|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Educational, Not-For-Profit, Non-Party-Political, Non-Sectarian, Facts-Through-Research | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| First published in 1963 |
|
|
| Home | Overview | FAQ | Downloads | Newsletters | About | Contact | Links |
Fluoridation: Frequently Asked Questions SECTIONS on this page:
| A Balanced Perspective: Water Fluoridation is a polarised debate - people are either for it or against it. But before you choose, how much do you really know about fluoridation? Fluoridation promoters claim that fluoridation is safe, effective and cost-effective. In the early days promoters claimed a 65% reduction in decay and stated there would be a reduction in the numbers of dentists because fluoridation was so effective. Fluoridation began in Australia in 1953. Promoters claim an overwhelming majority of scientific studies in many countries support their claims and that the 'optimal' amount is one part per million (1ppm = one part fluoride in one million parts of water). Fluoridation is endorsed by dental and medical associations, state health departments, the (Australian) National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and other organisations. They also sometimes assert it is common knowledge that fluoridation is wonderful and that anyone who thinks otherwise is crazy. But those disputing these claims including scientists say our governments are overriding our freedom of choice in what chemicals or drugs we allow into our bodies. They also state the water fluoridation chemicals come from fertiliser factory chimneys and are highly toxic. Selling these chemicals earns billions for these corporate polluters. The fluoride accumulates in the body and over time causes a range of problems: dental fluorosis (white chalky mottling of the teeth, actually dental decay), cancers, kidney disease, arthritis and dozens of other diseases, as researched in independent peer-reviewed studies. Most of continental Europe no longer fluoridates. Fluoridation is not a dental issue (scientific studies show it is ineffective) - instead fluoridation is a commercial and political issue, and fundmentally a matter of freedom of choice. Who do you believe? Careful - it may be too early to judge. We recommend looking into the matter further - which is what these "Frequently Asked Questions" are for... |
|
Common Questions and Answers: Top |
|
Q: How do we sort out what is TRUTH and what is TRUTH DECAY? A: With diametrically opposed viewpoints, debate is the tried and tested approach used over many centuries to illuminate the truth. But despite numerous debates being organised over these decades, fluoridation promoters have almost always declined to put their case under standard debating rules, for whatever reason(s) - presumably there is benefit to them in not debating or bringing the ongoing debate into the mainstream media. Of course, if the process was safe and effective, presumably they'd be there to win the debate. But instead, promoters remain absent or silent. Likewise responses to letters seeking answers to specific questions go unanswered or skimmed over. Whether the particular science is "truth" or "truth decay" just depends if commercial and political interests are driving the science . And how the science is reported. |
|
Q: Where does the scientific information come from? A: We have taken the viewpoints of the many scientists and researchers independent from the fluoridation industry's influence. In researching the subject, it quickly becomes clear that some of the scientific research is funded by the very commercial interests that drive fluoridation -- that's where the "scientific evidence" for a half of the 'polarised debate' comes from. We suggest you trust your own intuition and judgement about everything you read on the subject of artificial water fluoridation. Further links will be provided if you'd like more information. |
|
Q: What is Fluoride? A: Fluorine is a naturally occurring, highly reactive element (#9 in the periodic table). It is rarely found by itself in nature, instead it is often bound to aluminium (in bauxite) or in rocks such as fluorite. It is toxic in relatively small amounts. In fact, fluoride is more toxic than lead. More Info: See Ian Stephens' one page article on 'Fluorine' on Downloads page. |
|
Q: Is fluoridation safe? A: No. The health effects, proven over decades, and with more and more evidence accumulating, show fluoride is unsafe even at levels used for water fluoridation. The fluoride ion in the chemicals used for water fluoridation is the same fluoride ion that's found in Sodium Fluoride, which has been used as a rat and cockroach poison for decades. Fluoridation uses a lower concentration of one part per million (1 ppm), so many people won't notice the effects until they start to appear, possibly many years or even decades later. Fluoride is a cumulative toxin - we only excrete up to half of what we ingest, assuming our kidneys are working correctly. The other 50% accumulates in our teeth, skeleton and soft tissues (in organs such as kidneys, gastro-intestinal tract, heart and brain). This accumulating fluoride inhibits enzymes, distorts proteins (all muscles, cartilage and tissues) and can even mutate DNA. So fluoride is far from safe - it is actually a biocide, i.e. kills all living things eventually. It's only that the concentration is low that we don't see the result straight away. But as we said, fluoride is cumulative. More info: See health effects below, in the Overview, or search online for 'fluoride health effects'. |
|
Q: I thought fluoridation was supposed to be good for you? A: Many of us thought that - before we found out it's just commerce, politics and spin. |
|
Q: Is fluoridation effective? A: Teeth decay has been in decline for decades in many countries, whether or not those countries are fluoridated. It's been shown scientifically that the reduction in tooth decay is actually independent of fluoridation. Each decade since the 1930s has seen better hygiene and better food (until relatively recently when an increase in consumption of sugary processed foods has seen a upturn in dental decay). This important fact is glossed over by fluoride promoters making their living from fluoride. For example in New Zealand, records show decay dropping for 25 years before the introduction of fluoridation. |
|
Q: Is fluoridation mass medication? A: Yes, clearly. If a politician or authority turns up on your doorstep every morning (or everytime you have a drink) and gives you a fluoride tablet to swallow, you'd be very aware you're being medicated. And that everyone else is too whenever they turn on their taps (apart from those savvy politicians and others who have the proper water filtration). |
|
Q: What types of fluoride are there? A: Calcium fluoride was associated with the "Colorado brown stain" on teeth - higher levels of this seemed to have less decay (but also had higher dental fluorosis). In hindsight, it wasn't the fluoride, it was the higher minerals such as calcium and magnesium in the water that helped teeth. Other types of fluorides are many times more soluble than calcium fluoride, including sodium fluoride which for decades has been used as a rat poison, insecticide and cockroach killer. A third type are the silicofluorides (hexafluorosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride) produced by phosphate fertiliser factories and sold as waste. |
|
Q: Where does the fluoride (for fluoridation) come from? A: Usually from overseas. Silicofluorides tend to come from phosphate fertiliser factories. If the fluoride wasn't removed from the "super"phosphate, it would kill the crop, the farm animals and even the farmer. Aluminium smelters produce sodium fluoride. Some examples currently:
|
|
Q: Are the chemicals used for fluoridation refined, pharmaceutical grade? A: No. They are typically unrefined toxic silicofluoride waste, also containing traces of other toxic substances such as arsenic, lead, cobalt and radioactive isotopes such as radium. They are unrefined industrial waste. |
|
Q: Does fluoride affect health (apart from teeth)? A: Yes, in so many ways. Fluoride back in the 1930s was known as a pollutant and a highly toxic enzyme inhibitor. With the threat of further litigation, fluoride's image was white-washed. |
|
Q: Hasn't fluoridation been proven scientifically? A: The initial "Fluoridation Trials" (1945-55) attempted to prove that it is, but were deeply flawed. They weren't even called objective "experiments", they were called "trials" to prove it was okay. Scientists back then knew that fluoride is an enzyme poison and that fluoride pollution was detrimental to life, and fortunately they weren't afraid to say so. (It's different these days, there's a lot of suppression in dental, medical and scientific careers). For example, in October 1944, the Journal of the American Medical Association published an editorial stating "… that the use of drinking water containing as little as 1.2 to 3 parts per million of fluoride will cause such developmental disturbances in bones as osteosclerosis, spondylosis, and osteoporosis, as well as goitre." This was just six years before the US Public Health Service started aggressively promoting fluoridation. |
|
Q: What about recent fluoridation studies? A: More recent studies have shown no statistical proof that fluoride is beneficial. In fact, they show no difference between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities. e.g. In 1987 the US NIDR (National Institute of Dental Research) study, the largest dental study carried out in the US, showed a difference of one tooth surface (out of 128 surfaces). This is statistically insignificant. Perhaps why this study was only released under Freedom of Information'. Yet when it was released, the US dental authority tried to "spin" it to make fluoridation sound great. (What do you expect when you add rat poison to water - that it might help teeth!) More info: Dr Phillip Sutton's book "The Greatest Fraud: Fluoridation" |
|
Q: Does fluoride stop sugar rotting teeth? A: "You've been living in a dream world, Neo." That fluoride supposedly prevents decay is the spin "that's been pulled over your eyes to conceal you from the truth". "What truth?" That you are consuming rat poison, whether you know it, or like it, or not. The sugar industry loves the fluoride myth, people can eat as many sugary products as they like and supposedly still be protected by the wonder chemical (from industrial factory waste). |
|
Q: Aren't anti-fluoride people crazy ratbags? A: Maybe some are crazy, it's probably the usual mix in any community. But they are aware that fluorides are toxic and cumulative, and that it's best not to drink, ingest or otherwise consume rat-poison. More likely, the "crazy" ones are those endorsing bags of sodium fluoride rat poison for everyone else to drink. |
|
Q: Is fluoride a drug or medication? A: Fluoride has pharmacological effects on the body and so must be regarded as a medication (or drug). Sometimes promoters try to deny this. But if it wasn't a 'drug' producing certain effects, why would they be wanting to put it in the water? |
|
Q: Is fluoride essential for humans? A: No. In 1979 the US FDA (Food and Drug Administration) removed the text from its register that fluoride "is essential or probably essential" |
|
Q: What are the beneficial uses of fluoride? A: Steel and aluminium production, etching glass with hydrofluoric acid (HF). Low-friction engine components. Tanker linings for corrosive chemicals. Making bricks. Making atomic bombs. Much of civilisation's industrial production depends on fluoride (as reported by investigative reporter Christopher Bryson, "The Fluoride Deception" ~p150). Fluoride is active ingredient in 1080 poison for killing rats, rabbits, cockroaches, etc. Inhibiting enzyme function. |
|
Q: Is fluoridation cost effective? A: Of course fluoridation is a cost effective way of dumping fluoride waste. Just ask any phosphate fertiliser factory, steelworks or aluminium smelter. They don't have the high cost of responsibly disposing of their toxic pollution and instead actually get paid for it! Some of this money would be reinvested in promoting fluoride waste products (converting prominent people and organisations to support it) and expanding fluoride waste into new markets in susceptible countries. |
|
Q: Aren't there human rights and other implications of dumping toxic fluoride wastes? A: Of course. It can't be dumped in the rivers, lakes or oceans as fluoride kills things for miles around and is illegal under international law. But it can be reduced to 1ppm and put into drinking water, where it earns a good profit at the expense of virtually the entire population. |
|
Skeptical Questions (good to be skeptical): Top |
|
Q: All this deception is a bit hard to believe!? A: We know what you mean, that's what many of us think at first. We recommend you read a bit more, such as the concise two page flier "The Fluoridation Fraud" by Clavell Blount. (It's an astounding summary available on our website in Downloads. In it, he mentions the "1951 Dental Conference in Washington", in which Dr Francis Bull explains to dentists how to promote fluoridation. We have the full minutes of this dental conference, also in the Downloads Section.) |
|
Q: Isn't fluoridation just another 'conspiracy theory'? A: There's no theory to it - all of this is provable facts. And for companies that can dispose of their industrial fluoride waste, it's no theory - it's brilliant business sense! The fluoride chemicals are from factory smokestacks. It's just not advertised widely, for obvious reasons. To answer the question fully: Imagine being a giant industrial company and receiving handsome payments for your toxic chimney effluent. There is so much money to be made that it takes only a small "investment" back into the process to keep the main players on side. They all have interests of their own, such as: keeping their jobs (and mortgages being paid), that it's easier to play along than rock the boat of large corporations, organisations and governments. Once we dig below the surface layer, we find there is no "theory" to it but facts. |
|
Q: Doesn't fluoride strengthen your teeth or fight decay? A: We've heard this for so many years its startling that we've believed it for so long. Fluoride toughens the outer layer of teeth, but this doesn't mean less decay. Having fluoride hardened teeth can make it more difficult for dentists to find decay, if it has got into the middle of a tooth. In such a case, it can go undetected until the nerve is hit - hence it is like a pain 'bomb' going off inside the mouth. Dentists jargon for a tooth like this is a 'fluoride bomb,' but they prefer not to use this term. X-rays for better or (probably) worse, are used increasingly to find decay inside teeth that can't be seen by the dentist. |
|
Q: What does fluoride do to bones? A: Having heavier bones does not make stronger bones. The evidence shows they are more brittle in fluoridated areas. Dr Hans Moolenburgh reported in the "Fluoridation: The Freedom Fight" (1987) that people in fluoridated areas are on average about two kilograms heavier than in non-fluoridated communities. Bone cancer is shown to be higher in young boys in fluoridated areas. |
|
Q: My teeth are much better than my parents and grandparents - hasn't fluoridation reduced teeth decay? A: Decay rates have reduced worldwide in fluoridated and non-fluoridated countries. But that doesn't mean its because of fluoride. An increase in dental hygiene since the 1930s has shown improvements each decade. Fluoridationists use pseudo science to try to hoodwink people into believing it's because of their industrial waste that dental health is improving. |
|
Q: Why have I never seen the negative effects of fluoride? A: Do you know what the negative effects are? And have you looked for them? Health authorities in fluoridated countries such as Australia have rarely tested fluoride levels (in blood or bone) - it appears that they just don't want to know. Doctors and dentists aren't trained in diagnosing fluoride illnesses, they are trained that fluoridation is "safe and effective" and so they parrot that, until they find out for themselves. Fluoride toxicity is ignored, a dirty little secret of dentistry. |
|
Q: My teeth are great! Sydney has fluoridated for over 40 years now. How can fluoride be a problem? A: After 40 years of fluoride accumulating, the effects will be noticeable through fluoridated communities. Look to the rising cancer death rates, chronic illness rates and all the "pseudo-disease-foundations" collecting for escalating diseases of "modern living" - So, do you still fancy consuming an exotic chemical cocktail of industrial waste "medication" with your water, endorsed by your government and health authorities? Also, small doses of fluoride are cumulative. The effects can be slow to manifest. Fluoride is not the only cause of all these conditions, but it contributes significantly. More Info: See Health Effects info on this site. Stop it accumulating at your current rate, minimise your fluoride exposure. Some people highly sensitised to fluoride cannot stand in a shower for more than two minutes. Paraphrasing Sherry Rogers "If you're not prepared to eat or drink it, don't put it on your skin." |
|
Q: I'm recovering from serious illness... has fluoride caused it? A: No-one healing from chronic health conditions ought to be subjected to a toxic and cumulative rat poison in their water supply. Unless they choose it and inform their politician that they want it (but why force it on others without their consent). Other factors can cause serious illness in this world of toxic products and environments. Dr Dean Burk, founder of the United States National Cancer Institute, said that fluoride causes more human cancer death and causes it faster than any other chemical. Burk's studies showed fluoride added 10,000 cancer deaths in the US each year, and including other illness, 50,000 deaths each year overall. |
|
Q: You've got to die of something, don't you? A: Does that mean it's acceptable to cut 20, 30 or 40 years (or more) from your lifespan, by drinking a chemical cocktail that damages and ages you before your time? Is life really that bad? Instead of dying middle-aged of cancer, heart disease, or whatever illness, or suffering arthritis, osteoporosis, alzheimer's, for decades and degrading the quality of life - what about just dying of old age at 80, 90 or 100? Wouldn't that be something to aim for? And in the meantime, what about the quality of one's life? Once you know fluoride is a toxic industrial waste, with crippling effects and degenerative conditions, it's harder to continue using this question. Straight tap water is suddenly less appealing. You may regain great power by taking back control of your health from the dental and medical 'Authorities' and making up your own mind. Imagine drinking cool, clear, safe water. |
|
Q: If fluoridation is so bad, why don't we hear of the dangers of fluoride through our media? A: Notably large media organisations rarely report on "fluoride" stories and Government efforts (such as the UK, US, New Zealand and Australia) to censor the internet (including in Australia for "advice on dental care"), just makes people wary that things are being hidden from them. So why the deathly silence and secrecy around discussing fluoridation? Apart from the mantra of "safe and effective" would you say people are fully informed on fluoridation? |
|
Q: How much does fluoridation cost? A: In monetary terms, billions of dollars worldwide (a conservative estimate is over US$50b) that each year is spent buying toxic industrial waste and disposing of it in drinking water. This large volume of money and the number of people in high places who continue to allow and even promote fluoridation, says a lot about why fluoride has been called the "protected pollutant" and is still being promoted by slick (and immoral) operators. |
|
Practical Action Questions: Top |
|
Q: Can I remove fluoride by boiling the water? A: No. This only slowly concentrates the fluoride, as some of the water (steam) evaporates, but the fluoride will not evaporate. This makes kettles and urns potentially quite dangerous if they are not emptied regularly. |
|
Q: What water filter should I buy? A: Some of the best types of fluoride removing water filters are distillers, reverse osmosis, and a combination filter (ion exchange resins with a carbon filter). Note that the cheap filters are typically only carbon filters and WILL NOT remove any fluoride. See our Water Filter Guide online to get an understanding of what's required. Different people in different areas have a variety of requirements. |
|
Q: What do people in other countries think of Australia's fluoridation policy? A: Australia is the most fluoridated nation on the planet (at over 85%) with Queensland undemocratically now being increasingly poisoned. We get feedback that Australia is backward, or a third world country. Our scientific, medical and dental reputation is being tarnished by an unquestioning adherance to a ridiculous commercially greedy practice. Not to mention people suffering unnecessarily from toxic waste induced illness. |
|
Q: Why are so many areas of Australia fluoridated? How come Australia is so F'd? A: It's got nothing to do with children's teeth. Fluoridation is promoted by industrial giants with plenty of spending money. Their adversary? The knowledgeable Mr and Mrs Joe Citizen and the local anti-fluoridation / fluoride-free groups in fluoridated countries. If it looks like a David and Goliath battle, that may be true now. But really it's a numbers game. As more and more people find out, we will reach a critical mass and fluoridation will be untenable to politicians. See the next question - "When will Fluoridation be stopped?" |
|
Q: When will fluoridation be stopped in Australia and the World? A: When you, your street, your neighbourhood, and particularly your electorate, demands it be stopped. It doesn't have to be everyone, but certainly a critical mass speaking up. It is about building awareness of this at-first shocking fact that large commercial operations have (so far) gotten away with disposing of their toxic waste in our drinking water and are still getting paid for it. All the other hangers-on - dental unions, doctors unions, political parties, and those that haven't thought about it but just believed the commercial spin, will resist the change. But Politicians will always respond when they know they risk losing their seat (unless they are spineless and are leaned on by their political party). To speed up the process, get involved! Contribute what you're good at, for the benefit of all Australians and indeed all citizens of the world, as well as all the other life-forms killed by fluoride (except perhaps cockroaches!) See our webpages "Overview" or "Download" (Action section) for ideas on what actions you could take. |
|
Q: I've told my politician but he hasn't done anything - What do I do? A: In essence, our democracy and our communities haven't been aware of the information sufficiently to. As has been said, democracy isn't something you have, it's something you 'do'. Tell your politicians what you want, what your will is. And inform more and more people to do the same. If your politician doesn't get on-board, you know what to do at election time. Until then, continue to tell others. See "Tell Politicians My Will" (i.e. tell your politicians what you want them to do) Coming Soon to "Downloads". |
|
Q: What do fluoride promoters say? A: Watch out for typical classy Fluoride Promoter Tactics like these:
|
|
Q: Is fluoridated toothpaste still okay? A: Water fluoridation is often implemented at one part per million and essentially is toxic and cumulative. Toothpaste in its usual strength can contain around 1000ppm (kids toothpaste is sometimes about 500ppm). Even if ALL the toothpaste is spat out, some fluoride is absorbed through the mucousal lining of the mouth and is in the bloodstream in minutes, thus increasing the daily fluoride exposure. It is very difficult to recommend toothpaste for anything other than keeping these companies in business. |
|
Q: Who was Mrs Marsh? A: A product of the Australian advertising industry, like the Marlboro Man was for cigarettes. The parallels are there. In the 1950s dentists dressed in white coats ('authorities') used to promote cigarettes, as well as fluoridation. The same rear-guard defence strategy is used with fluoride -- trying to maintain its image (and commercial cashflow) for as long as possible. |
|
Q: Anything else I can do? A: Learn as much as you need to know. Plenty of the information here will help you reduce your fluoride exposure and contribute to informing others of this ridiculous yet continuing rat-poisoning practice. Check back again fairly regularly as we'll be adding more suggestions. |
|
More Questions & Answers to follow soon... Feel free to ask questions - See our Contact page. |