Doctor Exposes Fluoride as Poison

Advertisements

Fluoride Reduces IQ – 23 published studies

From the Fluoride Action Network

23 published studies report an association of reduced IQ
with high fluoride exposure

Print version (pdf)

In the summer of 2008, the following two reports reviewed the published studies reporting an association of high fluoride exposure and reduced IQ. The fluoride levels in water in these studies range from 0.88 – 9.4 ppm.

Connett M, Limeback H.
Fluoride and its effect on human intelligence. A systematic review.

International Association for Dental Research 83rd General Session and Exhibition. Toronto, Canada.
Poster 2205. July 4, 2008.

Tang Q-Q, Du J, Ma H-H, Jiang S-J, Zhou X-J.
Fluoride and Children’s Intelligence: A Meta-analysis.
Biol Trace Elem Res. 2008 Aug 10. 2008.

The Tang et al. study cites 16 studies, including 5 Chinese studies that had not been translated into English. FAN plans to have them translated.

The Connett & Limeback review, published prior to Tang et al., found 18 out of 20 studies reporting an association to fluoride exposure and lowered IQ. Their results are reproduced below in the following Table.

The citations for the 23 studies are listed at the end with links to the Chinese and translated versions.

The Fluoride journal published 6 of the translated Chinese studies on fluoride’s impact on IQ in its April-June 2008 edition (Qin-1990, Chen-1991, Guo-1991, Liu-2000, Hong-2001, Li-2003) and will publish more translated studies in later editions.

Twelve (12) of the human/IQ studies were originally published in Chinese. Julian Brooke translated these studies into English under contract with Fluoride Action Network.

In their review of the toxicology of fluoride, the committee who authored the 2006 National Research Council of the National Academies report on fluoride (NRC), cited only 3 of the 23 studies in its ‘Findings on Human Cognitive Abilities’, and cited 6 of the 23 studies in its references (Yang et al., 1994; Li et al., 1995; Lin et al., 1991; Zhao et al., 1996; Lu et al., 2000; Xiang et al., 2003). 5 studies (including one untranslated Chinese study) were published after the NRC report was released. The NRC report stated:

Human Cognitive Abilities.
In assessing the potential health effects of fluoride at 2-4 mg/L, the committee found three studies of human populations exposed at those concentrations in drinking water that were useful for informing its assessment of potential neurologic effects. These studies were conducted in different areas of China, where fluoride concentrations ranged from 2.5 to 4 mg/L. Comparisons were made between the IQs of children from those populations with children exposed to lower concentration of fluoride ranging from 0.4 to 1 mg/L. The studies reported that while modal IQ scores were unchanged, the average IQ scores were lower in the more highly exposed children. This was due to fewer children in the high IQ range. While the studies lacked sufficient detail for the committee to fully assess their quality and their relevance to U.S. populations, the consistency of the collective results warrant additional research on the effects of fluoride on intelligence. Investigation of other mental and physiological alterations reported in the case study literature, including mental confusion and lethargy, should also be investigated.
Ref: bottom of page 220 to page 221

The NRC report also stated:

On the basis of information largely derived from histological, chemical, and molecular studies, it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain and the body by direct and indirect means. To determine the possible adverse effects of fluoride, additional data from both the experimental and the clinical sciences are needed.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11571&page=222

Table from Connett and Limeback 2008 review [comments in italics were not in original paper]
Author
(Year)
Group
compared
Water
[F-]ppm
n Urine
[F-]
IQ test IQ
Results
S.D.
+/-
p Conclusion
Hu
(1989)
Low F
High F
<0.70
>7.0
181
198
ND
ND
84.9
85.15
NR
NR
>0.05 “the effect of fluoride poisoning on intellectual ability is negligible”
Ren
(1989)
Low I
High F, low I
Not
reported
169
160
ND Wechsler 85
64.8
22.3
20.4
<0.01 “Disrupted child intellectual development” is “clearly much more serious” from a “ harmful environment containing both high fluoride and low iodine …than the effects of iodine deficiency alone”
Qin
(1990)
Low F
Normal F
High F
0.1-0.2
0.5-1.0
2.1-4.0
147
59
141
ND
ND
ND
Raven 23.03
28.14
21.17
NR
NR
NR
>0.05
<0.01
“A child whose drinking water is above 2.0 mg/L or below 0.2 mg/L manifest intellectual deficits as compared to ‘normal’ control group.”
Guo
(1991)
Control
Endemic    fluorosis
Serum F
0.10
0.15
61
60
ND
ND
Chinese
Binet
83.95
77.30
8.93
8.52
(7-9 yr.)

<0.05

“children living in high fluoride areas have lower IQs”
Lin
(1991)
Low F, (Low I)
High F (high I)
0.34 (0.96 ppb)
0.88 (5.21 ppb)
256
250
1.52
2.56
78
71
NR
NR
<0.01 “low iodine intake coupled with high fluoride intake exacerbates the central nervous lesions and the somatic developmental disturbance of iodine deficiency”
Chen (1991) Low F
High F
0.89
4.55
320
320
ND
ND
Raven 104.03
100.24
14.96
14.52
<0.01 “fluoride has a direct connection with intellectual development of children”
Yang (1994) Low F (Low I)
High F (high I)
0.5 (0.13 mg/L)
2.97 (1.1 mg/L)
416
1102
0.82
2.03
Chinese Comparative Scale of Intelli-gence Test 81.97
76.67
11.97 7.75 >0.05 IQ ‘somewhat’ lower but not significant

“The average IQ scores of children in the high fluoride, high iodine area and the control area were 76.67±7.75 and 81.67±11.97 respectively. This difference is not significant, however the number of children showing moderately low IQ scores in the subject population is significantly higher than the control. See Table 2.”

Li
(1994)
Low F

HF I no fluorosis
HF II fluorosis
HF III flurosis

0.3 in all water
0.5 ppm (grain)

4.7 ppm (grain)
5.3 ppm (grain)
31.6 ppm(grain)

51

33
37
36

ND
ND

ND
ND
ND

Work capacity
(reaction time, short-term memory, etc.)
Two com-ponents  of mental capacity decreased 0.05
and
<0.01
“early prolonged high fluoride intake causes a decrease an a child’s mental work capacity”
Li
(1995)
Low F
High F
fluorosis

low-mild
severe

226
230
1.02
2.69
Rui Wen 89.9
80.3
10.4
12.9
<0.01 High fluoride environment can adversely affect the development of intelligence in children
Wang (1996) Low F
High F
<1.0
>1.0 – 8.6
83
147
ND
ND
Wechsler 101.23
95.64
15.84
14.34
<0.05 “high fluoride intake has a clear influence on the IQ of preschool children”
Zhao
(1996)
Low F
High F
0.91
4.12
160
160
ND
ND
Pau Wan 105.21
97.69
14.99
13.00
<0.01 “The intake of high fluoride drinking water before birth had a significant deleterious influence on children’s IQ. “
Lu
(2000)
Low F
High F
0.37
3.15
58
60
1.43
4.99
Raven 103.5
92.2
13.86
20.45
<0.005 “exposure of children to high levels of fluoride may therefore carry the risk of impaired development of intelligence”
Hong
(2001)
Low F
High F
High F, low I
0.75
2.90
2.94
32
85
28
ND
ND
ND
Raven 82.79
80.58
68.38
8.98
2.28
19.12
>0.05
<0.01
F makes I-deficiency worse, lowering IQ more than just with low I
Li
(2003)
Non-fluorosis
fluorosis
ND
ND
301
419
ND
ND
Raven 96.97
88.67
18.43
15.26
<0.01 Fluoride disrupts intellectual development
Xiang
(2003)
Low F
High F
0.36
2.47
135
155
1.11
3.47
Combined raven 100.41
92.02
0.003 drinking water fluoride levels greater than 1.0 mg/L may adversely affect the development of children’s intelligence”
Wang
(2005)
Control
dental fluorosis
skeletal fluorosis
49
97
57
1.61

1.35

Raven percentiles
5-25 >75
4
14
24
8
12
2
<0.01 “..Negative correlation between urine fluoride and intelligence”

“…The numbers of below-average IQ subjects from the two fluorosis groups were clearly higher than the control group. Further demonstrating that high fluoride intake has a damaging effect on intellectual ability.  Even the control group had 16.3% of subjects in the low range, suggesting that even moderate levels of fluoride contamination such as were present in the control zone can still have a noticeable effect on the intellectual development of children.”

Seraj
(2007)
Low F
High F
0.4
2.5
85
41
ND
ND
Raven 98.9
87.9
12.9
11.0
0.000 “High F may be associated with impaired development of intelligence”
Rocha-Amador (2007) Low F
Mod F
High F
0.8
5.3
9.4
52
20
60
1.5
6.0
5.5
Wechsler b values
-6.7
-11.2
-10.2
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
“Children exposed to either F or As have increased risks of reduced IQ scores”
Trivedi
(2007)
Low F
High F
2.01
5.55
101
89
2.30
6.13
Stanford-Binet 100.04
91.72
1.23
1.13
<0.001 “..the mean IQ level of students exposed to high F drinking water was significantly lower than that of the students to a lower F level drinking water”
Wang
(2007)
Low F
High F
0.5
8.3
110
106
1.5
5.1
Raven 105
101
15
16
<0.05 “Children’s intelligence and growth can be affected by high concentrations of As or fluoride.”

For the sources to this table click here

Fluoride Story on CBS Atlanta

Lately more and more articles are making it into the mainstream media about the dangers of Fluoride. This is no doubt thanks in part to the hard work of Dan Stockin who is quoted in this article below. He has done so much for all of us who are concerned about fluoride. I know him to be a genuinely dedicated and caring individual who has stood up to many Goliath’s in the government and medical community, and I for one am very thankful for his bravery.

Here is the video of this recent story

Fluoride: Friend Or Foe?

Fluoride Opponent Says Chemical Is Harmful To Our Health

By Stephany Fisher, CBS Atlanta Anchor
POSTED: 2:05 pm EST March 8, 2010
UPDATED: 2:41 pm EST March 8, 2010
ATLANTA — It’s in the tap water we drink and many of the foods we eat.For decades, we’ve been told that it helps fight cavities, but there are critics who say this chemical is doing more harm than good.”I’ve worked with a lot of dangerous things in my career. I don’t get real worked up over chemicals or I could have never done my job — this one scares me,” said Daniel Stockin, a health advocate whose background includes toxics assessment.What could it be? Arsenic? Lead?No, it’s fluoride — the kind you brush your teeth with, and the kind that’s been added to Atlanta’s city water supply since 1969. Every public water district in Georgia is required by law to do so. “When we started to fluoridate 50-plus years ago, water was the only source for the fluoride, then they really quickly said hey, let’s put it in toothpaste, and then it started to show up in the foods made with fluoridated water,” Stockin said.

Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation (Video)

Featuring a Nobel Laureate in Medicine, three scientists from the National Research Council’s landmark review on fluoride, as well as dentists, medical doctors, and leading researchers in the field, this professionally-produced 28 minute DVD presents a powerful indictment of the water fluoridation program. To learn more and to purchase the DVD, see: http://www.FluorideAlert.Org

Bill would require Tenn. utilities to provide notice if fluoridation of water stops

This is a big deal to me, because I live in TN,  and I have worked really hard to get the word out about Fluoride here, in fact I was even on the news here in Tennessee at one point.

Here is the Article:

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Tennessee public utilities would have to provide notice if they stop fluoridation of their water systems under a proposal that was unanimously approved by the Senate.

The measure sponsored by Democratic Sen. Tim Barnes of Clarkesville was approved 32-0 on Thursday.

Utilities would have to notify the state within 10 days of the decision and the public 30 days prior to discontinuance.

Barnes says he proposed the measure after residents in Montgomery County complained that a public utility there decided to remove fluoride from the water without notifying them.

Fluoride is added to drinking water to help reduce tooth decay.

The companion bill is awaiting a vote in the House Public Health and Family Subcommittee.

Fluoridated “Nursery® Water” Background to Class Action Suit

From http://www.fluoridealert.org/nursery.water.background.html

CLASS ACTION SUIT: DiSimone v. DS Waters of America, Inc.

Notice of Class Action and Proposed Settlement

• According to Council for Plaintiff, Herman Gerel LLP:

NURSERY WATER MISLEADS PARENTS

On November 9, 2006, the American Dental Association (ADA) issued an alert advising parents to avoid using water with added fluoride when mixing infant formula. Likewise, the American Academy of Pediatrics (“AAP”) recommends that “Supplementary fluoride should not be provided during the first six months of life.”

Contrary to these clear warnings, Nursery Water, one of the nation’s biggest infant bottled water companies, markets its fluoridated water to infants and claims in its marketing and advertising that fluoride in water will “strengthen your little one’s teeth” and “prevent tooth decay.”

On February 21, 2008, Herman Gerel, LLP filed the first suit in the country against one of the nation’s biggest infant bottled water companies – Nursery Water – for misleading parents with erroneous information on its website and advertising materials regarding the safety and benefits of fluoride in infant bottled water, in clear violation of Federal Trade Commission rules. This case is currently pending in the Central District of California. See DiSimone v. DS Waters of America, Inc.

EWG calls for Investigation of Nursery Water (Feb 2008)- see press release and Letter to Federal Trade Commission and the FDA (html or pdf)

• January 3, 2007. Dental Experts: Too Much Fluoride Is Bad For Babies – WCVB-TV (Boston)

• Fluoride Action Network’s Online Petition to Wal Mart to stop selling Nursery Water

Should Infants Drink Fluoridated Water?

source

Summation Fluoride Exposure During Infancy:

In contrast to recommendations adopted in the 1950s, fluoride supplementation is no longer recommended for newborn children. This includes both fluoride in drops, and fluoride in drinking water.

Not only is fluoride ingestion during infancy unnecessary, it can also be harmful – as suggested by a mounting body of evidence linking fluoride exposure during the first year of life with the development of dental fluorosis. (For pictures of dental fluorosis, click here)

Because of the risk for dental fluorosis, and the lack of demonstrable benefit from ingesting fluoride before teeth erupt, the American Dental Association – and a growing number of dental researchers – recommend that children under 12 months of age should not consume fluoridated water while babies under 6 months of age should not receive any fluoride drops or pills.

Fluoridated drinking water contains up to 200 times more fluoride than breast milk (1000 ppb in fluoridated tap water vs 5-10 ppb in breast milk). As a result, babies consuming formula made with fluoridated tap water are exposed to much higher levels of fluoride than a breast-fed infant. (A baby drinking fluoridated formula receives the highest dosage of fluoride among all age groups in the population (0.1-0.2+ mg/kg/day), whereas a breast-fed infant receives the lowest).

Dental fluorosis is not the only risk from early-life exposure to fluoride. A recent review in The Lancet describes fluoride as “an emerging neurotoxic substance” that may damage the developing brain. The National Research Council has identified fluoride as an “endocrine disrupter” that may impair thyroid function, while recent research from Harvard University has found a possible connection between fluoride and bone cancer.

FLYER: Fluoride Warning for Infants

ACTION ALERT: Ask Wal-Mart to Stop Selling Fluoride “Nursery Water” to Babies

NEW! Health Alert Flyer (pdf file)

Articles of Interest Fluoride Exposure During Infancy:

Notable Quotes Fluoride Exposure During Infancy: (back to top)

“A major effort should be made to avoid use of fluoridated water for dilution of formula powders.”
SOURCE: Ekstrand J. (1996). Fluoride Intake. In: Fejerskov O, Ekstrand J, Burt B, Eds.
Fluoride in Dentistry, 2nd Edition. Munksgaard, Denmark. Pages 40-52.

“If using a product that needs to be reconstituted, parents and caregivers should consider using water that has no or low levels of fluoride.”
SOURCE: American Dental Association (2006). Interim Guidance on Reconstituted Infant Formula. November 9, 2006.

“[I]nfant formulas reconstituted with higher fluoride water can provide 100 to 200 times more fluoride than breastmilk, or cows milk.”
SOURCE: Levy SM, Guha-Chowdhury N. (1999). Total fluoride intake and implications for dietary fluoride supplementation.
Journal of Public Health Dentistry 59: 211-23.

“[P]arents of children using powdered infant formula should be warned by their medical practioners to use unfluoridated or defluoridated water to reconstitute the formula.”
SOURCE: Diesendorf M, Diesendorf A. (1997). Suppression by medical journals of a warning about overdosing formula-fed infants with fluoride.
Accountability in Research 5:225-237.

“Our analysis shows that babies who are exclusively formula fed face the highest risk; in Boston, for example, more than 60 percent of the exclusively formula fed babies exceed the safe dose of fluoride on any given day.”
SOURCE: Environmental Working Group, “EWG Analysis of Government Data Finds Babies Over-Exposed to Fluoride in Most Major U.S. Cities”, March 22, 2006.

“[M]ore than 50 percent of infants are currently formula fed by 1 month of age, and these infants are likely to be continuously exposed to high intakes of fluoride for 9 or 10 months – a circumstance quite rare in the 1960s and early 1970s.”
SOURCE: Fomon SJ, Ekstrand J. (1999). Fluoride intake by infants. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 59(4):229-34.

“Fluoride is now introduced at a much earlier stage of human development than ever before and consequently alters the normal fluoride-pharmacokinetics in infants. But can one dramatically increase the normal fluoride-intake to infants and get away with it?”
SOURCE: Luke J. (1997).
The Effect of Fluoride on the Physiology of the Pineal Gland. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Surrey, Guildford. p. 176.

‘[F]luoride exposure, at levels that are experienced by a significant proportion of the population whose drinking water is fluoridated, may have adverse impacts on the developing brainThe findings are provocative and of significant public health concern.”
SOURCE: Schettler T, et al. (2000). Known and suspected developmental neurotoxicants. pp. 90-92. In:
In Harms Way – Toxic Threats to Child Development. Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility: Cambridge, MA.

“Infant foods mixed with water pose a special problemOne wonders what a 50-fold increase in the exposure of fluoride, such as occurs in infants bottle-fed with water-diluted preparations, may mean for the development of the brain and other organs… There is reason to be aware of the possibility that fluoride may affect the somatic and mental development of the child.”
SOURCE: Carlsson A. (1978). Current problems relating to the pharmacology and toxicology of fluorides.
Lakartidningen 25: 1388-1392.

“The entire Board holds serious concerns about the current fluoride exposure of infants between the ages of zero and six months. We deem this exposure to be a “significant public health risk”, and one that should be given immediate attention by the city and state.”
SOURCE: Burlington Board of Health (Vermont, USA) August 31, 2005. See copy of full report.

Fluoride Exposure During Infancy Fluoride Supplementation No Longer Recommend for Newborns: (back to top)