April 22, 2019

Archives for September 19, 2012

Artificial Water Fluoridation: The disproportionate harm caused to Aboriginal, Black, and Hispanic communities

COF-COF Journal Image

COF-COF Journal Fluoridation & Fluoride, September, 19 2012

Sheldon Thomas

Clear Water Legacy


For as long as the practice of artificial water fluoridation has been promoted, impartial researchers have warned, and demonstrated by more than 100 animal studies, that even trace amounts of fluoride can cause harm to humans.

Even in a healthy adult, only about half of ingested fluoride is eliminated from the body. Close to 50% will readily seek out areas of high calcium reserve, bond to the calcium in those areas, and remain.

Fluoride is bio-accumulative and is primarily stored in the bones, with lesser amounts in the teeth. The amount of retained fluoride increases with age and intake, and is released back to the bloodstream during the natural life-stage overturning of bones. Stated differently, the fluoride stored in the bones is not entombed.  It will re-emerge from stasis to further injure the body.

Fluoride’s effect on the skeletal system is to increase bone density, but in doing so it essentially weakens bone structure. 1 The claim that fluoride strengthens bone is a reversal of scientific fact.

Fluoride has been found to concentrate in the pineal gland, there interfering with the production of melatonin, a vital neurotransmitter regulating many bodily functions. 2

Fluoride from drinking water enters the bloodstream soon after swallowing and is transported throughout the entire body, causing interference and injury to many biological mechanisms.

Unfortunately, the agencies and associations that continue to promote artificial water fluoridation  –  including Health Canada, the Association of Local Public Health Agencies (alPHa), nearly all Provincial Medical Officers of Health, the Canadian Dental Association and most Canadian medical associations  –  continue to parrot the decades-old message that artificial water fluoridation is ‘safe and effective’; and, by that, they mean safe and effective for all.

Water fluoridation is promoted as if its effects are equal upon all community members. It is promoted as if we are all physiologically the same, cut from the same biological cloth that would make reaction to chemicals predictable.  Absurd doesn’t begin to describe such a notion.

There is no concentration of fluoride in drinking water that is safe for all. There is no daily dosage of fluoride that is safe for all. Some people suffer an immediate adverse physical reaction to fluoride in their drinking water. Some will slowly develop fluoride-related medical conditions, or succumb to fluoride-enabled diseases that do not appear to affect others.

Some will be stricken by a disease after many years of drinking fluoridated water and never suspect that fluoride was the root cause.


All of this begs the question, Who are the ‘some’ ?

The 2006 National Research Council of the Academy of Sciences report on Fluoride in Drinking Water designated kidney patients, diabetics, seniors and babies as ‘susceptible sub-populations’ that are especially vulnerable to harm from ingested fluorides. 3  

The NRC report paints a clear picture of who the ‘some’ are, and how large their numbers could be.

The ‘safe and effective’ message completely ignores racial, ethnic, and socio-economic differences. There is strong evidence that some ethnic groups suffer disproportionate harm.

Aboriginal, Black, and Hispanic communities are among those groups.

The latest census reports indicate the number of Aboriginal, Black and Hispanic residents in any community.  All three groups comprise ‘fluoride-susceptible sub-populations’ in the eyes of the NRC’s fluoride review expert panel.

Fluoride exposure has been linked to:

  • cancers 4
  • increased bone fracture in both the young and the elderly 5
  • calcification (stiffening) of tendons and joints, arthritic symptoms 6
  • brain injury producing Alzheimer’s-like symptoms 7
  • reduced IQ 8
  • attention deficit disorders 9
  • enzyme poisoning 10
  • hypothyroidism 11
  • elevated lead uptake into the bloodstream 12
  • depleted immune systems 13
  • and an alarming prevalence of dental fluorosis (mottled, discoloured/porous tooth enamel) 14

Health conditions shared by Aboriginal, Black and Hispanic resident populations

The claim of ‘disproportionate harm’ is built upon three common denominators, shared by all three of the aforementioned ethnic groups.

1.  All three groups demonstrate high incidence of diabetes. Diabetics often experience excessive thirst, causing them to drink a lot of water. If the water is fluoridated, their daily fluoride dosage can be elevated well over normal exposures.

2.  All three groups demonstrate high incidence of kidney disease. Impaired kidneys interfere with the body’s ability to eliminate ingested fluoride via the urine, causing the body to retain more fluoride than would be retained by a healthy individual.

3.  All three groups suffer from lactose intolerance. The inability to drink milk forces many to drink greater amounts of water, or resort to reconstituted beverages and juices, most of which are made with fluoridated water.



There is a prevalence of diabetes and kidney disease in Aboriginal communities. Each of these conditions leads to an even greater exposure to fluoride, and greater subsequent injury due to fluoride’s toxic effects. 15

Type 2 diabetes in Native American communities increased dramatically during the second half of the 20th century.  Of equal concern is the fact that Type 2, or adult-onset diabetes, is increasingly being discovered in Native American youth. 16

There is a similar prevalence of diabetes and kidney disease in Black communities. 17

Blacks are nearly twice as likely to suffer from diabetes as are whites. 18


Hispanics, too, are nearly twice as likely to suffer from diabetes as are Caucasians. 19


Kidney disease

Healthy kidney function should allow an adult to excrete, via urine, approx. 50% of ingested fluoride. 20   The more fluoride retained throughout the body, the greater its damaging effects.

Although Native Americans make up just 1.5 percent of the U.S. population, they have the highest rate of diabetes in the world and one of the highest rates of end stage renal disease (ESRD). 21   ESRD is the last stage (stage five) of chronic kidney disease. It is a stage when dialysis or kidney transplant becomes necessary to survive.

Because Native Americans are more likely to develop diabetes, they are also more likely to develop chronic kidney disease.  Diabetes is the leading cause of renal failure. 22

Diabetes-related kidney failure affects a much higher percentage of Black Americans than whites. 23

Black Americans constitute about 29 percent of all patients treated for kidney failure in the U.S., but only about 14 percent of the overall U.S. population. 24

Black Americans also develop kidney failure at an earlier age than white Americans. The mean age for Black Americans at the start of treatment for kidney failure is 56 years, compared with 66 in white Americans. 24

Hispanics, too, are at increased risk of kidney disease.  They are grouped in that section of the population that has a high rate of diabetes and/or high blood pressure. 24


Lactose intolerance

Aboriginals are 80 -100 % lactose intolerant. 25

Blacks are 75 % lactose intolerant. 25

Hispanics are 50-80% lactose intolerant. 26


Lactose intolerance will do two things to the afflicted:

  • force them to avoid milk, to instead drink greater quantities of fluoridated water and/or fluoridated juices and pop, and
  • deprive them of natural sources of dietary calcium ( milk and dairy products ) which tends to bind with free fluoride ion, enabling the body eliminate greater amounts of fluoride in urine and stool.


Lactose intolerance partially explains why dental fluorosis is more apparent, and more severe, in Aboriginal, Black and Hispanic communities.


Dental fluorosis

Dental fluorosis is a degraded condition of the tooth enamel caused by ingesting too much fluoride. Any tooth affected by dental fluorosis is, unmistakably, a damaged tooth.

The degree of damage can range from very mild (barely visible mottled white spotting on teeth), to mild, to moderate and on to severe fluorosis (dark staining, corrosion, pitting, and chipping of the tooth surface or biting edge).


Studies confirm that ethnic groups commonly display the worst stages of dental fluorosis:

  • Aboriginals are 80 to 100% lactose intolerant, and very prone to fluorosis. 25
  • Hispanics are at higher risk of suffering from the more severe forms of fluorosis. 26
  • Dental fluorosis is higher among Blacks. Despite the cavity reducing claims of fluoridation promoters, tooth decay is also higher among Blacks. 27


Skeletal fluorosis / what else do the teeth reveal?

Of great importance in the discussion of dental fluorosis is the fact that the teeth are the windows to the bones. The severity of dental fluorosis is a reliable indicator of the fluoride accumulation and toxicity affecting the skeleton.

Fluoride ions are taken up rapidly by replacing hydroxyl ion in bone, altering the size and the structure of the bone crystals. 28

Teotia and Teotia, in 1971, reported that skeletal fluorosis is not confined only to adults but also afflicts the newborn, infants and children. Skeletal fluorosis may develop within six months of exposure to high intakes of fluoride. 29

Although this paper, to this point, has discussed only dental fluorosis, there is no intent to understate fluoride’s massive impact on the much larger calcium reservoir .. the skeletal system.

Studies show fluoride to be a mutagen, capable of enabling cancers. 4

Dr. Elise Bassin, a Harvard University dental researcher, has established that young males who have consumed fluoridated water since birth have a seven-fold increased risk of developing osteosarcoma, a cancerous (malignant) bone tumor that can develop during the period of rapid growth that occurs in adolescence. Osteosarcoma is a particularly lethal and painful form of cancer. 30

It should come as no surprise that fluoride could generate a cancer in the very place where its deposition is the highest, and where its accumulation only increases with time.

Skeletal fluorosis, and the resultant alteration of bone structure, has also been linked to increases in bone fractures among all ages, and particularly pelvic fractures in the elderly. 31

A Mexican study conducted on children looked at fracture rates among youths in relation to dental fluorosis. The study, led by Alarcon-Herrera, and published in 2001, found that bone fracture rates rose sharply with increasing severity of dental fluorosis, and that the risk was heightened even among children with ‘mild’ fluorosis. 32

To quote the National Research Council’s 2006 fluoride review panel, “Fracture risk and bone strength have been studied in animal models. The weight of evidence indicates that, although fluoride might increase bone volume, there is less strength per unit volume.” 35

Clearly, dental fluorosis points to something more than ‘just a cosmetic dental effect’.  In steadfast defiance of many solid, peer-reviewed studies, public health authorities stubbornly maintain that there is no credible evidence that fluoride causes harm to the bone, or to any other bodily tissue.  The reality remains that dental fluorosis is a ‘bio-marker of too much fluoride ingestion’.


Emerging Studies linking ethnic groups to diabetes and kidney disease


Genetic disposition

Research in recent years indicates that many Native Americans are genetically predisposed to diabetes.  “Some of the susceptibility genes for diabetes are likely to be specific to certain populations, while others may be more universal, or common to multiple ethnic groups” say researchers at the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. 33

About 70 percent of Black Americans with non-diabetic forms of kidney disease have the MYH9 gene, and many of them end up on dialysis. The gene predisposes Black Americans to the kidney disease that was thought to stem from high blood pressure.

“The MYH9 gene association in African-American kidney disease is the most powerful genetic cause of a common disease yet discovered,” said Dr. Barry Freedman, professor of internal medicine and nephrology at Wake Forest University, who led a team of researchers in isolating the gene.

Hispanics or Latinos usually suffer from higher rates of type 2 diabetes ..  inadequate nutrition and reduced physical activity in the setting of an increased genetic predisposition to type 2 diabetes have contributed to the inexorable rise in metabolic abnormalities in Hispanics in the United States.” 34



The ethnic groups mentioned here bear similarities that leave them disproportionately exposed to ingested fluoride. Some of the harm that comes from fluoride exposure is obvious, and well-established.  But, ominously, the advance of modern research continues to implicate fluoride in a host of other bodily injuries, including some of society’s most devastating diseases. 35

For the discussed ethnic groups, being unable to escape high levels of fluoride is only part of the problem. The high group prevalence of diabetes and kidney disease will work against many to slowly shut down their natural ability to purge their bodies of fluoride.  In response to unkind genetics, their bodies, to a greater extent than most, will become fluoride repositories. 36

It is this disproportionate accumulation of fluoride that will deliver the disproportionate bodily harm.  The practice of water fluoridation fails to adequately assess the unique sensitivities of ethnic communities to the fluoridating chemicals in common use. 37

Health authorities, in particular, fail to acknowledge ethnic group sensitivities when they advise municipalities to maintain an arbitrarily-set ‘optimum concentration’ of fluoride ion in drinking water.  But, in that failure, health authorities cannot be described as discriminatory .. their ‘safe and effective’ message does not acknowledge anyone’s unique sensitivities.

Aboriginal, Black and Hispanic leaders are reacting to growing evidence that their community members are more negatively affected by water fluoridation.

In the US, ethnic community leaders are asking hard questions of government and health authorities to learn what was, and is, known about the health effects of water fluoridation. They understandably wonder why ethnic groups appear to suffer more than other population groups.  The larger question being asked is, ‘How long have health authorities known that ethnic minorities would fare worse by water fluoridation?’

Atlanta civil rights leaders former US Ambassador Andrew Young and Dr. Gerald Durley have called on top Georgia state legislators to repeal Georgia’s mandatory water fluoridation law. They expressed concerns about issues of fairness and safety, and they seek to investigate evidence of purposeful suppression of information that is not favourable to artificial water fluoridation.

Dr. Durley addressed disproportionate fluoride harm to black citizens’ teeth, and noted that with disproportionate amounts of kidney disease and diabetes in the black community, blacks are more impacted by fluorides.

On July 1, 2011 the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the oldest and largest Latino organization in the US, issued a resolution that stated:

  • current science shows that fluoridation chemicals pose increased risk to sensitive subpopulations, including infants, the elderly, diabetics, kidney patients, and people with poor nutritional status
  • minority communities are more highly impacted by fluorides as they historically experience more diabetes and kidney disease;

The LULAC resolution summarized by demanding to know why government agencies entrusted with protecting the public health are more protective of the policy of fluoridation than they are of public health.   38

LULAC, justifiably, poses the ultimate question.


About the author: 

Sheldon Thomas is the founder of ‘Clear Water Legacy’ (www.clearwaterlegacy.com), and a former Manager of Water Distribution for the City of Hamilton, Ontario.



1. WHO Fluoride in Drinking Water 2006, pg 30, 3.1.2. ‘Distribution’

2. ‘The Effect of Fluoride on the Physiology of the Pineal Gland’ Jennifer Anne Luke, 1997, School of Biological Sciences, University of Surrey, pages: 1-9; 51-53; 167-177

3. National Research Council info on kidney patients and others as fluoride-susceptible groups – see p. 350 ff at: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11571&page=351

4. Taylor A, Taylor NC. (1965). ‘Effect of sodium fluoride on tumor growth’. Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 119:252-255.

5.  Riggs BL, et al. (1990). Effect of Fluoride treatment on the Fracture Rates in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis. New England Journal of Medicine 322:802-809.

6. Bang S, et al. (1985). Distribution of fluoride in calcified cartilage of a fluoride-treated osteoporotic patient. Bone 6: 207-210.

7. ‘Chronic administration of aluminum–fluoride or sodium–fluoride to rats in drinking water: alterations in neuronal and cerebrovascular integrity’, Julie A. Varner et al., Psychology Department, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY, USA 1997

8. Li Y, et al. (2003). The effects of endemic fluoride poisoning on the intellectual development of children in Baotou. Chinese Journal of Public Health Management 19(4):337-338.

9. Dr. Phyllis J. Mullenix, Toxicology Department, Forsyth Research Institute, Boston, MA – JOURNAL TITLE: Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats, 1995

10. “There is plenty of evidence to indicate that fluorine in the amount of 1 ppm or slightly more interferes with enzyme systems and these enzyme systems are involved in the growth of bones, in the functioning of nerve tissue and so forth. It is clear that fluoridation is a calculated risk.” Dr. Robert S. Harris, Ph.D, Director of Nutritional Biochemistry Laboratories, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

11. “In humans, effects on thyroid function were associated with fluoride exposures of 0.05-0.13 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was adequate and 0.01-0.03 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was inadequate.”  National Research Council. (2006) Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards,  p 218.

12. ‘Fluoride increases lead concentrations in whole blood and in calcified tissues from lead exposed rats’,  Sawan RM et al., 2010,  Journal Toxicology, pg 21-26

13. Gibson, 1992, Effects of Fluoride on Immune System Function, Complementary Medical Research, Issue 6, pg 11-113;  Sutton P, 1991, ‘Is the Ingestion of Fluoride an Immunosuppressive Practice?’, Medical Hypotheses 35, 1-3,

14. “An increase in fluoride content and decrease in calcium content in fluorosed human teeth were observed when compared to the control.”  Susheela AK, Bhatnagar M. 1999. Structural aberrations in fluorosed human teeth: Biochemical and scanning electron microscopic studies. Current Science 77: 1677-1680.

“Fluorosed enamel has a reduced amount of mineral when compared with control enamel.”  Denbesten PK, et al. 1985. Changes in the fluoride-induced modulation of maturation stage ameloblasts of rats. Journal of Dental Research 64: 1365-70.

15. James R. Gavin III, MD, chair of the American Diabetes Association’s African-American Program / African American Community Health Advisory Committee

16. American Indian Health Central   http://aihc1998.tripod.com

17. James R. Gavin III, MD, chair of the American Diabetes Association’s African-American Program / African American Community Health Advisory Committee

18. American Diabetes Association, 2005

19. American Diabetes Association. 2010. Latino Programs.

20. Marier and Rose 1971

21. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, US Department of Health and Human Services        www.ahrq.comn

22.  Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality ( AHRQ,  www.ahrq.comn ) of the US Department of Health and Human Services

23.   Perneger TV, Brancati FL, Whelton PK, Kiag M. End-stage renal disease attributable to diabetes mellitus. Ann Intern Medicine 1994;121:912-8. (AHRQ Grant HS06978).

24.   National Kidney Foundation statement ,  December 2009

25.   National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2006

26.   Cuatrecasas P, Lockwood DH, Caldwell JR. Lactase deficiency in the adult: a common occurrence. Lancet, 1965;1:14-8. /  Woteki CE, Weser E, Young EA. Lactose malabsorption in Mexican-American adults. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1977;30:470-5. /  Scrimshaw NS, Murray EB. The acceptability of milk and milk products in populations with a high prevalence of lactose intolerance. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1988;48:1083-5.

27. CDC Surveillance for Dental Caries, Dental Sealants, Tooth Retention, Edentulism, and Enamel Fluorosis — United States, 1988–1994 and 1999—2002

28. ‘Highlights of Forty Years of Research on Endemic Skeletal Fluorosis in India’,  S P S Teotia , M Teotia and K P Singh, presented at the 4th International Workshop on Fluorosis Prevention and Defluoridation of Water, India

29. Teotia M, Teotia SPS and Kunwar KB. Endemic skeletal fluorosis. Arch. Dis. Child. 1971; 46:686-91.

30. Dr. Elise Bassin, 2001, PhD dissertation, at Harvard University.  The thesis found a strong statistically significant relationship between fluoride exposure during the 6th to 8th years of life (the “mid-childhood growth spurt”) and the later development of osteosarcoma among young males.

31. Dr. Hardy Limeback PhD, DDS Professor and Head, Preventive Dentistry University of Toronto: “Our recently published study on fluoride in bone from fluoridation (Chachra et al, J Dent Res 89(11):1219-1223, 2010) shows a negative trend in changes that have occurred in the bone of Torontonians who have lived only a portion of their lives in fluoridated Toronto.”

32. Alarcon-Herrera MT, et al. (2001). Well Water Fluoride, Dental fluorosis, Bone Fractures in the Guadiana Valley of Mexico. Fluoride 34(2): 139-149.

33. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK)

34. ‘Diabetes in the Hispanic or Latino population: genes, environment, culture, and more.’

Caballero AE.  Latino Diabetes Initiative, Joslin Diabetes Center, Harvard Medical School

35. 2006, NRC ‘Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards’

36. “Persons with renal failure can have a four fold increase in skeletal fluoride content, are at more risk of spontaneous bone fractures, and akin to skeletal fluorosis even at 1.0 ppm fluoride in drinking water.” SOURCE: Ayoob S, Gupta AK. (2006). Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Review on the Status and Stress Effects. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 36:433–487

37. Russell, 1962; Butler et al., 1985; Williams and Zwemer, 1990; Beltrán-Aguilar et al., 2005; Martinez-Mier and Soto-Rojas, 2010

38. http://lulac.org/advocacy/resolutions/2011/resolution_Civil_Rights_Violation_Regarding_Forced_Medication/

Brewer’s ‘Daily Dose’ 19-Sep-2012

Opinion: Fluoride Propaganda by First Five of Sacramento

By: Brian Lambert, Sacramentopress.com, Sacremento, California 18-Sep-2012

In a recent “Oral Health Begins At Birth” ad, First Five of Sacramento used disinformation to promote water fluoridation. The eight page ad was seen in the mid-August 2012 Sacramento News & Review. First Five was born out of Prop 10, using tax on tobacco to fund various childhood health programs.

In the first paragraph Mike Blount laments the lack of dental care in California. Blount goes on to claim water fluoridation is an “investment toward the health of area residents.” He then makes broad claims of the supposed effectiveness of the program and its effect on tooth decay. Another story dramatizes a seven month old treated for dental decay, including statements by his mother on fluoride. Also seen is an info-graphic titled “How Does Fluoride Work?” Here we also have claims of fluoridated water supposed positive effect on bones. Also the delivery of the fluoride drug is outlined. Finally, a smiling cartoon character asks “Are you receiving fluoridated water?”

We will focus on what First Five is advertising here (and on its web site) and leave the moral and ethical issues of drugging the population without consent for lawyers to work out. If you interested in the countless studies of the harm of fluoride drugs to the rest of your body go here. Let’s take these claims one by one, and look at the facts. See the ad here.


The unnamed dentist here is prescribing fluoride to a 7 month old. The fact is fluoridation is not medically recommended by the American Dental Association (ADA) or Center for Disease Control (CDC) for babies below 12 months of age. LINK


How can we ignore negative effects of fluoride on the whole body? Recent studies link fluoride to bone cancer, bone fractures, thyroid disorder, lowered IQ and tooth damage among other things. What kind of health investment puts one area above all others? Even the AMA – American Dental Association concedes that no studies were done to determine any side effects caused by fluoridation.


Too much fluoride damages your teeth. Yes, you have seen the first visible signs of an overexposure to fluoride. White spots on teeth is called Dental Fluorosis. Teeth impacted by fluorosis have visible discoloration, ranging from white spots to brown and black stains. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), 41% of American children now have some form of dental fluorosis, with 2 to 4% of children having moderate to severe stages (CDC 2005). We are concerned that dental fluorosis in a child may signal that damage to other tissues has also occurred. That damage may be less visible and less obvious but possibly far more serious.

The discoloration induced by fluorosis – particularly in its advanced forms can cause significant embarrassment and stress to the impacted child, resulting in adverse effects on esteem, emotional health, and career success. The only one benefiting here is your dentist with costly office visits for you.


The bones are effected in three ways; Skeletal fluorosis, brittleness and cancer.

Excessive exposure to fluoride causes an arthritic bone disease called skeletal fluorosis. In its early stages, is a difficult disease to diagnose, and can be readily confused with various forms of arthritis. In the advanced stages, fluorosis can resemble a multitude of bone/joint diseases, including: osteosclerosis, renal osteodystrophy, DISH, spondylosis, osteomalacia, osteoporosis, and secondary hyperparathyroidism.

Studies on human populations consuming fluoride in drinking water, have found an association between dental fluorosis and increased bone fracture in children; and between long-term consumption of fluoridated water and increased hip fracture in the elderly. According to the US National Research Council, “The weight of evidence indicates that, although fluoride might increase bone volume, there is less strength per unit volume.”

As acknowledged by the U.S. National Toxicology Program there is a “biological plausibility” of a link between fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma (a rare type of Bone Cancer). In addition to its biological plausibility, there is now a substantive body of evidence indicating that fluoride can in fact induce osteosarcomas in both animals and humans. Most notably, a recent national case control study conducted by scientists at Harvard University found a significant relationship between fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma among boys, particularly if exposed to fluoridated water between the ages of 6 and 8 (the mid-childhood growth spurt).


First Five is yet another organization relying on 50 year old endorsements. Studies from 50 years ago do not pass muster under today’s standards for safety or effectiveness. Research from the same era also “proved” cigarettes don’t cause cancer. Even the AMA – American Dental Association concedes that no studies were done to determine any side effects caused by fluoridation. There has never been a study of the results of fluoridation of the quality required by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA). No study involving randomized clinical trials & double blind testing of this unapproved drug.

If Water Fluoridation works at reducing cavities, why do non-fluoridating countries (97% of Europe) have essentially the same levels of cavities as the few fluoridating ones? (see chart) One of the biggest factors that mars many studies claiming to show a benefit from fluoridated water is the failure to account for income levels. Data by the Dept. of Health & Human Services (DHHS) shows a strong relationship between income level & dental health. A quality diet and health care benefits the whole body.

In the ad, an unnamed dentist lists a number of possible causes of tooth decay. But the dentist never asked a simple question; Did the child go to bed with a bottle? Baby Bottle Tooth Decay (BBTD) also called nursing caries is caused by babies sucking on sugary beverages for hours on end, leading to decay and tooth extraction under anesthesia. Fluoridation cannot prevent this.


The mother in the story mentions missing “nutrients.” This is an interesting statement. The fact is no disease will result from depriving man or animals of fluoride. Also consider the reported fluoride concentrations in mothers milk of 0.004~0.04ppm. These levels are much lower than the average level used in fluoridation programs (0.6~1.2ppm) Studies have shown that increasing the mothers fluoride intake results in little or no change in the concentration in her milk.


First Five says it works systemically by drinking it down. But the current consensus is that fluoride’s benefit (whatever it may be) comes from topical (surface contact) with teeth after the teeth have erupted into the mouth.

The Center for Disease Control stated in 1999:”fluoride prevents dental caries predominately after eruption of the tooth into the mouth, and its actions primarily are topical for both adults and children.”     The CDC repeated this position in 2001, affirming that “fluoride’s predominant effect is post-eruptive and topical.”


In reality it is hard to avoid fluoride considering it is in many processed food and drinks. The total fluoride exposure from all sources must be considered when determined the drug dosage. This total dosage is something overlooked by fluoride promoters.

Many young children swallow over 50% of the tooth paste used, particularly if they use candy-flavored varieties. Research has shown that some children swallow more fluoride from toothpaste alone than is recommended from all sources combined.

Other sources include processed foods made with fluoridated water, fluoride-containing pesticides, bottled teas, fluorinated pharmaceuticals, teflon pans, and mechanically deboned chicken. Taken together, the glut of fluoride sources in the modern diet has created a toxic cocktail, one that has caused a dramatic increase in dental fluorosis (see above) over the past 60 years. One example is wine and grape juice. The wine and grape juice made in the U.S. have high levels of fluoride pesticide. The problem with fluoride, therefore, is not that children are receiving too little, but that they are receiving too much.


When First Five was contacted about the sources for the data in the ad, I was directed to the CDC web site and found admission of harm.

Q #20. What are the effects of excess levels of fluoride and why are they different for children and adults different? LINK

A: … increased likelihood of bone fractures, and may result in effectson bone leading to pain and tenderness. …because it impacts teeth while they are still in formative phases. . …have an increased chance of developing pits in the tooth enamel, along with a range of cosmetic effects to teeth. (Fluorosis)

The CDC says bone and tooth damage are the result of excess fluoridation. It is only logical that if these tissues are effected, then others areas of the body are as well.


I am wondering why I was referred to the CDC on this. The CDC promotes fluoridation but;

  • Is not overseeing the safety of the program
  • Does not vouch for the safety of the chemicals used
  • Accepts no other liability in the matter

We also found no ownership of fluoridation at the American Dental Association (ADA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or the National Sanitation Foundation International (NSF). In fact, no federal agency accepts liability for the “safe levels” or the “safety of the chemicals” it recommends for fluoridation.


The suggestion that “water fluoridation is safe for all” is an irresponsible position that deserves a rebuttal and to be reevaluated by all agencies. It is clearly not for babies, dialysis patients, thyroid disease patients, or anyone that consumes anything beyond the “average” amount of soda/tea/juice/water etc.

But is it for anyone at all if as the CDC tells us “you will get brittle, aching bones” if you get too much over the years? Just how are we supposed to monitor our dosage of the drug “doctor” (City of Sac)?  Not only do doctors have no way of monitoring your intake of fluoride, they do not routinely test your blood levels, which do not reflect bone, brain, & thyroid fluoride levels.

The only truthful thing the City of Sacramento has said about Water Fluoridation is that over 99% of it is flushed unsued down the drain. (according to Sac. Dept. of Utilities) Tell us again how that is an effective program.

Sacramento is burdened with water fluoridation not by choice, but due to industry lobbyists. For how this happened see the story.