The widespread availability of refined sugars in the mid 19th century led to an epidemic of dental disease (which has only recently come under control). To reduce levels of dental decay, the Irish Government in the 1960s decided to fluoridate public water supplies.
Why is water fluoridation carried out in Australia?
Water Fluoridation in Australia – the official position
” Water fluoridation is the single most effective public health measure for reducing dental caries across the population,” Page 16*
I know this sound pretty obvious, but why not remove the problem instead of force medicating the population with toxic waste to control it?
Could it possibly be a case of follow the mighty dollar yet again? Industry needs somewhere to dump its toxic waste materials, while at the same time making a buck or two. Food manufacturers are not prepared to lower the sugar content of foods, except when it suits them to add other poisons such as aspartame. I would also guestimate the population has what is termed a ‘sweet tooth’ or sugar addiction.
Can you become addicted to sugar?
We have enough scientific evidence now to tell us that we can train ourselves to crave, to build tolerance and to experience withdrawal when we ingest a lot of refined sugar. These are the hallmarks of addiction. Craving, tolerance and withdrawal.
Dr. Serge Ahmed, of Bordeaux, France, has been working with rats and giving them the choice between cocaine and sugar. Guess what wins, time and again? That’s right, sugar. The sweet taste of sugar is more rewarding than the high of cocaine.
Some people know they are sugar addicts and cannot handle it at all. They know because they can’t stop eating it once they start. They crave sugary foods and they need more and more to feel satisfied. They also experience withdrawal if they stop eating sugar.
I think that might confirm what I suspected; sugar is the real problem when it comes to tooth decay. Reduce the amount consumed, perform regular oral hygiene and stop force medicating the population with dangerous poisons.
As with dietary fiber’s capacity to slow or restrict bile acid and sugar absorption in the gut, fluoride is a nutrient that acts against a harmful biological process; in fluoride’s case the harm comes from a modern lifestyle involving sugar and oral microbes, and diets lower in sugar remove this need for fluoride. ( Jones PJ, Varady KA. Are functional foods redefining nutritional requirements? [PDF]. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2008;33(1):118–23. doi:10.1139/H07-134. PMID 18347661.)
A Little History:
During the 1940s and 50s, when the successful push for fluoridation was underway, the pro-forces touted the controlled experiment of Newburgh and Kingston, two neighbouring small cities in upstate New York, with much the same demographics. Newburgh had been fluoridated and Kingston had not, and the powerful pro-fluoridation Establishment trumpeted the fact that ten years later, dental cavities in kids 5 to 9 in Newburgh were considerably lower than in Kingston (originally, the rates of every disease had been about the same in the two places). OK, but the antis raising the disquieting fact that, after ten years, both the cancer and the heart disease rates were now significantly higher in Newburgh. How did the Establishment treat this criticism? By dismissing it as irrelevant, as kooky scare tactics.
Seems they still treat anyone who disagrees with them, or provides evidence of the dangers of ingesting fluoride as ‘kooks’ and ‘scare mongerers’.
An article by Dr. Jackie Alan Giuliano in “Healing Our World” noted that reporters Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson discovered the truth about fluoride while researching hundreds of declassified documents about the Manhattan Project, America’s secret atomic bomb development program.
They found that fluoride as a key chemical in atomic bomb production. Millions of tons were used during the Cold War period to manufacture high-grade uranium and plutonium. “Fluoride was the top chemical hazard of the U.S. nuclear weapons program, not only for workers, but for those living in nearby communities as well,” Giuliano wrote.
“The documents show that the first U.S. lawsuits levied against the atomic weapons program were over fluoride poisoning, not radiation damage. The documents reveal that the U.S. government secretly ordered atomic bomb scientists to create “evidence useful in litigation” against defence contractors who were being accused of injuring citizens with fluoride.”
This secret work to head-off government lawsuits lead to a multi-billion dollar industry that has been poisoning our water supplies, our toothpaste, and our bodies ever since. Believe this or not, fluoride tablets are even available for children.
Some fifty years after the United States began adding fluoride to public water supplies to reduce cavities in children’s teeth, declassified government documents are shedding new light on the roots of that still-controversial public health measure, revealing a surprising connection between fluoride and the dawning of the nuclear age.
Today, two thirds of U.S. public drinking water is fluoridated. Many municipalities still resist the practice, disbelieving the government’s assurances of safety.
Since the days of World War II, when this nation prevailed by building the world’s first atomic bomb, U.S. public health leaders have maintained that low doses of fluoride are safe for people, and good for children’s teeth.
That safety verdict should now be re-examined in the light of hundreds of once-secret WWII documents obtained by Griffiths and Bryson – including declassified papers of the Manhattan Project, the U.S. military group that built the atomic bomb.
Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production, according to the documents. Massive quantities of fluoride – millions of tons – were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War. One of the most toxic chemicals known, fluoride rapidly emerged as the leading chemical health hazard of the U.S atomic bomb program–both for workers and for nearby communities, the documents reveal.
In my humble opinion there ought to be a worldwide controversy about the mass medication, by way of adding fluoride to public drinking water. It is simply not good enough for government bodies to force this upon the general public, when the histories are now becoming available for one and all to read, and new scientific evidence clearly shows that adding fluoride does NOT prevent dental carries. If fluoride has any beneficial effect at all, it is solely through external application, where it can them be ‘spat’ out and rinsed away.
Recent research on the mechanism of action of F in reducing the prevalence of dental caries (tooth decay) in humans shows that F acts topically (i.e. at the surface of the teeth) and that there is negligible benefit in actually ingesting it.26-28 This is supported by experiments on laboratory rats: a slow-release source of F fixed in the mouth reduced dental caries, but when the mouth was bypassed by placing the source under the skin, there was no detectable reduction.29 The lack of observed systemic benefit from ingesting fluoridated water at concentration 1 ppm is not surprising, since the resulting level of F in the saliva is only around 0.01 ppm. 30
The evidence that there is negligible systemic benefit from fluoridation is accepted by eminent dental researchers 26-28 and at least one leading US proponent of fluoridation, Professor Brian Burt.31 Therefore proponents must come to grips with a serious ethical question: Is it right to put F in drinking water and to mislead the community that F must be ingested, when any small benefit is due to the topical action of F on teeth.32
SOME MORE REFERENCES:
Sugar: The Sweet Poison
History of tooth decay
Material Safety Data Sheet Sodium fluoride MSDS
New Evidence on Fluoridation -Paper published in Australian & New Zealand Journal of Public Health 21 (2): 187-190 (1997)
House Plants and Fluoride – if you are a plant lover you should read this.
To be continued……………..
Please do join in the conversation and tell us what you are thinking.