptable 
				Daily Dose of Fluoride." The statements in this brief are still 
				operable. April 2006.
 http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/000052.htm
 
 13. American Dental Association, "Crucial" Alert - 4/9/2006
 http://www.ada.org/prof/index.asp
 
 and
 Oregon, Department of Human Services. 4/6/2006. April 2006.
 http://www.medfordnews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=329621&cp=10996
 
 Vermont, Health Department Statement. 3/23/2006. April 2006.
 http://healthvermont.gov/news/2006/032306fluoride.aspx
 
 and
 CDC - Fluoride is like vitamins and minerals - and it is safe 
				and effective, too (despite findings to the contrary).
 http://www.cdc.gov/oralhealth/waterfluoridation/safety/nrc_report.htm
 
			   |