Header graphic for print
The Corporate Observer A Publication by Attorneys Devoted to Protecting Consumer Rights

Fluoride: The Growing Debate

Posted in Consumer Protection

Fluoride is accepted as a significant dental public health achievement of the past century. It has been sold to the American public decade after decade as an essential tool in fighting tooth decay and cavities. While historically, the efficacy of fluoride in preventing tooth decay and cavities is well documented, recent scholarship is showing that there may be more to this chemical than we’ve been taught to believe.

More and more credible claims are suggesting that fluoride is a dangerous chemical in our water supply. In fact, the fluoride we use to fluoridate our water systems is a hazardous by-product of the phosphate fertilizer industry which consistently supports water fluoridation. These factories are earning a profit from their waste by feeding the American population a chemical that would otherwise be a pollutant. In addition, fluorosis – a condition caused by ingesting too much fluoride – is beginning to be seen as more serious condition than previously thought. The time is right for honest, open debate among all stockholders.

To begin the debate, I’ve found numerous reports on fluoride’s toxicity and shocking reports that the EPA and other government agencies have turned a blind eye to studies from the National Toxicology Program and the National Research Council. These studies have determined that fluoride could be cancerous. Other research, specifically from the University of Michigan’s School of Dentistry has found that fluoride ingestion is significantly higher among African Americans than among other ethnic groups.

Now I find myself asking, “Is this true, is Fluoride, the supposed dental miracle, contaminating our water supply and causing noticeable fluorosis and possibly cancer? Could the pressure of the phosphate fertilizer industry push policy makers to ignore the warnings? And what’s more, is fluoride causing these problems more commonly in the African American community than in other communities?"

What are your opinions on fluoride? How serious is this issue, and does the orthodoxy of water fluoridation need to be reexamined? If there are negative effects to water fluoridation, what can we do to mitigate them in the near future?

Assisted by Zachary Kady

  • http://www.fluorideaustralia.org Ged Johnson

    Problem:
    Fluoride, or “hydrofluorosilic acid”, is a waste chemical from Factories, it is so TOXIC it eats into cement. This is same chemical is used in water supplies around the world. Stacks more information collected at http://www.fluorideaustralia.org
    Solution:
    1. Filter your water with Reverse Osmosis filter. This is the only way to clean fluoride out of your water supply.
    2. Substitute your Fluoride with Oils that contain Acticator X, discovered by Dr Weston Price. These oils are critical for proper tooth, bones, and general health

  • http://www.fluorideaustralia.org Ged Johnson

    Problem:
    Fluoride, or “hydrofluorosilic acid”, is a waste chemical from Factories, it is so TOXIC it eats into cement. This is same chemical is used in water supplies around the world. Stacks more information collected at http://www.fluorideaustralia.org
    Solution:
    1. Filter your water with Reverse Osmosis filter. This is the only way to clean fluoride out of your water supply.
    2. Substitute your Fluoride with Oils that contain Activator X, discovered by Dr Weston Price. These oils are critical for proper tooth, bones, and general health

  • Laura Duchon

    The European Court of Justice has decided that fluoridated water must be treated as a medicine and cannot be used to prepare foods.( Doug Cross- UK Council Against Water Fluoridation-July 22,2009)
    Most of Europe is not fluoridated and their dental health is excellent.
    Why is the ADA still propagating fluoridation when the research is clearly indicating
    that the effect is topical and may do harm systemically?
    An excellent website is FluorideAction.Net.
    Has anybody bothered to at least to read some of the research?
    It was once used for the treatment for hyperthyroidism; the incidence of hypothyroidism has skyrocketed in the past decade. This alone should give pause.
    When will the ADA wise up?