FHN Complementary Medicine Newsletter April 2004
Like most Americans, including many physicians and dentists, most of us thought that fluoride's only effects were beneficial - reductions in tooth decay, etc. We believed assurances of safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation. To say the least there is a growing controversy regarding this practice. I think some headlines from around the world might illustrate the issues.
“EPA knew that a significant number of children develop moderate to severe dental fluorosis, but since it had deemed the effect as only cosmetic, EPA didn't have to set its health-based standard at a lower level to prevent it.”
“These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis.”
“…two epidemiology studies from China that show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.”
“…fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin.”
“New research of bone cancer figures has shown a 40% elevated rate in Republic of Ireland (fluoridated) compared to Northern Ireland (unfluoridated).(1) The bone cancer in question called osteosarcoma is one of the most prevalent cancers in young males, aged 9-20. There are both animal and human studies linking osteosarcoma and water fluoridation/fluoride.”
"the assessment indicates that infants below the age of four months are exposed to doses of fluoride that exceed the recognised no observable effect level…. bottle-feeding parents are still overdosing their infants with fluoride from the tap water. “
Hope this gives you something to think about!
Drs. Glenn and Julie Smith