Is fluoride a nutrient that’s good for dental hygiene, especially healthier teeth? Or the industrial chemical, also added to water supplies across much of the United States, is actually a dangerous developmental neurotoxicant? A report from the world’s oldest and most prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, has officially classified fluoride as a neurotoxin — in the same category as arsenic, lead and mercury.
Dr. Philippe Grandjean of Harvard School of Public Health and Dr. Phillip Landrigan of Icahn School of Medicine in their study Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity, published in The Lancet Neurology in 2014, noted:
“Neurodevelopmental disabilities, including autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and other cognitive impairments, affect millions of children worldwide, and some diagnoses seem to be increasing in frequency. Industrial chemicals that injure the developing brain are among the known causes for this rise in prevalence. In 2006, we did a systematic review and identified five industrial chemicals as developmental neurotoxicants: lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, arsenic, and toluene. Since 2006, epidemiological studies have documented six additional developmental neurotoxicants — manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers.
The authors cited research from the Harvard Medical School of Public Health which suggested that fluoride added into water supplies significantly decreased the IQ of children.
In a meta-analysis, researchers from Harvard School of Public Health and China Medical University in Shenyang combined 27 studies and found strong indications that fluoride may adversely affect cognitive development in children. They analyzed possible associations with IQ measures in more than 8,000 children of school age. The average loss in IQ was reported as a standardized weighted mean difference of 0.45, which would be approximately equivalent to seven IQ points for commonly used IQ scores. The children, up to 14 years of age, in high-fluoride areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who lived in low-fluoride areas.
“Fluoride seems to fit in with lead, mercury, and other poisons that cause chemical brain drain. The effect of each toxicant may seem small, but the combined damage on a population scale can be serious, especially because the brain power of the next generation is crucial to all of us,” senior author Dr. Philippe Grandjean had remarked then.
The level of fluoride analyzed in most of the studies was less than four milligrams per liter. The US Environmental Protection Agency allows municipal governments to use more than the concentrations cited in the Harvard study, meaning American kids could be suffering even more serious neurological complications from exposure to fluoride.
Opponents of fluoride being added to the water seized on the recent findings to push for an end to water fluoridation in America. “In light of the new classification of fluoride as a dangerous neurotoxin, adding more fluoride to Americans’ already excessive intake no longer has any conceivable justification. We should follow the evidence and try to reduce fluoride intake, not increase it,” Fluoride Action Network Executive Director and retired chemistry professor Dr. Paul Connett said in a statement.
Numerous other studies, including a 2006 report by the US National Academy of Science which found that fluorides also increase the production of free radicals in the brain through several different biological pathways and that fluorides act to increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease, have concluded that fluoride affects brain function and can cause other health problems. The toxic effects of fluoride on the human brain have been documented since decades where scientists and experts have spoken about the dangers of fluoridation.
How much more proof doe we need?? https://t.co/F4l9eZPtzT
— Living Nourished (@NourishedRose) January 20, 2016
How many studies does America need before the country finally stops adding fluoride to drinking water and pulls the plug on fluoridation? Why must the children be used to satisfy the political agenda of special-interest groups? Even if fluoridation reduced cavities, is tooth health more important than brain health?
There’s a reason why multiple countries and communities all over the world are putting an end to water fluoridation, except for the United States:
“In point of fact, fluoride causes more human cancer deaths than any other chemical. When you have power you don’t have to tell the truth. That’s a rule that’s been working in this world for generations. There are a great many people who don’t tell the truth when they are in power in administrative positions. Fluoride amounts to public murder on a grand scale,” Dr. Dean Burk, Biochemist, Founder of Biotin, and Former Chief Chemist at the National Cancer Institute of Health, commented in 2013.
Excellent documentary on Fluoride & fluoridation of water. This issue isn’t going away people. #toxin #cancer http://t.co/tONy2Rr0
— AnonymousOracle (@MxJ7) January 28, 2013
This Article (Fluoride Classified As Neurotoxin – Joins Arsenic, Lead And Mercury As Human Carcinogen) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.
I have asked many forced-fluoridation fanatics to tell me how much accumulated fluoride in the body they think is safe. So far not a single one of them has been able to answer the question.
http://forcedfluoridationfreedomfighters.com/a-preliminary-investigation-into-fluoride-accumulation-in-bone/
I’very known this was a carcinogen for a long time. Now it’s clear that it’s a neurotoxin, as well! Also not surprised it’s still being promoted as a cavity fighter. Because, you see, it was commonly known to be a toxic waste until the aluminum companies foisted it on us so they wouldn’t have to figure out how to safely dispose of fluoride, a biproduct of the process of making aluminum!
Fluoride is simply the element fluorine with one more electron. Its not right to say its a waste byproduct because… conservation of mass… they don’t “make” fluoride, if its not used here or there it would still be wherever they got it from. They could dump it back in whatever mine they pulled the salt from and it would go back into the mix of naturally occurring minerals. That would be a waste though as there are lots of other uses. The point is its not some waste product that’s dumped in the water supply because they cant get rid of it… next time your at the beach grab a glass of sea water and let it evaporate. The white powder left is a mixture of salts some of those will be naturaly occurring fluorides, chlorides, iodides, bromides. Whats in himilayan rock salt? same deal with iron oxide (rust) tainting it pink.
If Fluoride is good for our dental-hygiene, and is going to be banned now, then what’s the alternative for healthier teeth?
a healthy diet is the best way to get healthy teeth
Would you rather have your children brain dead idiots with good teeth or have good brain function with enough sense to know to have a good dentist to take care of your teeth?
Good question, with an obvious answer! (Y)
As Andrew said, diet. Traditional nourishing diets. There are plenty of guidelines to be found online. I’ve found clay to be a perfect toothpaste on its own, I also used just baking soda for years, and now I mostly use a miswak (chewing stick). I recommend clay or miswak highest (note: the fluoride found in miswak is not the same), my mouth feels SO clean and my teeth so smooth after using them. My dental health improved incredibly when I stopped using fluoride. I no longer have loose teeth or sensitivity or feel stomach pain after brushing, and it has been this way for several years now. Oil pulling is also nice.
How exactly do you use backing soda? Do you mix it wiht something? Water etc.?
And what is “Oil pulling”?
reasons i have trouble with this: 1) there is no such thing as the “National Cancer Institutes of Health.” 2) dr. dean burk passed away in 1988
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/08/30/fluoridated-water-is-public-murder-on-a-grand-scale-dr-dean-burk/
I’m not here to argue about fluoride.. however since I’m guessing anon and its followers are interested in the truth its worth noting that this article suffers from a very common cognitive bias. Ie starting with a conclusion then finding evidence which supports it and not trying to “disprove” a hypothesis. This is the opposite of the scientific method. A more beneficial way to approach this issue and any other for that matter would be to form a hypothesis first then test it and ultimately attempt to prove yourself wrong.
Eg: Does the concentration of the Fluoride anion found in drinking water correlate with incidence of (insert pathology of choice)
First you would need to find the specific concentration in fluoridated water (this should be well documented but it never hurts to experiment)
Reference that with the published literature (scientific journals not google searches)
Compare actual physiological concentrations of fluoride between people exposed to fluoridated water and a control group without.
At this point you would realise that the control group does not have zero levels of F- because its an abundant ion found in many completely natural foods. Eg apples contain more fluoride w/w then typical fluoridated water even organic non gmo picked by virgins in the moonlight, apples.
Its the dose that makes the poison not the molecule. There is no such thing as a toxic or non toxic chemical only the LD50 that differs.
Also sodium fluoride specifically is mentioned as a waste product which is misleading the sodium ion is completely irrelevant since it dissociates in solution the fluoride ion could just have easily have come from any inorganic fluoride salt. Are you implying that the specific source of NaF is contaminated? if so with what?
You could combine the purest sodium hydroxide and hydrofluoric acid in the cleanest conditions and produce pure sodium fluoride in pure water this would be no different to getting it from another industry as a waste product unless that specific source is contaminated with something else but this is not the argument raised in this article its the sodium fluoride itself that’s labelled as the poison. Again failing to mention the irrelevance of the sodium or the concentrations of fluoride that are ment to be poisonous.
Don’t forget even good old dihydrogen monoxide has an LD50 rating and is considered toxic in excess but no one says water is a poison.
I thought I would clarify. Issues with the reported chemistry aside, if as one quote mentioned, people already get enough / too much, then ceasing water fluoridation is a no brainer. It would be worth letting people know where their levels of fluoride is coming from. Drink a lot of tea? you get lots of fluoride naturally in tea leaves so if you also live in an area that supplements the water and use fluoride toothpaste then you could be getting too much.