I wrote this research paper a while back and published it on Helium.com, but I wanted to post it here for all my friends to read. Think about it. Do some research of your own.
Would you give your child rat poison? No? Well, what if you diluted it? Let’s say one drop of rat poison to a glass of water? What about one drop of rat poison to three gallons of water? Would you then let you child drink that water? Is the answer still no? My guess is that any amount of rat poison added to your drinking water would be deplorable. To many people it is, yet every day, millions of people in America are drinking essentially the same thing in hope of achieving proper oral health. People are brushing with it, and swishing it at dentist offices, in hopes of keeping their pearly white smiles. This sounds crazy doesn’t it? People don’t knowingly ingest rat poison, but every day in America, people are ingesting Fluoride. Fluoride is the same chemical that can be found in rat poison. How can this be? Fluoride is in every national brand of toothpaste on the shelves. Schools across America provide children with a “swish” of Fluoride almost monthly. We have even accepted it as an additive to not only our tap water, but we can buy it in bottled water as well. While Fluoride has been propagated as a necessary tool in the promotion of proper oral health, there are many hidden dangers associated with it.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fluoride is on their list as one of the many water contaminants in the United States. It is listed under inorganic chemicals along with Arsenic, Mercury, Cyanide, and Lead. As listed on the EPA’s website, the potential health effects from drinking water contaminated with Fluoride are bone disease and mottled teeth in children. The listed sources of this contamination include discharge from Aluminum and fertilizer factories, as well as an additive to drinking water to promote strong teeth. (EPA) Isn’t it strange that Fluoride is listed as a water contaminant and at the same time is purposely added to our drinking water to build strong teeth? Why is it that it is added to support strong teeth, when the possible health hazards include mottling of the teeth, or tooth decay? Bone Disease and tooth decay are not the only health hazards associated with Fluoride. Looking back at the history of Fluoride, it becomes even more questionable as to why it was ever thought of as a healthy additive in the first place, especially when there have been fatalities associated with the ingestion of it.
In 1992, in Hooper Bay Alaska, there was a problem with one of the town’s Fluoride pumps. The faulty equipment caused an abnormally high level of Fluoride to be pumped into the town’s drinking water, which resulted in the death of a 41-year-old man and illness of nearly 300 other people. While the level of Fluoride in the town’s water supply was increased greatly by the faulty equipment, “The level of dose causing illness…was 27 times lower than the dose previously reported” for causing illness. (Foulkes) This discrepancy among toxic doses is prevalent among most studies of the dangers or lack there-of, concerning Fluoride. Most governmental agencies declare Fluoride to be safe and that there is no concern regarding Fluoride. They deem it safe and a necessary additive to prevent tooth decay, despite the illnesses and deaths that are associated with it. However, there is one man that is speaking out against Fluoride.
In 1993, Dr. Robert Carton, a past President of EPA Headquarters Union in Washington D.C. filled a legal affidavit voicing his concerns about his fellow colleagues and their obvious cover-up of the dangers of Fluoride. In the affidavit, Dr. Carton explains his credentials as being an environmental scientist with the U.S. Army. He was employed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from 1972 until1992. He spent approximately 15 of those years in the Office of Toxic Substances, managing risk assessments. For two years, he was responsible for writing regulations under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. He was also program manager for compliance of new pollution sources with the National Environmental Policy Act. (Carton 1993) Carton explains in his affidavit that he has concerns regarding the “significant harm to public health from fluoridation and that it is unacceptable as a public health measure”. According to Carton, “There is evidence, ignored by the EPA…that exposure to Fluoride at 1 mg/l in drinking water over a long period of time may calcify ligaments and tendons, causing arthritic pains, and may be responsible for the alarming increase in cases of repetitive stress injury.” Carton also states that Fluoride is a known mutagenic, and that it certainly may cause cancer, but that the government continuously denies this fact regardless of the many studies that have proven it to be a mutagenic among laboratory animals. Skeletal fluorosis, Arthritis, tooth decay, cancer, and even death are associated with the ingestion of Fluoride, yet the EPA has done everything it can to cover up these facts.
In a report written by Dr. J. William Hirzy, Senior Vice-President of the National Treasury Employees Union, on why EPA Headquarters Professional Union opposes the use of Fluoride, he gives an astounding number of reasons to that exact question. According to Dr. Hirzy in a study done in 1995 on the effects of Fluoride in rats, those that were exposed before birth had a high incident of hyperactivity after birth, and it remained for the rest of their lives. It is important to note that according to the study rats are more resistant to Fluoride than humans are, and when given a relatively low dose of Fluoride, the effects were quite astounding which suggests that the effects in humans would be even greater. In the case of hyperactivity found in rats exposed to Fluoride in utero, the main reason for the dysfunction was that the Fluoride depleted certain chemicals found in the brain that form the membrane of brain cells. Dr. Hirzy reports of many other studies that suggest that Fluoride is responsible for a decrease in I.Q. levels in children as well as an early onset of sexual maturity. Hirzy also states that according to a CDC report, nearly 22% of American children have dental fluorosis (tooth decay). (Hirzy 1999) That percentage seems a little high, considering that the government adds Fluoride to our water to prevent tooth decay in our children.
While the government may never open up about all of the dangers of Fluoride, they have made it clear that too much Fluoride can indeed cause tooth decay rather than prevent it. It is also clear that too much Fluoride can cause bone disease. Both tooth decay and bone disease have been listed on the EPA’s website as side effects from Fluoride exposure, this much we know to be true. The question remains, are the possible risks, such as hyperactivity in our children, lowered I.Q., cancer, and last but certainly not least, death, enough to urge us to at least question our use of Fluoride? Our children’s health and our own are in jeopardy if we don’t open our minds and our eyes to possibilities that may not be as clear as our drinking water. We may have to look deeper into it, do a little research of our own, and find out for ourselves what the truth is. According to credible government employees, such as Dr. Carton, the dangers are big enough that it made him come forward and speak out against the very people that were employing him. We have much more to loose than Dr. Carton did when he risked loosing his job with the EPA, we have our health and that of our children’s at stake. If we refuse to look into the possible health hazards of Fluoride, we might as well give our children rat poisoning twice a day to brush with. Why not add it to our drinking water, the government obviously has no concerns about it, so why should we?
References
EPA http://www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html
Foulkes, RG, http://www.fluoridation.com/poison
Carton, Robert 1993 http://fluoridealert.org/carton-affidavit.htm
Hirzy, J. William 1999 http://fluoridealert.org/hp-epa.htm
