Anti-fluoride advocate speaking tonight

Judy

- January 26, 2012 at 14:17:35

In 1998, when our US city had a ballot measure on water fluoridation, I called the ADA in Chicago and asked to speak to someone regarding the so-called ‘optimal 1ppm’ level in water. They connected me with their science person. This science guy give me the usual ADA spiel on how fluoridation was the very best thing to happen in community health care in the 20th century. Then he told me “By the way, mother’s milk has negligible amounts of fluoride in it—human breasts filter out fluoride no matter what the mother’s intake.” Stunned, I asked him, “What’s your source for this information?” He said it was from La Leche League statistics, which I later verified as fluoride in mother’s milk is 6-17 mcg/L. [[[micrograms--not milligrams]]] Then I asked him did he really understand the full import of this fact? After a very long pause on both our parts and my ah-ha moment, I said: “That means that God, Nature or whomever protects newborns from fluoride ingestion. This means fluoride is not good for newborn brains [the blood/brain barrier is not even fully formed until about 6 months of age in a full term infant] or for tiny newborn kidneys that must filter it out." Then he paused and anonymously told me: “Go vote against it!” And that ended our conversation.

Submit a Comment

END THE MASS MEDICATING OF OUR CITY

- January 25, 2012 at 14:01:30

Our voices need to be heard, anyone who is opposed to water fluoridation. Sign a petition or write a letter. Here is my letter feel free to copy-paste-print-sign it-get everyone you know to sign it. We have to put an end to this. Water fluoridation takes away our freedom to choose. We have the freedom to choose what kind of food we eat, what medication we take, and we NEED to have the RIGHT TO CHOOSE whether we want poisonous mind numbing drugs in our water as well. To Whom This May Concern I am strongly opposed to the practice of community water fluoridation. I am aware that fluoride is a toxic drug, and have been informed of the risks and benefits of ingesting fluoride and I do not consent to using this drug. If I were to go to my local pharmacist and ask him if there were any drug on the shelves he would recommend that could be given to an individual regardless of their age, or quality of health; that could be taken in any amount, and could be used with any other pharmaceutical drug, his answer would be no. No such drug exists. So why would we allow this substance in the water, without any concern of how it may effect individuals. We all know that that fluoride has little if any benefit to dental health. In fact 97% of western Europe has chosen fluoride-free water . Rather than mandating fluoride treatment for the whole population, western Europe allows individuals the right to choose or refuse, fluoride. I would like to have this freedom for myself and my family as well. In case you were unaware of the risks of ingesting fluoride in your water, I will list several here for you to consider. Keeping in mind that even if you choose not to drink tap water, you do absorb it through your pores when you shower. Sodium fluoride suppresses thyroid function, collects in the pineal gland in your brain, contributes to cancer, birth defects, impairs immune system, osteoarthritis, increases lead and arsenic exposure, dental and skeletal fluorosis and neurotoxicity. Did you know that sodium Fluoride is also one of the basic ingredients in both PROZAC (FLUoxetene Hydrochloride) and Sarin Nerve Gas (Isopropyl-Methyl-Phosphoryl FLUORIDE) - (Yes, the same Sarin Nerve Gas that terrorists released on a crowded Japanese subway train!). The truth the public needs to understand is the fact that Sodium Fluoride is nothing more (or less) than a hazardous waste by-product of the nuclear and aluminum industries. In addition to being the primary ingredient in rat and cockroach poisons, it is also a main ingredient in anesthetic, hypnotic, and psychiatric drugs as well as military nerve gas. Why then is it allowed to be added to the drinking water of our city? Mr. Scarrow, I do hope that you take this matter seriously, and will do whatever you can in your power to end the needless medicating of our citizens. Calgary and many other cities across Canada have put an end to this atrocity and I know that we can do it too. This is a very important matter, that should not be ignored any longer. PS: I do not care what Prince Albert Parkland Health Regions stance is on this. This is about our FREEDOM TO CHOOSE. Perhaps we should be adding vitamins and nutrients to our water supply as there are alot worse health issues that need addressing. Thank you on behalf of myself and my family, Signed __________________________________________________________

Submit a Comment

• 

  DianeDi

  - January 27, 2012 at 09:55:31

  Most of us believed that water fluoridation was a huge health benefit.... I know I believed this, BUT, I found out this is not at all true. If you care about your health and those around you, I urge you to take 5 minutes and just listen. FLUORIDE: WHAT Is It & WHY It's In Our water -- http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=7FC9A6050DC13A2B6606084CED94863C4 and no matter what anyone tells you, they truly have been covering this up for decades, at everyone's expense. See this rare archive video below - Fluoride Dangers ~ They Knew All Along ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYi-_QzF9Tk&feature=related

• 

  DianeDi

  - January 27, 2012 at 13:57:31

  Ingesting fluoride it is not effective in preventing tooth decay and is harmful to human health and the environment. According to Health Canada, fluoride is not a nutrient. It is being added to our municipal water supplies as a medication – giving more authority to municipal authorities than we give to doctors, as they are not allowed to medicate patients without their consent. The ingestion of fluoride in municipal water has been linked to lower IQs and dental fluorosis in children; increase in hypothyroid disease, especially in women; and an increase in hip fractures in the elderly. Some studies have also linked it to skeletal fluorosis and osteoscarcoma or bone cancer. I understand that there are differing opinions about the effect of ingesting fluoride on human health, however, I believe when scientific opinions vary, it is best to err on the side of caution. Evoking the precautionary principle in the case of fluoridating municipal water carries no risk as the widespread use of fluoridated toothpastes and the availability of dental care to our population will serve as effective preventatives to tooth decay. More than 3,200 doctors, dentists, scientists and environmentalists have recently signed a declaration calling for the end to fluoridating municipal water. If you have not had the opportunity already, please have a look at the video at http://www.waterloowatch.com/fan%20video.html where some of these scientists, including a Nobel Laureate in Medicine, provide leading arguments against the fluoridation of municipal water.

Todd

- January 24, 2012 at 07:27:41

The spinsters, scamsters, and criminals supporting water fluoridation are the same bunch still defending the brutal genital mutilation of males. Another agreement with Don: jail the f-ers.

Submit a Comment

mikies

- January 24, 2012 at 07:27:21

For a registered nurse to be calling fluoride a nutrient is like calling tobacco smoke an air freshener. That nurse should should find a different calling

Submit a Comment

WordofWarning

- January 23, 2012 at 17:04:58

The very expression "community water fluoridation" is a tell-tale sign you are listening to a propagandist.

Submit a Comment

Henry

- January 23, 2012 at 17:04:25

I don't see anything about conspiracy in the article or Ms Logue's quoted opinions. And, by the way, Pew is extremely selective about the materials it favors; it appears to be more interested in point-scoring than contributing truthful information.

Submit a Comment

Marg phillips

- January 23, 2012 at 17:03:54

The intriguing aspect of fluoridation is that it is promoted by doctors, nurses and dentists who get little to no chemistry training, and those who object to it are scientists, chemists, pharmicists, informed members of the public and those who are directly affected by it. One nursing dictionary defines 'fluoride' as 'nutrient added to community water to prevent tooth decay' Very scientific! If you know what a Periodic Table is, you are opposed to adding a very dangerous substance to water as a form of mass medication. If you know anyone with thyroid problems, you can be pretty sure they have been exposed to overdose of fluoride. If you think it is good for you, your brain has been addled by it, since it allows lead and aluminium to cross the blood brain barrier.

Submit a Comment

Sick

- January 23, 2012 at 17:03:44

That fluoridation propaganda site is really sick. I agree with Donald: you people ought to be jailed.

Submit a Comment

Linda Rosa, RN

- January 23, 2012 at 15:30:59

Ms. Logue is being very selective about the materials she favors. This is the usual patter we have heard from anti-fluoridationists since the 1940s. These are the people who love to concoct conspiracy theories. Fluoridation is safe and cost effective. A full mouth of your own teeth when you get to be 90 years old? Priceless. If you are confused about community water fluoridation, ask your dentist. Or contact Pew's Campaign for Dental Health: http://www.ilikemyteeth.org/fluoridation/

Submit a Comment

• 

  Darryl Turner

  - January 24, 2012 at 07:27:02

  Well what do you say about the research done in Germany finding that only 6 nanometers of fluoride covers teeth and it easily comes off when chewing???? And you can find this iformation in Science Daily, published on Dec. 15th, 2010 and the article is called: Does fluoride really fight cavities by the skin of the teeth? Oh and btw, did you see that news item on Youtube called fluoride spill??? A HAZMAT TEAM is cleaning up the HYDROFLUOROSILICIC ACID that's spilt on the driveway of the water treatment plant and is eating through the cement driverway, yeah right, SAFE AND EFFECTIVE for who????? How much are you getting paid to say this crap??????

Newmont

- January 23, 2012 at 13:23:15

Bourke Shire accused of illegally dumping fluoride http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-23/bourke-shire-accused-of-illegally-dumping-fluoride/3787362 A EPA spokeswoman says the action is being taken as the council breached the Protection of the Environment Operations Act. She says the depot cannot be lawfully used as a waste facility for sodium fluoride, which is classified as hazardous and dangerous.

Submit a Comment

DonaldR

- January 23, 2012 at 13:01:53

Personally, I won't be satisfied until all the fluoridationists are jailed for crimes against humanity. Barry Grove's book, Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death, exposes the "science" that has successfully promoted water fluoridation for what it is: bluff, propaganda, and lies. Fluoride is a poison--more poisonous than lead, slightly less poisonous than arsenic. It is cumulative and collects in bones and tissues, not just the teeth. Numerous studies done on animals point out the obvious dangers. Other studies have shown increased rates of cancer, osteoporosis, and other diseases. Dr. Albert Schatz, who discovered the antibiotic streptomycin, said in 1982 that "fluoridation is the greatest fraud that has ever been perpetrated." Yet other studies of tens of thousands of children show that it isn't even effective at preventing cavities and is an extremely poor delivery system even if it were effective.

Submit a Comment

Ann

- January 23, 2012 at 12:44:56

The chemicals used in water fluoirdation is fluorosilicic acid - toxic waste from factory chimney scrubbers. It's more poisounous than lead and is contaminated with arsenic, mercury etc. It is not of medical grade, unlike that added to dental products. Putting fluoride on teeth is much more effective than drinking it. It goes against all medical ethics to medicate whole communities, regardless of need or personal choice. There have been many fluoride overdoses in water supplies such as in Hooper Bay, USA where a man died and 250 were made ill. All medication should be prescribed individually according to age, weight and general health and not given en-masse with no control over dosage.

Submit a Comment

• 

  Linda Rosa RN

  - January 23, 2012 at 15:32:10

  Fluorosilicic acid breaks down into water, a bit of sand, and fluoride ions. I don't see any problem there. US courts of last resort have concluded that community water fluoridation is NOT "mass medication," but an adjustment of a nutrient that is already found naturally in water.

Daeran Gall

- January 23, 2012 at 09:24:54

FluorideAction.ca is a source of information and advocacy here in Saskatchewan for the growing movement to get rid of this over reaching and fifties era public health measure. The truth is there is no benefit to drinking toxic fluoride compounds derived from the phosphate fertilizer industry. Your council has been duped by American Corporate Lobby groups. Let council know that medicating their population is NOT part of their mandate. Health Canada is not doing its job here, and they know it. Health Canada offers NO legal support to councils who put fluoride compounds in their water. Further Health Canada has not approved the sodium silicofluoride used in Saskatchewan. So Council is prescribing an unapproved medication against the will of its populace... Time to redefine what Councillors are supposed to do. Anyone that prescribes a medication without your consent is violating your basic human rights to information and freedom of person. Councillors are not exceptions to the rule. Nor are they above the law.

Submit a Comment

• 

  Gerhard Janzen

  - January 23, 2012 at 12:39:38

  Mr. Chairman this letter is for you to read at the city council night. I was in Prince Albert when the fluoride debate was raging. I thought we had laid that myth to rest a long time ago. The same arguments that were placed before us in 1954 are being placed before us again. As a dentist I know first hand what the dental situation was in 1953. Many times I would book children 3 to 7 years of age in the hospital for a full mouth extraction of a myriad of unrepeatable teeth. Where were you when we needed you to take a positive side to the treatment of dental problems.? Do you remember the crying youngsters swollen faces abscesses, serious infections, the smell of virulent pus flowing from ruptured absences? I WAS THERE!! “Do some something. Relieve the pain, and in the process destroy the function for life. Mess up the dental arches, commit the patient to orthodontic treatment” There were no registered orthodontists in Saskatchewan in 1953. We did do something, with the help of city council Fluoride was added to the water supply. Take a 4 year old and remove all unrepeatable teeth under general anesthetic. There were many times when I would have 4-6 children booked for full mouth extractions. There was no other treatment. You talk about wasted fluoride lost in the water system. Why don’t you talk about the cost of orthodontic treatment that is prevented by 50 cents worth of fluoride that is used? You talk about the risks, talk about the general anesthetic risk that was taken the bleeding risk from the extractions, years taken to treat the ensuing orthodontic treatments. The travel involved, just getting to an orthodontists. These were real problems, visible problems, painful problems sickness causing debilitating problems and you talk about a few dollars that are spent per person in treatment. I was not only and on the scene as witness as to the situation but in many cases responsible for treatment and patient care. I lived through that era. Later during the 1980 I also saw the results of the vilified treatments now being spoken about. (Cut the fluoride) It was a pleasure to see 6 years olds with no caries, no swelling, no infection, no spilling infections and no smelling of puss, just a clean health functioning youngster and with his health on the way to being a functioning adult. Gerhard Janzen Retired Dentist after nearly 45 years of dental practice in Prince Albert.

Sue Kingsbauer

- January 23, 2012 at 08:00:53

Thank you Maureen Logue! Reeducating the public, unpropagandizing them, and creating awareness are the best steps for bringing an end to fluoridation of our public water supplies. Now we need open-minded leaders and officials to be willing to admit that adding fluoride to our waters is not in our best interest.

Submit a Comment

nyscof

- January 23, 2012 at 07:31:16

Studies Show Fluoridation Is Ineffective, Harmful and a waste of money. Fluoridation Opposition is Scientific, Respectable & Growing More than 4,000 professionals (including 331 dentists and 443 MD’s) urge that fluoridation be stopped citing scientific evidence that ingesting fluoride is ineffective at reducing tooth decay and has serious health risks. See statement: http://www.fluoridealert.org/professionals-statement.aspx

Submit a Comment

James Reeves

- January 23, 2012 at 07:31:07

Fluoridation is a Waste of Tax Money Interestingly, the politicians often align with the big money side where these industries sell their toxic waste fluoride to commuinties. Most people now know their health will be sacrificed with fluoridation. That is why promoters lose about 80% of all elections held worldwide. Someday soon people will look back on this outdated practice and wonder how we ever decided to dump this toxic waste fluoride into our drinking water. See (www.fluoridealert.org ) for the scientific information. Even if fluoride was helpful to teeth, distributing any drug in drinking water is the most expensive and wasteful method. As a Civil Engineer, I know that people drink only 1/2% (one-half percent) of the water they use. The remaining 99 ½ % of the water with this toxic fluoride chemical (Hexafluorosilicic acid, which is waste material flushed directly from industrial smokestacks) is dumped directly into the environment through the sewer system. The company CEO would be arrested if they dumped this toxic waste into a river. The only way they can do it legally is to run it through the community water systerm first. For example, for every $1000 of fluoride chemical added to water, $995 would be directly wasted down the drain in toilets, showers, dishwashers, etc., $5 would be consumed in water by the people, and less than $0.50 (fifty cents) would be consumed by children, the target group for this outdated practice. That would be comparable to buying one gallon of milk, using six-and-one-half drops of it, and pouring the rest of the gallon in the sink. Fluoridation surely is in contention as the most wasteful government program. Giving away fluoride tablets free to anyone who wants them would be far cheaper and certainly more ethical, because then we would have the freedom to choose which prescription drug we take.

Submit a Comment