End Fluoridation, Say 500 Physicians, Dentists, Scientists.

[Wakeupcall]

I have no objection to state funded public healthcare measures that work. And fluoridation, along with vaccination, has arguably been the most successful public health measure ever implemented in the State.

To make the people even more docile. Of course it was a success, oppression was the subtle goal!

[LeDroit]

To make the people even more docile. Of course it was a success, oppression was the subtle goal!

Ah jaysus, get a girlfriend or a hobby or something will you.

[Samell]

Politcal decisions based on populist fear mongering. Not scientific research or evidence. Scaremongering works on ignorant people. That's why you must be fought.

The original champion of water fluoridation H. Trendly Dean DDS, admitted under oath 55 years ago that his data purporting to prove the efficacy of fluoridation for dental health were invalid. (City of Oroville v's Public Utilities Comission of the State of California-H.Trendly Dean proceedings, Oroville, Ca 20-21 October 1955.

U.S study of 50 000 people in 68 cities in 1986/7 showed fluoride increased tooth decay

400 000 children studied in India measuring Calcium and Fluoride levels, Fluoride increases decay calcium reduces it

21 000 children studied in Japan in1972 Fluoride found to increase tooth decay.

After 20 years of fluoridation in Seattle Wa authorities reported an unprecedented dental crisis.

22 000 children studied in Tuscon Az. Fluoride increased tooth decay

In 1987, Alan S Grey DDS, FRCD(C), director of the Division of Dental Health Services for the British Columbia, called for the re-examination of the relevance of Fluoride compounds in the Canadian public water supply when it was learned that tooth decay rates in British Columbia (11% of the population use fluoridated water) were LOWER than those of other Canadian provinces with Fluoridation rates of 40%-70%.

but obviously these fact and figures are just scaremongering on my part LeDroit and cannot be thought of as scientific.

Accept we are being forced to take a non-approved, un-researched medical product against our will, this is not a conspiracy theory but fact. No Fluoride additive has ever received FDA approval, it is a waste product from industry, it is not even treated to ensure it is of pharmaceutical standard, it is RAW INDUSTRIAL WASTE added to our water.

I am not a crank wanting fluffy green TD's to make the world right I just want to have a choice about what I put in my body.

[fiannafailure]

I have no objection to state funded public healthcare measures that work. And fluoridation, along with vaccination, has arguably been the most successful public health measure ever implemented in the State.

LeDroit

How can you make that statement about fluoridation, please explain your reasoning and where is the data to support it to be found.

We spoke about smoking earlier, an activity that at one stage was prescribed by doctors.

Wakeupcall

To make the people even more docile. Of course it was a success, oppression was the subtle goal!

I am more of the opinion that it was a genuine gesture towards dental health in the 60's and it simply become a bad habit that officialdom is perhaps afraid to study now for fear of litigation.

But until the studies are done nothing can be proved, I am currently dealing with four consultants and and in the case of three out of the four, fluoridation has crossed their mind as a possible cause of the sharp rise adenocarcinoma of the glandular and lymphatic system's.

However for some diseases there is very little doubt about the effects of fluoride http://www.pjps.pk/CD-PJPS-16-2-03/Paper-2.pdf

Skeletal flourosis is one of the crippling endemic disease which is widely distributed all over the world in high fluoride areas. It is mainly caused by fluoride in drinking water, burning coal and phosphate fertilizers. In July 2000 about 124 children of age group 4-16 years were detected suffering from skeletal fluorosis at Manga Mandi near Lahore. Fluoride content in drinking water of this area was ranging from 0.45 ppm to 29 ppm (Ahmad, 2001).

Luckily a few studies are being done on the effects of fluoride on the human body and how these effects may manifest an example is here

Fluoride does not accumulate in brain. Of all tissues, brain has the lowest fluoride concentration [Jenkins, 1991; Whitford, 1996; Ekstrand, 1996]. It is generally agreed that the blood-brain barrier restricts the passage of fluoride into the central nervous system. The human pineal gland is outside the blood-brain barrier [Arendt, 1995]. It is one of a few unique regions in the brain (all midline structures bordering the third and fourth ventricles) where the blood-brain barrier is weak. Cells in these regions require direct and unimpeded contact with blood [Rapoport, 1976]. Therefore, pinealocytes have free access to fluoride in the bloodstream. This fact, coupled with the presence of HA, suggest that the pineal gland may sequester fluoride from the bloodstream.

The purpose of this study was to discover whether fluoride accumulates in the aged pineal gland. Its objectives were to determine (a) the fluoride concentrations of the pineal gland (wet), corresponding muscle (wet) and bone (ash); (b) the pineal concentrations of calcium and HA.

The study proved that fluoride readily accumulates in the Pineal gland

In conclusion, this study presented evidence that fluoride readily accumulates in the aged pineal. Fluoride may also accumulate in a child's pineal because significant amounts of calcification have been demonstrated in the pineals from young children [Cooper, 1932; Wurtman, 1968; Kerényi and Sarkar, 1968; Tapp and Huxley, 197 1; Doskocil, 1984]. In fact, calcification of the developing enamel organs and the pineal gland occur concurrently. If fluoride does accumulate in the child's pineal (this needs verification), the pinealocytes will be exposed to relatively high local concentrations of fluoride. This could affect pineal metabolism in much the same way that high local concentrations of fluoride in the developing enamel organ affect ameloblast function. Research is presently underway to discover whether fluoride affects pineal physiology during childhood: specifically pineal synthesis of melatonin.

Now if the pineal gland accumulates fluoride it is very possible, indeed likely, that it also accumulates in the nearby pituitary gland which is also a weak spot in the blood-brain barrier and the effects here could be just what is required to promote glandular associated cancers.

LeDroit

The odd big mac does nobody any harm, just as the occasional exposure to flouride does no harm, but compulsorily drinking an accepted carcinogen every day for a lifetime and consuming it with everything you eat is what concerns me.

[fiannafailure]

There I was minding my own business the other morning, when this article came through my news feed.

Common bone drugs linked to esophageal cancer risk | Reuters

(Reuters) - People who take a commonly used class of osteoporosis drugs called bisphosphonates for more than five years may be doubling their risk of developing cancer of the gullet or esophagus, a British study found on Friday.

Researchers who conducted the work said the results were worrying, but should not prompt doctors or patients to immediately change their practice on bisphosphonates, which are prescribed mainly to older people to help strengthen weak bones.

Now as most people on this site know, I was diagnosed with this form of cancer about 6 months ago and so I read it through and moved on.

But there was something about that report that pestered my brain for hours, and then it came to me. I had read a book some months ago published by the National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, and that was the cause of my pesteration.

Fluoride and bisphosphonates are closely related.

Fluoride in drinking water: a scientific review of EPA's standards Fluoride in drinking water: a scientific review of EPA's standards

Click on the link to google books above the link brings you to page 139 which had caused my brain to go into overdrive.

Many people have scoffed at the links provided to support the contention that fluoride is harmful, the most common complaint being that they did not have much academic accreditation.

Here we have a report from Oxford university alonfside a report from the US National Research Council, which if read together suggest that when fluoride is taken over a long period of time, it doubles the incidence of cancers affecting the digestive system.

Exactly what the worldwide trend in cancer diagnosis is telling us.

I have just advised my 16 year old daughter to study hard, become a lawyer specialising in medical cases and become very rich.

The bell tolls for water fluoridation and perhaps its governmental supporters.

[river]

There I was minding my own business the other morning, when this article came through my news feed.

Common bone drugs linked to esophageal cancer risk | Reuters



Now as most people on this site know, I was diagnosed with this form of cancer about 6 months ago and so I read it through and moved on.

But there was something about that report that pestered my brain for hours, and then it came to me. I had read a book some months ago published by the National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Fluoride in Drinking Water, and that was the cause of my pesteration.

Fluoride and bisphosphonates are closely related.

Fluoride in drinking water: a scientific review of EPA's standards Fluoride in drinking water: a scientific review of EPA's standards

Click on the link to google books above the link brings you to page 139 which had caused my brain to go into overdrive.

Many people have scoffed at the links provided to support the contention that fluoride is harmful, the most common complaint being that they did not have much academic accreditation.

Here we have a report from Oxford university alonfside a report from the US National Research Council, which if read together suggest that when fluoride is taken over a long period of time, it doubles the incidence of cancers affecting the digestive system.

Exactly what the worldwide trend in cancer diagnosis is telling us.

I have just advised my 16 year old daughter to study hard, become a lawyer specialising in medical cases and become very rich.

The bell tolls for water fluoridation and perhaps its governmental supporters.

how are biphospanates and flouride closly related??
is there any bit of real science to this antiflouride rubbish

[realist]

Here we have a report from Oxford university alonfside a report from the US National Research Council, which if read together suggest that when fluoride is taken over a long period of time, it doubles the incidence of cancers affecting the digestive system.

This article may be of some interest to you.

Controlling the fluoride dosage in a patient with ... [J Am Dent Assoc. 2005] - PubMed result

[soubresauts]

This article may be of some interest to you.

Controlling the fluoride dosage in a patient with ... [J Am Dent Assoc. 2005] - PubMed result

I've been studying the fluoride issue for 15 years, but I didn't know that --
cancer patients are self-treating with fluoride gels. It is mind-boggling. Those fluoride gels are deadly dangerous.

And all because of tooth decay. "Compromised salivary function" can mean more tooth decay because the oral bacteria can be more active.

And what causes tooth decay? Sugar! There is no other cause. But you almost never hear doctors or dentists telling people that they can avoid decay by avoiding sugar... because they have to uphold the myth that fluoride is the answer to tooth decay.

Western medicine is completely obsessed with dosing people with fluoride.

At the same time, tooth decay is rampant in the western world, particularly in Ireland.

Here's something else I didn't know until the other day: nearly all babies are dosed with sugar from the day they are born. Sugar? Yes, ordinary sugar, sucrose. Why? Because sugar is a painkiller. Did you not know that? I didn't either. And why would a baby need a painkiller? Because doctors are always sticking needles in babies, from the day they're born.

Fortunately, some doctors are questioning this lunacy; see last Thursday's Guardian:

Doctors should stop giving newborn babies sugar to relieve the pain of minor medical procedures because it does not work and may damage their brains, new research in The Lancet warns today.

If the fluoridation business is anything to go by, it will be years before this sugar-for-babies business is stamped out. And of course the two businesses -- fluoridation and sugar -- are closely linked.

The other day I was talking to an expert on breastfeeding. She was interested in what I was saying about fluoridation and the tooth decay issue. But she insisted that "prolonged" breastfeeding -- letting the baby suckle for hours -- causes tooth decay. And that is the official line from the medical establishment: "breastfeeding causes tooth decay"!

Even the leading promoters of fluoridation, Profs Helen Whelton and Denis O'Mullane of UCC, and Mike Lennon and Liz Kay in England, have admitted, under a little duress mind you, that sugar is the cause.

You couldn't make it up. The multiplication of medical madness in the 21st century.

[orbit]

Here we have a report from Oxford university alonfside a report from the US National Research Council, which if read together suggest that when fluoride is taken over a long period of time, it doubles the incidence of cancers affecting the digestive system.

Suggest?

Why don't you try to find out what the actual figures are, say for the republic and Northern Ireland? If there really is a link, then you should see it in the real figures.

[fiannafailure]

Suggest?

Why don't you try to find out what the actual figures are, say for the republic and Northern Ireland? If there really is a link, then you should see it in the real figures.

orbit

I am going into hospital in the morning for major surgery which should finally take care of my cancer, following this, it is my intention to do just that. I have identified several vectors of study required and possible means of financing the study.

The circumstantial evidence, that the fluoridation of water over time, carries health risks is really growing worldwide.

This latest Oxford study which shows that a substance with extremely similar effects on human health can cause cancer surely alerts the government to the possibilities.

It should really be incumbent on the EPA to do this study, but we are where we are.