South Africa: Fluoride - good teeth or pollutant?

[pfpcnews]

Fluoride: good teeth or pollutant?

The South African Journal of Natural Medicine - August 7, 2006

By Dr Bernard Brom
MB ChB (UCT), CEDH (France), Dip Acup (Singapore)

The US government requires that all fluoridated toothpastes and mouth rinses be labelled with a warning to keep them out of reach of children under 6 years of age and that they should not be swallowed. Why is this so, and why the controversy?

Fluoride is not a nutritional supplement but a poison and by-product of industry. Like chlorine, also a poison and by-product of industry, it is being 'dumped' into our water supply. The ostensible reason for adding this poison to the water supply is to prevent tooth decay in children, despite the fact that little is known about the effects of fluoride on the rest of the body.

The shortsightedness of professional bodies is remarkable. It will become increasingly difficult to control the intake of fluoride as it increases in the food chain from watering, rain, etc. and as fluoride begins to appear in more and more products, ranging from toothpaste to drugs and cosmetics. Parents are even encouraged to give their children fluoride in tablet form.

The fluoride added to water is sodium fluoride and not the natural calcium fluoride, which is much less bio-available. Sodium fluoride is far more soluble and easily absorbed. Fluoride is more poisonous than lead and only slightly less poisonous than arsenic. It has been used as a pesticide, rodenticide, anaesthetic and in many drugs.

Fluoride does not confer any health benefits to adults, and 20 years or more of fluoride ingestion may pose significant health risks. Opponents to fluoridization are asking if it is wise to subject adults to the possible effects of chronic poisoning in order to prevent caries in children. Is there not a better way?

Does fluoride prevent the formation of caries in children?

It seems that investigators have failed to show a consistent correlation between anticaries activity and the specific amounts of fluoride incorporated into enamel. Since the 1970s, caries scores have been declining in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities in Europe, the USA and elsewhere.1

Fluoride poisoning is linked to many symptoms and signs, of which the most well known is dental fluorosis, a brown staining and/or pitting of the permanent teeth. It is claimed that the amount of fluoride in water is insufficient to cause any problems, but in view of the water solubility of sodium fluoride (as opposed to calcium fluoride found in nature), the increasing amounts in the atmosphere and food chain, and the unreliability of the human factor (control of amounts used), it seems unwise and perhaps even unconstitutional to allow a poison into the water supply.

In addition, one must always remember the possible synergistic effect with other chemical substances in the water and in the body, multiplying and amplifying the consequences of fluoride's effect on the human body. In addition, subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effect of fluoride and its compounds. These populations include the elderly, people with various mineral and vitamin deficiencies and those with cardiovascular and kidney disease.

There are also insufficient data regarding safe daily intake over the long term. Industries with fluoride disposal problems are often the ones controlling the bulk of research on fluoride toxicity. This toxicity has included reports of lower IQ in children, increase in incidence of hip fractures, chromosomal damage, stomach and bowel disorders, fatigue, a decrease in calcium levels as fluoride levels increase, a possible increase in heart disease and effects on the brain.

Although the possibility of toxic effects is dismissed by government agencies and most medical scientists as insignificant, one cannot dismiss the fact that fluoride is a poison, and therefore when used to prevent disease should be classified as a drug and subjected to extremely rigorous independent studies before being released into the water supply.

Reference:
1.USA Department of Health and Human Services. Review of fluoride benefits and risks February 1991; 31: 7.

Recommended reading:
1.J Hattersley. The case against fluoridation. Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine 1999; 14.4: 185-192.

SOURCE:
http://www.naturalmedicine.co.za/sajnm_ ... 9110816919