Transcript Thinking About Fluoride

THINKING ABOUT FLUORIDE
AN INFORMAL SLIDE PRESENTATION
copyright 2009 by Rae Nadler-Olenick
The material in this slide show is intended for presentation
before neighborhood associations, PTA’s, church groups
and similar community-oriented audiences. It is to be
shown free of charge, for educational purposes only. It’s
meant as a guide to help you acquaint your friends and
neighbors with this important subject. No script is
provided. Users are free to modify it by removing slides
and/or adding their own new ones but not by changing the
content of any of the original slides contained herein.
Thank you for sharing this resource with your community.
- RNO
THINKING ABOUT FLUORIDE
WHO SUPPORTS WATER FLUORIDATION?
•THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION (ADA)
•THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL (CDC)
•THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (AMA)
•ALL STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENTS
•ALL AMERICAN DENTAL SCHOOLS, RESEARCH INSTITUTES AND MAJOR FUNDING ENTITIES
•YOUR FAMILY DENTIST
•THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
•THE SUGAR LOBBY
•THE GOVERNMENTS OF MOST ENGLISH-SPEAKING COUNTRIES
WHO DOESN’T SUPPORT WATER FLUORIDATION?
THE REST OF THE WORLD
LOOK WHAT CAME ALONG ABOUT THE
SAME TIME AS FLUORIDE
Q: Do You Trust Politicians?
HEALTH BUREAUCRATS
ARE POLITICIANS
•THEY MAKE THE HEALTH DECISIONS THAT AFFECT YOU
•THEY RUN THE CDC, FDA, ADA AND SIMILAR ORGANIZATIONS
•THEY ARE NOT YOUR FAMILY DENTIST OR FAMILY DOCTOR
•THEY OFTEN LACK APPROPRIATE SCIENTIFIC TRAINING
•THEY ARE WELL-PAID POLITICAL APPOINTEES
•THEY ARE NOT ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE
•THEY REPORT TO THEIR BOSSES AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS
OF GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION AND INDUSTRY
•THEY SERVE CORPORATE INTERESTS
IF DR. MARCUS WELBY WERE IN CHARGE, WE
COULD TRUST HIM. UNFORTUNATELY HE’S NOT.
Q: Do You Still Trust Health Bureaucrats?
WHY SHOULD WE ABANDON
WATER FLUORIDATION?
• IT DOESN’T WORK
• IT’S BAD FOR YOU
• IT’S EXPENSIVE & WASTEFUL
WATER FLUORIDATION
DOESN’T WORK
• BOTH THE CDC AND THE ADA ADMIT THAT ANY
BENEFITS OF FLUORIDE COME FROM TOPICAL
APPLICATION (AS IN TOOTHPASTE)
• LOOK AROUND YOU. YOU’LL SEE GOOD TEETH
AN BAD TEETH, JUST AS ALWAYS. THE GULF
BETWEEN THE DENTAL HEALTH OF LOW
INCOME AND MIDDLE-CLASS CHILDREN IS AS
GREAT AS EVER. PROPONENTS OF WATER
FLUORIDATION AS A “SOCIAL EQUALIZER”
CAN’T QUANTIFY THE BENEFITS.
WATER FLUORIDATION IS BAD
FOR YOU
• FLUORIDE IS A TOXIC WASTE REGULATED BY THE EPA
• THE CDC AND ADA BOTH RECOMMEND AGAINST USING
FLUORIDATED WATER FOR BABY FORMULA
• FLUORIDE CAUSES FLUOROSIS, A DISFIGUREMENT OF
THE TEETH
• FLUORIDE CAUSES AND/OR AGGRAVATES BONE AND
JOINT DISEASES
• FLUORIDE AGGRAVATES DIABETES & KIDNEY DISEASE
• FLUORIDE DAMAGES THE THYROID GLAND BY
REPLACING NECESSARY IODINE
• FLUORIDE LOWERS IQ
• EVERYONE RECEIVES THE SAME CONCENTRATION
REGARDLESS OF AGE, SIZE, ACTIVITY LEVEL AND STATE
OF HEALTH
FLUORIDE IS A TOXIC WASTE
REGULATED BY THE EPA
(a by-product of the phosphate fertilizer industry)
BOTH THE CDC AND THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION ADVISE
AGAINST MIXING BABY FORMULA WITH FLUORIDATED WATER
FLUORIDE CAUSES FLUOROSIS,
A DISFIGURMENT OF THE TEETH
FLUORIDE CAUSES AND/OR AGGRAVATES
BONE AND JOINT DISEASES
FLUORIDE AGGRAVATES DIABETES
AND KIDNEY DISEASE
FLUORIDE DAMAGES THE THYROID
GLAND BY REPLACING NECESSARY
IODINE
FLUORIDE LOWERS IQ
EVERYONE RECEIVES THE SAME
CONCENTRATION REGARDLESS OF AGE,
SIZE, ACTIVITY LEVEL AND STATE OF
HEALTH
WATER FLUORIDATION IS EXPENSIVE
AND WASTEFUL
• AUSTIN SPENDS OVER $300,000 ON WATER
FLUORIDATION ANNUALLY
• LESS THAN 1% OF THE FLUORIDATED WATER
SUPPLY IS CONSUMED AS DRINKING WATER
• THAT’S AT LEAST $297,000 WASTED!
• THE MONEY COULD BE BETTER SPENT ON
REAL ORAL HEALTH PROGRAMS
• (and by the way, where does all that tapwater that
isn’t consumed by drinking go? Back into the
environment!)
HOW DID WE GET
INTO THIS
SITUATION?
TWO THINGS
CAME
TOGETHER
WORLD WAR II
EARLY* DENTISTS WHO STUDIED A
CONDITION CAUSED BY EXCESSIVE
FLUORIDE IN DRINKING WATER
• COLORADO BROWN STAIN
• “TEXAS TEETH”
THEY THOUGHT THESE TEETH WERE
HEALTHY AND DESIRABLE.
*1920’s and earlier
A FEW WORDS ABOUT THOSE
DENTISTS’ “DISCOVERIES”
• THE DENTISTS NOTICED THAT MANY OF THEIR PATIENTS
HAD UNSIGHTLY BROWN STAINS ON THEIR TEETH.
• THEY LIKEWISE NOTED THAT THOSE BROWN-STAINED
TEETH SEEMED RESISTANT TO DECAY.
• THEY KNEW THAT UNUSUALLY HIGH AMOUNTS OF
NATURALLY-OCCURRING FLUORIDE IN THE LOCAL
WATER CAUSED THE STAINS.
• THEY CONCLUDED (INCORRECTLY) THAT FLUORIDE WAS
ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DECAY RESISTANCE.
WHAT THE DENTISTS FAILED TO
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT:
• THE NATURAL FLUORIDE SOURCE IN THE LOCAL
DRINKING WATER WAS CALCIUM FLUORIDE. THUS THE
PEOPLE WERE CONSUMING A GREAT DEAL OF CALCIUM.
• THE LOCAL POPULATION WAS WEALTHY (RANCHERS &
FARMERS), HEALTH CONSCIOUS AND ABLE TO AFFORD
THE BEST DENTAL CARE.
•
THEY ENJOYED A HEALTHY DIET OF FOODS LOCALLYGROWN ON THEIR RICH SOIL, INCLUDING GRAINS,
VEGETABLES, BEEF AND AN ABUNDANCE OF MILK.
• THEY CONSUMED VERY FEW PROCESSED FOODS.
NOW BACK TO OUR STORY…
WORLD WAR II INDUSTRY
REQUIRED FLUORIDE FOR:
• STEEL SMELTING
• ALUMINUM SMELTING
• URANIUM ENRICHMENT
WE COULD NOT HAVE WON THE
WAR WITHOUT IT.
PRIOR TO WW II, FLUORIDE HAD NOT BEEN
WIDELY USED IN INDUSTRY. ITS TOXIC
PROPERTIES QUICKLY BECAME APPARENT IN
THE FACTORIES, WHERE WORKERS BECAME
ILL WITH A VARIETY OF AILMENTS. FARMS
DOWNWIND OF THE FACTORIES SUFFERED
SERIOUS CROP AND ANIMAL LOSS.
FEARING A SPATE OF LAWSUITS, INDUSTRY
AND GOVERNMENT (JOINED BY HIGHER
EDUCATION, WHICH IS FUNDED BY BOTH)
WENT IN SEARCH OF “EVIDENCE FAVORABLE
TO LITIGATION.” THEY DISCOVERED THE
FLUORIDE-IS-GOOD-FOR-YOUR-TEETH
DENTISTS. THE REST IS HISTORY.
USING 2 OR 3 DENTISTS’ WRONG
CONCLUSIONS AS A RATIONALE:
• THE INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE OBLIGINGLY DEFINED
FLUORIDE AS A NUTRIENT (ALONG WITH CALCIUM,
MAGNESIUM AND VITAMIN D).
• THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE SET THE “IDEAL”
CONCENTRATION ARBITRARILY AS ONE PART PER
MILLION IN DRINKING WATER – FOR EVERYONE .
• A MAJOR PUBLICITY CAMPAIGN - HEAVILY FUNDED BY
INDUSTRY - WAS LAUNCHED TO “SELL” FLUORIDE TO
THE PUBLIC.
• ALL AMERICAN DENTAL SCHOOLS AND RESEARCH
LABS ADOPTED A PRO-FLUORIDE POSITION
• LATER, LAWS WERE CLEVERLY FASHIONED TO ENABLE
BOTH THE FDA AND THE EPA TO AVOID RESPONSIBILITY.
SINCE 1945 THE “REGULATORY”
AGENCIES HAVE CLUNG TO THEIR
OUTDATED STANDARD DESPITE:
• MOUNTING EVIDENCE OF HARM
• MOUNTING EVIDENCE OF CHRONIC OVEREXPOSURE FROM OTHER SOURCES,
ESPECIALLY FOOD AND DENTAL PRODUCTS
• MOUNTING EVIDENCE OF INEFFECTIVENESS
• THE 2006 NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
REPORT, WHICH CONCLUDED THAT THE EPA’S
MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL (MCL) IS NOT
PROTECTIVE OF HEALTH.
Some Examples:
• IN THE MID-1980’S, UNDER HEAVY LOBBYING
PRESSURE FROM DOW CHEMICAL CO. WHICH
MAKES FLUORIDE-BASED PESTICIDES,THE EPA
RAISED THE MCL FOR FLUORIDE IN WATER
FROM 2 TO 4 PPM.
• IN 1990, THE HEAD TOXICOLOGIST OF EPA’S
DRINKING WATER DEPARTMENT, DR. WILLIAM
MARCUS, WAS FIRED FOR SPEAKING OUT
AGAINST FLUORIDE. HE SUED, AND WAS
REINSTATED WITH BACK PAY AND PUNITIVE
DAMAGES AFTER PROVING HIS FIRING WAS
POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.
• IN 1994, A TOP TOXICOLOGY EXPERT, DR.
PHYLLIS MULLENIX, WAS FIRED FROM HER
HARVARD-FUNDED JOB AFTER PUBLISHING
RESEARCH CONNECTING FLUORIDE TO
CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM DAMAGE IN
LABORATORY RATS. SHE HAD EARLIER
SPOKEN ON THE SUBJECT AT THE NIH IN
WASHINGTON DC AND IN BOSTON.
• DURING THE LATE 1990’S, THE EPA’S OWN
UNION OF SOME 1500 SCIENTISTS AND
ENGINEERS ISSUED A STRONG STATEMENT
AGAINST THE FLUORIDATION OF DRINKING
WATER AND EVEN PARTICIPATED IN LAWSUITS
AGAINST THEIR EMPLOYER IN AN EFFORT TO
GET EPA’S SAFETY STANDARDS REVIEWED.
• IN 2001, A HARVARD GRADUATE STUDENT,
ELISE BASSIN, WHOSE RESEARCH SHOWED A
LINK BETWEEN FLUORIDE AND A HIGHER
INCIDENCE OF BONE CANCER IN YOUNG BOYS
WAS REPUDIATED BY HER OWN MAJOR
PROFESSOR, AND THE PUBLICATION OF HER
WORK WAS DELAYED FOR FIVE YEARS.
• IN 2006, THE NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL’S
REPORT ON FLUORIDE IN WATER CONCLUDED
THAT EPA’S CURRENT ALLOWABLE MCL OF 4
PPM IS NOT PROTECTIVE OF HEALTH AND
CALLED FOR A REVIEW OF THE STANDARDS.
TO DATE, NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE.
Why Do They Act This Way?
• FEAR OF LITIGATION. A TORRENT OF RUINOUS
LAWSUITS WOULD FOLLOW ANY ADMISSION THAT
WATER FLUORIDATION HAS DAMAGED THE HEALTH OF
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE.
• LOSS OF FACE. AN ADMISSION OF HARM WOULD
SERIOUSLY DAMAGE THE PRESTIGE OF THE HEALTH
BUREAUCRATS WHO ENDORSE WATER FLUORIDATION
• INERTIA. (IT’S EASIER TO KEEP FOLLOWING A
FAMILIAR ROUTE THAN CHANGE DIRECTION).
• UNWILLINGNESS TO PART WITH LONG-HELD
BELIEFS. SOME HEALTH BUREAUCRATS MAY
ACTUALLY BELIEVE ARTIFICIAL FLUORIDATION IS SAFE
AND EFFECTIVE. THEY’VE BEEN TOLD THAT MOST OR
ALL OF THEIR LIVES, JUST AS WE HAVE.
The Moral of Our Story:
THE POWER OF A HANDFUL OF HIGHLY
PLACED BUREAUCRATS TO OBSTRUCT
THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC IS
LOCKED IN AT THE TOP. THEREFORE , IT
IS NECESSARY TO OPPOSE THEM AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL.
SAY NO TO WATER FLUORIDATION.
THE END