Townhill Park, Harefield, Thornhill and the Flowers Estate in Bassett have all been identified as target neighbourhoods, where there are high levels of tooth decay in children.

These are all the lower class areas. Surely free toothbrushes would be a cheaper option? AND holding the parents accountable for neglecting there offspring.
I'm glad i'm not in one of those areas!

But, as the map opposite shows

What map?

I buy toothpaste, call me old fashioned.

Gozza wrote:

But, as the map opposite shows

What map?

Erm, the big one.

I grew up in an area with fluoridation. My husband didn't. We're of the same class and dental habits. I have never had a cavity - he's had 10. This shows the benefit it provides. Anyone else have a real story instead of one they read in a study?

Joanna wrote:
I grew up in an area with fluoridation. My husband didn't. We're of the same class and dental habits. I have never had a cavity - he's had 10. This shows the benefit it provides. Anyone else have a real story instead of one they read in a study?

Gosh Joanna, I have looked at the studies and had made my own mind up. But now you have made this earth-shattering in depth scientific finding, I say put the poison in the water and take away everyone's choice.

Joanna wrote:
I grew up in an area with fluoridation. My husband didn't. We're of the same class and dental habits. I have never had a cavity - he's had 10. This shows the benefit it provides. Anyone else have a real story instead of one they read in a study?

My son loves carrots and has had lots of dental problems throughout his life. My daughter hates carrots with a vengance but has perfect teeth.
Ban carrots I say!
Oh but then again he likes rice pudding and she doesn't.
I don'y know what to think.

Colgate Warrior wrote:
I buy toothpaste, call me old fashioned.

Old fashioned.

Mr Sarcy-Barstard wrote:

Joanna wrote: I grew up in an area with fluoridation. My husband didn't. We're of the same class and dental habits. I have never had a cavity - he's had 10. This shows the benefit it provides. Anyone else have a real story instead of one they read in a study?

Gosh Joanna, I have looked at the studies and had made my own mind up. But now you have made this earth-shattering in depth scientific finding, I say put the poison in the water and take away everyone's choice.

lol....Joanna clearly has the scientific breakthrough that settles the debate.

I assume she can prove they had the exact same diet throughout their lives too?

Silly woman

Fluoride is detrimental to the health of older people. It is ridiculous to add it to the water for the sake of a few toothbrushes.

Joanna wrote:
I grew up in an area with fluoridation. My husband didn\'t. We\'re of the same class and dental habits. I have never had a cavity - he\'s had 10. This shows the benefit it provides. Anyone else have a real story instead of one they read in a study?

I met a pro-fluoride person yesterday who wants fluoride for everybody as her children were brought up in an area with fluoride and have perfect teeth. I asked where did they live at that time and she said London. London has never been fluoridated but she will not take my word for it so I've sent her the map of the fluoride levels in England. I bet she still won't accept it as none of us like to admit we may be wrong.
One person's experience is a poor way to judge the right and wrong of an argument many a 90 year old smoker will say smoking doesn't harm you. A person saved by being thrown from a car without a seat belt may suggest that seat belts are a killer.
We do know one undisputed fact up to 48% of children in a fluoridated area will get fluorosis. 12% will need very expensive veneers to repair the damage. And the York review states that fluorosis is not just cosmetic despite what dentists and Prof John Newton of the CSHA says.

Well the water already tastes strongly of chlorine, why not add other chemicals. I will continue to drink Evian, that delicious refreshing tasteless water.

Now listen with mother you chavites and drink up your water now like good little children. The lower classes should have bad teeth it's the natural way of things. Soon they'll be giving them Ferraris

Is a sad state of affairs when the science seems to all come from citizens and the health professions only make vague claims of all studies and safe for all and everyone benefits with no hard science specifics. My experience is the professionals only read policy and talking points on what to say. They fail to do any meaningful research and ate totally current science lacking still with total confidence.This is a political policy not science. The wealth and force of the government is attempting to force outdated theory with medication by contaminated toxic waste. The NaSiF6 used has not one study with any health and safety data ever. There is no possible way to know what the dose will bee as almost all foods and beverages have contamination with fluoride. Kidney damage and thyroid function and low iodine ,calcium,magnesium, vitamin c all drasticly lower the amount it takes to damage you. That was shown in 1993 health department report that has no follow up in spite congressional testimony it was being done in 2000. Remember The Headquarters union in 1986 sued for fraud as fluoridation is unsafe. In 2005 11 professional EPA unions demanded immediate moratorium and congressional investigations of fraud. Now 19 In 2007 and still no action to protect the people. Remember no benefit only damage by ingestion. This is forced insanity. What government does best and all because they can not figure out how to get the lower social classes to brush their teeth. Good nutrition and avoiding sugar drinks and refined starches all day. In the US the
Studies (Burt 2007) show fluoridated Detroit 1950 with almost 100% of five year olds with cavities and often many. Their diet is fluoridated water, soda, chips (all junk food devoid of nutrition).No vegtables, fruits just garbage processed food. Most of the fluoridated inner cities are having increase of cavities and huge increases of dental fluorosis from fluoride toxicity. Fluoride damages teeth by ingestion. How ignorant can our dental professionals be. In the US dental incomes are soaring past doctors with cosmetic restoration making some filthy rich. Follow the money. Poor kids usually get no dental care in the US as dentists want the big bucks. Kids need dentists not fluoride. Jim Schultz

I still cannot believe in this day and age the government are still ignoring science and pushing this toxic waste on us!!

Fluoride only works if it's topical and if the teeth are reasonably dry to begin with. Systemically it's an extremely potent neuro-toxin that not only 'dumbs down' the population into a stupor, but it causes thyroid disease and cancer - and that's indisputable fact - and is strongly linked to various other cancers, alzheimers, and other neurological diseases.

Wake up people - this isn't a joke; these are our lives at stake!

I do have a suggestion though: If they do fluoridate, as it seems they're going to regardless, why don't neighbourhoods come together and invest in Reverse-Osmosis filters (the only ones that will decontaminate the water from fluoride), split the cost, and form co-operatives so everyone can have safe, clean water. You may still be getting it through your skin in the shower, but it would make the cost of the expensive filters cheaper for all and mean everyone could avoid the mass-medication and toxic waste the government are so set on us drinking.

Good to see that Sholing's not included in the list of deprived areas!

A consideration not mentioned is the product used (NaSiF6) which comes directly from pollution scrubbers is very acidic and excellent for leaching lead from brass, copper ,solder but becomes even better at this with chlorine or new cloramines as some waters become so excellent at corrosion they have been known to eat holes in new copper making it look like a sprinkler. Even worse they release off the scale lead concentrations as the protective layer of calcium peels off the pipe interior. Washington DC had a major problem with this from 2000 until 2004 but they were able to cover up the real cause and instead blamed it on some old lead supply lines. This was only part of the cause and not the major part. They fired inspectors who wo0uld not aid the coverup and altered testing methods to hid the problem and did what big government does best. Avoided their job to protect the people and protected fluoridation policy instead. Policy first as people are just colateral damage and what they do not know only hurts them. They did not test lead levels in school kids until a year later as blood lead lowers 50% every months after exposure ends. They also rigged schools lead studies. At least the people feel safe when they do not know of the fraud. Mass 2007 showed up to 900% increase in lead leaching when chloramine used as disinfectant. Why only damage with fluoride when you can do it with lead also in one package deal. Many cities do not get the corrosion control right. Lots of chemicals and decisions to make. DC did not even try to get it right or discover off the chart lead levels for two years ...Then two years to fix it. Government at work. Then they hid the real cause. Jim Schultz

Tanker trucks loaded with thousands of gallons drive around and one spilled a load with 50 in the hospital and I-4 closed for day in Orlando area. A tank split in New Orleans area by Mississippi and leaked out almost 500,000 gallons so they pumped it in the river before it ate the concrete retaining wall and ate the many tanks of other toxic chemicals to make one living hell. Thirty miles and out to sea..In a city this could be a Bopaul India with thousands injured. Union Carbide had lots of dead and blind over that.

It's very easy to make sweeping comments about how the working classes are the ones with the worst teeth and that their children deserve it because the parents clearly don't look after them properly. Would the people making these comments do so if they knew their name and address would be printed? And what class do they think they belong to - if they go to work then they're working class too. I find the small-mindedness of these selfish people appalling.

This is awful! I couldn't believe I was reading this in the Echo the other day. It is at least quite nice to realise that there are people out there that also realise FLOURIDE IS POISON!!! type flouride on youtube and watch any videos, also search David Icke. A big conspiracy and a mind supressant-so they get us exactly where they want us. It is true flouride can help externally on our teeth but once swallowed it is poisoning us-Hitler used high levels of it on concentration camps. OPEN YOUR MIND!!! LET'S STOP THIS HAPPENING!!!

If they really wanted the youth to get flouride, they'd ad it to beer.

The following post is available as a highly condensed landscape A4 duplex capable single sheet document for Word specifically formatted to be used as a flyer for home delivery. If you want it contact griffithspeter0@goog

lemail.com

sorry about the small print!

GIVE YOUR KIDS THE GIFT OF BONE CANCER, BRAIN DAMAGE AND STERILITY

The proposals to fluoridate public water with toxic compounds of hexaflourasilic acid are a direct breech of European regulations forbidding the mass medication of human populations. It is also an offence under section 23 of the offences against the person Act of 1861. The Water Supply (Fluoridation Indemnities) (England) Regulations 2005 (Statutory Instrument 2005 No. 920) were a specific attempt by the government to provide the water supply industry with "blanket" immunity against civil and criminal liability arising out of these criminal acts. Poisoning by Fluoride, a known and deadly toxin, has no place in the public health system and its introduction has more to do with eugenics and population control than dental care. Alan Johnson is more than aware of this. Unfortunately unelected and unaccountable "health quangos" will be seeking to call the shots on this issue and most of them will be riven with the corrupt members of Common Purpose. An organisation more sinister than the Real IRA.

Fluoridation of public water supplies should not be allowed! And here’s why: WHY EPA’S HEADQUARTERS UNION OF SCIENTISTS OPPOSES FLUORIDATION*

The following documents why our union, formerly National Federation of Federal Employees Local 2050 and since April 1998 Chapter 280 of the National Treasury Employees Union, took the stand it did opposing fluoridation of drinking water supplies. Our union is comprised of and represents the approximately 1500 scientists, lawyers, engineers and other professional employees at EPA Headquarters here in Washington, D.C.

The union first became interested in this issue rather by accident. Like most Americans, including many physicians and dentists, most of our members had thought that fluoride’s only effects were beneficial — reductions in tooth decay, etc. We too believed assurances of safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation.‡

Then, as EPA was engaged in revising its drinking water standard for fluoride in 1985, an employee came to the union with a complaint: he said he was being forced to write into the regulation a statement to the effect that EPA thought it was all right for children to have "funky" teeth. It was OK, EPA said, because it considered that condition to be only a cosmetic effect, not an adverse health effect. The reason for this EPA position was that it was under political pressure to set its health-based standard for fluoride at 4 mg/liter. At that level, 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.

We tried to settle this ethics issue quietly, within the family, but EPA was unable or unwilling to resist external political pressure, and we took the fight public with a union amicus curiae brief‡‡ in a lawsuit filed against EPA by a public interest group. The union has published on this initial involvement period in detail.1

Since then our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion. 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. First, a review of recent neurotoxicity research results.

In 1995, Mullenix and co-workers2 showed that rats given fluoride in drinking water at levels that give rise to plasma fluoride concentrations in the range seen in humans suffer neurotoxic effects that vary according to when the rats were given the fluoride – as adult animals, as young animals, or through the placenta before birth. Those exposed before birth were born hyperactive and remained so throughout their lives. Those exposed as young or adult animals displayed depressed activity. Then in 1998, Guan and co-workers3 gave doses similar to those used by the Mullenix research group to try to understand the mechanism(s) underlying the effects seen by the Mullenix group. Guan’s group found that several key chemicals in the brain – those that form the membrane of brain cells – were substantially depleted in rats given fluoride, as compared to those who did not get fluoride.

Another 1998 publication by Varner, Jensen and others4 reported on the brain- and kidney-damaging effects in rats that were given fluoride in drinking water at the same level deemed "optimal" by pro-fluoridation groups, namely 1 part per million (1 ppm). Even more pronounced damage was seen in animals that got the fluoride in conjunction with aluminum. These results are especially disturbing because of the low dose level of fluoride that shows the toxic effect in rats - rats are more resistant to fluoride than humans. This latter statement is based on Mullenix’s finding that it takes substantially more fluoride in the drinking water of rats than of humans to reach the same fluoride level in plasma. It is the level in plasma that determines how much fluoride is "seen" by particular tissues in the body. So when rats get 1 ppm in drinking water, their brains and kidneys are exposed to much less fluoride than humans getting 1 ppm, yet they are experiencing toxic effects. Thus we are compelled to consider the likelihood that humans are experiencing damage to their brains and kidneys at the "optimal" level of 1 ppm.

In support of this concern are results from two epidemiology studies from China5,6 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.

Another troubling brain effect has recently surfaced: fluoride’s interference with the function of the brain’s pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body’s internal clock, doing such things as governing the onset of puberty. Jennifer Luke7 has shown that fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin. She showed in test animals that this inhibition causes an earlier onset of sexual maturity, an effect reported in humans as well in 1956, as part of the Kingston/Newburgh study, which is discussed below. In fluoridated Newburgh, young girls experienced earlier onset of menstruation (on average, by six months) than girls in non-fluoridated Kingston.8

From a risk assessment perspective, all these brain effect data are particularly compelling and disturbing because they are convergent.

We looked at the cancer data with alarm as well. There are epidemiology studies that are convergent with whole-animal and single-cell studies (dealing with the cancer hazard), just as the neurotoxicity research just mentioned all points in the same direction. EPA fired the Office of Drinking Water’s chief toxicologist, Dr. William Marcus, who also was our local union’s treasurer at the time, for refusing to remain silent on the cancer risk issue.9 The judge who heard the lawsuit he brought against EPA over the firing made the finding - that EPA fired him over his fluoride work and not for the phony reason put forward by EPA management at his dismissal. Dr. Marcus won his lawsuit and is again at work at EPA. Documentation is available on request.

The type of cancer of particular concern with fluoride, although not the only type, is osteosarcoma, especially in males. The National Toxicology Program conducted a two-year study10 in which rats and mice were given sodium fluoride in drinking water. The positive result of that study (in which malignancies in tissues other than bone were also observed), particularly in male rats, is convergent with a host of data from tests showing fluoride’s ability to cause mutations (a principal "trigger" mechanism for inducing a cell to become cancerous) e.g.11a,b,c,d and data showing increases in osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey,12 Washington and Iowa13 based on their drinking fluoridated water. It was his analysis, repeated statements about all these and other incriminating cancer data, and his requests for an independent, unbiased evaluation of them that got Dr. Marcus fired.

Bone pathology other than cancer is a concern as well. An excellent review of this issue was published by Diesendorf et al. in 1997.14 Five epidemiology studies have shown a higher rate of hip fractures in fluoridated vs. non-fluoridated communities.15a,b,c,

d,e Crippling skeletal fluorosis was the endpoint used by EPA to set its primary drinking water standard in 1986, and the ethical deficiencies in that standard setting process prompted our union to join the Natural Resources Defense Council in opposing the standard in court, as mentioned above.

Regarding the effectiveness of fluoride in reducing dental cavities, there has not been any double-blind study of fluoride’s effectiveness as a caries preventative. There have been many, many small scale, selective publications on this issue that proponents cite to justify fluoridation, but the largest and most comprehensive study, one done by dentists trained by the National Institute of Dental Research, on over 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years, shows no significant differences (in terms of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among caries incidences in fluoridated, non-fluoridated and partially fluoridated communities.16 The latest publication17 on the fifty-year fluoridation experiment in two New York cities, Newburgh and Kingston, shows the same thing. The only significant difference in dental health between the two communities as a whole is that fluoridated Newburgh, N.Y. shows about twice the incidence of dental fluorosis (the first, visible sign of fluoride chronic toxicity) as seen in non-fluoridated Kingston.

John Colquhoun’s publication on this point of efficacy is especially important.18 Dr. Colquhoun was Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, the largest city in New Zealand, and a staunch supporter of fluoridation - until he was given the task of looking at the world-wide data on fluoridation’s effectiveness in preventing cavities. The paper is titled, "Why I changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation." In it Colquhoun provides details on how data were manipulated to support fluoridation in English-speaking countries, especially the U.S. and New Zealand. This paper explains why an ethical public health professional was compelled to do a 180-degree turn on fluoridation.

Further on the point of the tide turning against drinking water fluoridation, statements are now coming from other dentists in the pro-fluoride camp who are starting to warn that topical fluoride (e.g. fluoride in tooth paste) is the only significantly beneficial way in which that substance affects dental health.19,20,21 However, if the concentrations of fluoride in the oral cavity are sufficient to inhibit bacterial enzymes and cause other bacteriostatic effects, then those concentrations are also capable of producing adverse effects in mammalian tissue, which likewise relies on enzyme systems. This statement is based not only on common sense, but also on results of mutation studies which show that fluoride can cause gene mutations in mammalian and lower order tissues at fluoride concentrations estimated to be present in the mouth from fluoridated tooth paste.22 Further, there were tumors of the oral cavity seen in the NTP cancer study mentioned above, further strengthening concern over the toxicity of topically applied fluoride.

In any event, a person can choose whether to use fluoridated tooth paste or not (although finding non-fluoridated kinds is getting harder and harder), but one cannot avoid fluoride when it is put into the public water supplies.

So, in addition to our concern over the toxicity of fluoride, we note the uncontrolled - and apparently uncontrollable - exposures to fluoride that are occurring nationwide via drinking water, processed foods, fluoride pesticide residues and dental care products. A recent report in the lay media,23 that, according to the Centers for Disease Control, at least 22 percent of America’s children now have dental fluorosis, is just one indication of this uncontrolled, excess exposure. The finding of nearly 12 percent incidence of dental fluorosis among children in un-fluoridated Kingston New York17 is another. For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.

Thus, we took the stand that a policy which makes the public water supply a vehicle for disseminating this toxic and prophylactically useless (via ingestion, at any rate) substance is wrong.

We have also taken a direct step to protect the employees we represent from the risks of drinking fluoridated water. We applied EPA’s risk control methodology, the Reference Dose, to the recent neurotoxicity data. The Reference Dose is the daily dose, expressed in milligrams of chemical per kilogram of body weight, that a person can receive over the long term with reasonable assurance of safety from adverse effects. Application of this methodology to the Varner et al4 data leads to a Reference Dose for fluoride of 0.000007 mg/kg-day. Persons who drink about one quart of fluoridated water from the public drinking water supply of the District of Columbia while at work receive about 0.01mg/kg-day from that source alone. This amount of fluoride is more than 100 times the Reference Dose. On the basis of these results the union filed a grievance, asking that EPA provide un-fluoridated drinking water to its employees.

The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear. Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA’s standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry
.1 Applying the NAEP code of ethics to the Environmental Protection Agency and the fluoride in drinking water standard. Carton, R.J. and Hirzy, J.W. Proceedings of the 23rd Ann. Conf. of the National Association of Environmental Professionals. 20-24 June, 1998. GEN 51-61. On-line at URL http//:www.rvi.net/~

fluoride/naep.htm. 2 Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Mullenix, P.J., Denbesten, P.K., Schunior, A. and Kernan, W.J. Neurotoxicol. Teratol. 17 169-177 (1995). 3 Influence of chronic fluorosis on membrane lipids in rat brain. Z.Z. Guan, Y.N. Wang, K.Q. Xiao, D.Y. Dai, Y.H. Chen, J.L. Liu, P. Sindelar and G. Dallner, Neurotoxicology and Teratology 20 537-542 (1998).4 Chronic administration of aluminum- fluoride or sodium-fluoride to rats in drinking water: alterations in neuronal and cerebrovascular integrity. Varner, J.A., Jensen, K.F., Horvath, W. And Isaacson, R.L. Brain Research 784 284-298 (1998). 5 Effect of high fluoride water supply on children’s intelligence. Zhao, L.B., Liang, G.H., Zhang, D.N., and Wu, X.R. Fluoride 29 190-192 (1996). 6 Effect of fluoride exposure on intelligence in children. Li, X.S., Zhi, J.L., and Gao, R.O. Fluoride 28 (1995). 7 Effect of fluoride on the physiology of the pineal gland. Luke, J.A. Caries Research 28 204 (1994). 8 Newburgh-Kingston caries-fluorine study XIII. Pediatric findings after ten years. Schlesinger, E.R., Overton, D.E., Chase, H.C., and Cantwell, K.T. JADA 52 296-306 (1956). 9 Memorandum dated May 1, 1990. Subject: Fluoride Conference to Review the NTP Draft Fluoride Report; From: Wm. L. Marcus, Senior Science Advisor ODW; To: Alan B. Hais, Acting Director Criteria & Standards Division ODW. 10 Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of sodium fluoride in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice. NTP Report No. 393 (1991). 11a Chromosome aberrations, sister chromatid exchanges, unscheduled DNA synthesis and morphological neoplastic transformation in Syrian hamster embryo cells. Tsutsui et al. Cancer Research 44 938-941 (1984). 11b Cytotoxicity, chromosome aberrations and unscheduled DNA synthesis in cultured human diploid fibroblasts. Tsutsui et al. Mutation Research 139 193-198 (1984). 11c Positive mouse lymphoma assay with and without S-9 activation; positive sister chromatid exchange in Chinese hamster ovary cells with and without S-9 activation; positive chromosome aberration without S-9 activation. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of sodium fluoride in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice. NTP Report No. 393 (1991). 11d An increase in the number of Down’s syndrome babies born to younger mothers in cities following fluoridation. Science and Public Policy 12 36-46 (1985). 12 A brief report on the association of drinking water fluoridation and the incidence of osteosarcoma among young males. Cohn, P.D. New Jersey Department of Health (1992). 13 Surveillance, epidemiology and end results (SEER) program. National Cancer Institute in Review of fluoride benefits and risks. Department of Health and Human Services. F1-F7 (1991). 14 New evidence on fluoridation. Diesendorf, M., Colquhoun, J., Spittle, B.J., Everingham, D.N., and Clutterbuck, F.W. Australian and New Zealand J. Public Health. 21 187-190 (1997). 15a Regional variation in the incidence of hip fracture: U.S. white women aged 65 years and older. Jacobsen, S.J., Goldberg, J., Miles, ,T.P. et al. JAMA 264 500-502 (1990). 15b Hip fracture and fluoridation in Utah’s elderly population. Danielson, C., Lyon, J.L., Egger, M., and Goodenough, G.K. JAMA 268 746-748 (1992). 15c The association between water fluoridation and hip fracture among white women and men aged 65 years and older: a national ecological study. Jacobsen, S.J., Goldberg, J., Cooper, C. and Lockwood, S.A. Ann. Epidemiol.2 617-626 (1992). 15d Fluorine concentration is drinking water and fractures in the elderly . Jacqmin-Gadda, H., Commenges, D. and Dartigues, J.F. JAMA 273 775-776 (1995). 15e Water fluoridation and hip fracture . Cooper, C., Wickham, C.A.C., Barker, D.J.R. and Jacobson, S.J. JAMA 266 513-514 (1991). 16 Water fluoridation and tooth decay: Results from the 1986-1987 national survey of U.S. school children. Yiamouyannis, J. Fluoride 23 55-67 (1990). 17 Recommendations for fluoride use in children. Kumar, J.V. and Green, E.L. New York State Dent. J. (1998) 40-47. 18 Why I changed my mind about water fluoridation. Colquhoun, J. Perspectives in Biol. and Medicine 41 29-44 (1997). 19 A re-examination of the pre-eruptive and post-eruptive mechanism of the anti-caries effects of fluoride: is there any anti-caries benefit from swallowing fluoride? Limeback, H. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 27 62-71 (1999). 20 Fluoride supplements for young children: an analysis of the literature focussing on benefits and risks. Riordan, P.J. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 27 72-83 (1999). 21 Prevention and reversal of dental caries: role of low level fluoride. Featherstone, J.D. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 27 31-40 (1999). 22 Appendix H. Review of fluoride benefits and risks. Department of Health and Human Services. H1-H6 (1991). 23 Some young children get too much fluoride. Parker-Pope, T. Wall Street Journal Dec. 21, 1998. 24 Letter from Rebecca Hanmer, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water, to Leslie Russell re: EPA view on use of by-product fluosilicic acid as low cost source of fluoride to water authorities. March 30, 1983. OTHER CITATIONS a Exposure to high fluoride concentrations in drinking water is associated with decreased birth rates. Freni, S.C. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 42 109-121 (1994). bAmeliorative effects of reduced food-borne fluoride on reproduction in silver foxes. Eckerlin, R.H., Maylin, G.A., Krook, L., and Carmichael, D.T. Cornell Vet. 78 75-91 (1988). cMilk production of cows fed fluoride contaminated commercial feed. Eckerlin, R.H., Maylin, G.A., and Krook, L. Cornell Vet. 76 403-404 (1986). dMaternal-fetal transfer of fluoride in pregnant women. Calders, R., Chavine, J., Fermanian, J., Tortrat, D., and Laurent, A.M. Biol. Neonate 54 263-269 (1988). eEffects of fluoride on screech owl reproduction: teratological evaluation, growth, and blood chemistry in hatchlings. Hoffman, D.J., Pattee, O.H., and Wiemeyer, S.N. Toxicol. Lett. 26 19-24 (1985). fFluoride intoxication in dairy calves. Maylin, G.A., Eckerlin, R.H., and Krook, L. Cornell Vet. 77 84-98 (1987). gFluoride inhibition of protein synthesis. Holland, R.I. Cell Biol. Int. Rep. 3 701-705 (1979). hAn unexpectedly strong hydrogen bond: ab initio calculations and spectroscopic studies of amide-fluoride systems. Emsley, J., Jones, D.J., Miller, J.M., Overill, R.E. and Waddilove, R.A. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 103 24-28 (1981). iThe effect of sodium fluoride on the growth and differentiation of human fetal osteoblasts. Song, X.D., Zhang, W.Z., Li, L.Y., Pang, Z.L., and Tan, Y.B. Fluoride 21 149-158 (1988). jModulation of phosphoinositide hydrolysis by NaF and aluminum in rat cortical slices. Jope, R.S. J. Neurochem. 51 1731-1736 (1988). kThe crystal structure of fluoride-inhibited cytochrome c peroxidase. Edwards, S.L., Poulos, T.L., Kraut, J. J. Biol. Chem. 259 12984-12988 (1984). lIntracellular fluoride alters the kinetic properties of calcium currents facilitating the investigation of synaptic events in hippocampal neurons. Kay, A.R., Miles, R., and Wong, R.K.S. J. Neurosci. 6 2915-2920 (1986). mFluoride intoxication: a clinical-hygienic study with a review of the literature and some experimental investigations. Roholm, K. H.K. Lewis Ltd (London) (1937). nToxin-induced blood vessel inclusions caused by the chronic administration of aluminum and sodium fluoride and their implications for dementia. Isaacson, R.L., Varner, J.A., and Jensen, K. F. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 825 152-166 (1997). oAllergy and hypersensitivity to fluoride. Spittle, B. Fluoride 26 267-273 (1993). *For Correspondence: Bill Hirzy, NTEU Headquarters, Box 76082 Washington, DC 20013. TO RECEIVE THIS DOCUMENT AS AN EMAIL TXT YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO 07510258880
‡For a history of how drinking water fluoridation began, see "Fluoride, Teeth and the Atomic Bomb", by investigative reporters Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson ,

on-line at http://www.ia4u.net/

~sherrell/bomb.htm.
‡‡http://www.rvi.net

/~fluoride/amicus.ht

m
*PLEASE PHOTOCOPY THIS DOCUMENT FOR YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBOURS-GET THE TRUTH OUT*

Official statements from South Central SHA, the PCT and doctors Mortimore and Cockroft that dental fluorosis is harmless and fluoridation is completely safe must be immediately and publicly withdrawn.

In 1999, Earl Baldwin of Bewdley asked Her Majesty's Government:

"In view of the absence of any relevant scientific studies cited in the US Review of Fluoride, 1991, referred to in the Written Answer by Baroness Hayman on 8 February (WA 1-2), whether they can quote any other scientific sources in support of their belief that dental fluorosis is only a cosmetic side-effect of fluoride and not an indication of early toxicity."

Baroness Hayman responded, in a Written Answer, for the Government: "We accept that dental fluorosis is a manifestation of systemic toxicity. . " - (Hansard, 20 Apr 1999 : WA 158.).
It is estimated that, as in Ireland, 48% - 54% of children living in fluoridated areas develop dental fluorosis, which dentists refuse to treat on the NHS.

Dangers & Health Problems from the Drug Fluoride

by Stephanie Relfe B.Sc. (Sydney)

In the movie Conspiracy Theory Mel Gibson says, "You know what they put in the water, don't you? Fluoride! Yeah, fluoride. On the pretext that it strengthens your teeth! That's ridiculous. You know what this stuff does to you? It actually weakens your will, takes away the capacity for free and creative thought. And makes you a slave to the state".

It turns out that that statement is true.

From http://www.sonic.net
/kryptox/history/per
kins2.htm

The following letter was received by the Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee Wisconsin, on 2 October 1954, from Mr. Charles Perkins, a chemist:

"I have your letter of September 29 asking for further documentation regarding a statement made in my book, The Truth About Water Fluoridation, to the effect that the idea of water fluoridation was brought to England from Russia by the Russian Communist Kreminoff. "In the 1930`s, Hitler and the German Nazi`s envisioned a world to be dominated and controlled by a Nazi philosophy of pan-Germanism.

The German chemists worked out a very ingenious and far-reaching plan of mass-control which was submitted to and adopted by the German General Staff. This plan was to control the population in any given area through mass medication of drinking water supplies. By this method they could control the population in whole areas, reduce population by water medication that would produce sterility in women, and so on. In this scheme of mass-control, sodium fluoride occupied a prominent place. ...

"Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluoride will in time reduce an individual`s power to resist domination, by slowly poisoning and narcotizing a certain area of the brain, thus making him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him.

"The real reason behind water fluoridation is not to benefit children`s teeth. If this were the real reason there are many ways in which it could be done that are much easier, cheaper, and far more effective. The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty.

"When the Nazis under Hitler decided to go into Poland, both the German General Staff and the Russian General Staff exchanged scientific and military ideas, plans, and personnel, and the scheme of mass control through water medication was seized upon by the Russian Communists because it fitted ideally into their plan to communize the world. ...

"I was told of this entire scheme by a German chemist who was an official of the great IG Farben chemical industries and was also prominent in the Nazi movement at the time. I say this with all the earnestness and sincerity of a scientist who has spent nearly 20 years` research into the chemistry, biochemistry, physiology and pathology of fluorine--any person who drinks artificially fluorinated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same person mentally or physically." CHARLES E. PERKINS, Chemist, 2 October 1954.

____________________
______

Quoting Einstein`s nephew, Dr. E.H. Bronner (a chemist who had also been a prisoner of war during WWII) in a letter printed in The Catholic Mirror, Springfield, MA, January 1952:

"There is a sinister network of subversive agents, Godless 'intellectual' parasites, working in our country today whose ramifications grow more extensive, more successful and more alarming each new year and whose true objective is to demoralize, paralyze and destroy our great Republic--from within if they can, according to their plan--for their own possession.

"The tragic success they have already attained in their long siege to destroy the moral fiber of American life is now one of their most potent footholds towards their own ultimate victory over us.

"Fluoridation of our community water systems can well become their most subtle weapon for our sure physical and mental deterioration. ..

"As a research chemist of established standing, I built within the past 22 years, 3 American chemical plants and licensed 6 of my 53 patents. Based on my years of practical experience in the health-food and chemical field, let me warn: fluoridation of drinking water is criminal insanity, sure national suicide. Don`t do it.

"Even in small quantities, sodium fluoride is a deadly poison to which no effective antidote has been found. Every exterminator knows that it is the most efficient rat-killer. ... Sodium fluoride is entirely different from organic calcium-fluoro-phosp
hate needed by our bodies and provided by nature, in God`s great providence and love, to build and strengthen our bones and our teeth. This organic calcium-fluoro-phosp
hate, derived from proper foods, is an edible organic salt, insoluble in water and assimilable by the human body, whereas the non-organic sodium fluoride used in fluoridating water is instant poison to the body and fully water soluble.

The body refuses to assimilate it. "Careful, bonafide laboratory experimentation by conscientious, patriotic research chemists, and actual medical experience, have both revealed that instead of preserving or promoting `dental health,` fluoridated drinking water destroys teeth, before adulthood and after, by the destructive mottling and other pathological conditions it actually causes in them, and also creates many other very grave pathological conditions in the internal organisms of bodies consuming it. How can it be called a "health" plan? What`s behind it?

"That any so-called "doctors" would persuade a civilized nation to add voluntarily a deadly poison to its drinking water systems is unbelievable. It is the height of criminal insanity. "No wonder Hitler and Stalin fully believed and agreed from 1939 to 1941 that, quoting from both Lenin`s Last Will and Hitler`s Mein Kampf:

"America we shall demoralize, divide, and destroy from within." ...

"Are our Civil Defense organizations and agencies awake to the perils of water poisoning by fluoridation? Its use has been recorded in other countries. Sodium fluoride water solutions are the cheapest and most effective rat killers known to chemists: colorless, odorless, tasteless; no antidote, no remedy, no hope: Instant and complete extermination of rats. ...

"Fluoridation of water systems can be slow national suicide, or quick national liquidation. It is criminal insanity--treason!"

Dr. E.H. Bronner, Mfg. Research Chemist, Los Angeles.

Fluoride in Drugs Can Cause Planned Violence

From http://www.rense.com
/general78/fluo.htm

By Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD
11-3-7

Almost everyone has at least heard the recent news stories citing links between certain antidepressant drugs and suicides and even school shootings. Several surveys have shown that a majority of school shooters were taking SSRI- type antidepressants before they committed their heinous acts. What most people have not heard is that in most cases these were fluorinated drugs (Paxil and Prozac, etc.), the chemical structure of the drug included the toxic element fluorine.

A growing number of studies are showing that fluorine added to drugs and to drinking water can have a profound and prolonged harmful effect on the brain. At present, I am reviewing all the studies done on fluorinated pharmaceutical drugs and their effects on the brain. What I have found is shocking. There is a strong link between the use of many of these drugs and violent behavior, including homicides and suicides....

According to the "Physician's Desk Reference," used by doctors to prescribe medications, the commonly used fluorinated antibiotics Floxin, Levaquin, and Cipro can cause nightmares, psychotic reactions, paranoia, agitation, manic reactions, aggression and hostility, hallucinations, and even depersonalization, all symptoms associated with acts of homicide and suicide.

In fact, in their own clinical trials, pharmaceutical companies found homicides, homicidal acts, homicidal ideation, and aggressive behavior to be a side effect of the fluorinated medications. In addition, it was found that children with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) taking the medications experienced hostility episodes 17 times more often than depressed patients.

Of particular concern was the finding that 1.1 percent of healthy, psychiatrically normal people who took an SSRI anti-depressant experienced one or more hostile episodes, while none taking the placebo had such an event. Medications remain in the brain for prolonged periods after discontinuing the medication, more so with fluoxetine (Prozac) than Paxil.

In 1990, about 220 fluorinated pharmaceutical drugs were on the market. Now some 1,500 are under development...

It has been estimated that such side effects with these anti-depressant medications, as well as other fluorinated medications, are grossly underreported to the regulatory agencies. One study estimated only 1 percent to 10 percent of cases are ever reported. Why more people are not affected may be related to the abnormal brain chemistry of depressed and OCD-affected people.

What is unusual about the effect of fluorinated drugs is that they trigger planned violence rather than just violent outburst.

____________________
______

FLUORIDE DAMAGES THE BRAIN AND BODY

From http://fluoridedange
rs.blogspot.com/2006
/01/fluoride-harmful
.html

It is now an established fact that fluoride ingestion over a period of time can affect the structure and function of cells, tissues, organs and systems resulting in a variety of clinical manifestations," writes Dr. Susheela who researches fluoride extensively

(http://education.vs
nl.com/fluorosis/pub
lication.html).

The following symptoms can occur even when fluoride consumption is at the low level added to most US water supplies.


1) aches and pain in the joints, i.e. neck, back, hip, shoulder and knee without visible signs of fluid accumulation

2) non-ulcer dyspepsia such as nausea, vomiting, pain in the stomach, bloated feeling or gas formation in the stomach, constipation followed by diarrhea

3) polyuria (frequent urination) and polydipsia (excessive thirst)

4) muscle weakness, fatigue, anemia with low hemoglobin level

5) complaints of repeated abortions/still birth

6) complaints of male infertility with abnormality in sperm morphology, oligospermia (spermatozoa deficiency in the semen), azoospermia (spermatozoa absence in the semen) and low testosterone levels.” (Web editor's note: Is this why men on average now have a 50% less sperm count than is normal?)

____________________
______


From http://fluoridedange
rs.blogspot.com/2006
/01/fluoride-harmful
.html

“Americans are unaware that their arthritis, irritable bowel syndrome or other symptoms may be fluoride-related,” says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation. “This information should be heeded by physicians and members of the medical and scientific communities. Dr. Susheela is a world authority on the health effects of fluoride to the human body,” says Beeber.


____________________
______



How To Avoid Fluoride

The two most important things are to buy toothpaste without fluoride and to drink water without flouride.

Generally, only health food stores carry fluoride-free toothpaste. I once bought a tube of toothpaste that said that if toothpaste was accidentally swallowed, to go immediately to the nearest poison center! I wish I had saved that box, because they quickly replaced it with one without that label.

If you water is fluoridated, which it probably is unless you use well-water or rain water, the easiest and cheapest way to get fluoride out of your water is to drink only water that is filtered by reverse osmosis. You can b