National Fluoride Database Launched by USDA
- National Fluoride Database Launched by USDA
National Fluoride Database Launched by USDA
By Mary Sparrowdancer
© 2004 All Rights Reserved
"An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it."
--Orlando Battista, Chemist.
Upon first learning that a "new database" on fluoride levels in foods and drinks had been published in October, 2004 by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), I dropped what I was doing and rushed to look at the publication. A sense of hope welled in me - hope born from hope that perhaps at last, those governing what is left of our "government" had finally come to their collective senses, and were finally "fessing up" to the 60-year-old charge that graft, incompetence and lies are behind the mass-medicating of Americans via our drinking water - a scheme that was a mistake from the very beginning. It is an ongoing mistake that has resulted in so much disinformation pertaining to fluoride that this toxic substance has now been poured into most of America's water, it is in our foods, in household goods, in the air and it is in a growing number of drugs that Americans take daily.
I was scarcely able to wade through the emailed press release and then the introduction of this latest report, before once again feeling the curious sensation that seems to accompany the reading of most government publications - that odd feeling which occurs when my eyes roll upward in exasperation. The confession has not yet come; it is still a long way off. But this was at least one small step for us all into the direction where ignored truth has patiently awaited discovery for over a half a century. It is in embarking upon this path that the education of the American public regarding fluorine, fluoride, organofluorides and fluorinated products can finally take place.
It is within the first three or four sentences of the press release, titled, "Tracking Fluoride in the National Food Supply," that we catch a glimpse of what this report is really all about. In reality, it is about the accumulating consequences of deliberately contaminating America's water supply with the industrial waste product commonly referred to as "fluoride."
"For more than half a century," the opening remarks of the press release state, "to prevent tooth decay, small amounts of fluoride have been added to many U.S. municipal water supplies. That fluoride, as well as naturally occurring fluoride from wells and other water sources, subsequently finds its way into water-based beverages and foods."
Moving onto the introduction of the study, we discover what our "Adequate Intake" of fluoride is. According to various professional studies, and as can be seen in the Physician's Desk Reference, (PDR), "there is no evidence that fluoride is an essential nutrient for humans." Despite this, an "Adequate Intake" has been determined for us by those who are promoting pharmaceutical-grade fluoride products, and promoting the industrial waste fluoride that is being added to our drinking water.
The promoters have determined that in order to "prevent dental caries," our "Adequate Intake" for their product has been set (by them, and those partnered with them) at 0.01 mg a day for infants up to six months, and it is 0.05 mg/kg for infants and children older than six months. The dose for adults is simply 3 mg a day for women, and 4 mg a day for men - one size fits all per gender. Whether we are toothless or not, the promoters have been assuring us for over fifty years that fluoride added to our drinking water will "prevent dental caries."
In order to "prevent dental fluorosis," however - the mottling and discoloration of the teeth that is considered by the American Dental Association to be a "purely cosmetic" problem - the USDA quotes from the Institute of Medicine (which is also promoting fluoride), stating that the Tolerable Upper Intake Level for fluoride ingestion is capped off at "10 mg a day" for everyone over the age of eight.
Unfortunately, dental fluorosis is one of the only clearly visible signs of fluoride poisoning (other than death due to catastrophic fluoride accidents) that is medically recognized in this country. The Upper Intake Level for preventing problems that are far more serious than dental fluorosis - problems that are internal, systemic and may not be clearly visible or even recognized in this country at this time - are not even mentioned.
In addition, according to information that can be found on the American Dental Association's website, dental fluorosis is the result of an "intake of too much fluoride while the enamel is forming before teeth erupt." Therefore, for those of us whose teeth have already erupted, monitoring them for signs of fluoride poisoning in the post-eruption years of our lives is apparently of questionable benefit.
In keeping all attention deflected away from overall health and focused with tunnel vision only upon the pre-erupted tooth, no mention is made of the other problems that systemic ingestion of various fluoride compounds via skin, mouth and nose have been associated with, such as thyroid malfunction, altered mental status including depression and violent, uncharacteristic behavior, memory problems, gastrointestinal problems, cardiac arrhythmias, liver problems, bone problems, and joint, tendon and muscle problems, including rhabdomyolysis.
The USDA then states that similar suggested dosages and upper limit levels of fluoride ingestion have also been endorsed by the American Dental Association and the American Dietetic Association, as though the mere mention of such names commands immediate and unquestioned respect and suggests something akin to authoritarian infallibility.
Both of the above ADA groups, however, are unyielding fluoride promoters, which, in and of itself, indicates neither group has been doing any real homework.
It is the American Dental Association - a professional association of dentists - that staunchly backs the systemic, mass-medication of Americans under the claim that this drinking-water maneuver will "reduce cavities." And yet, one might reasonably think that after waiting for sixty years for any signs of the miraculous dental health claim to occur, we might have seen something by now that would favorably back up this aging, empty promise. The promised results have not yet occurred. In fact, in 2000 the Surgeon General issued the "first ever" call to action due to increasing dental problems in the U.S., although we are now, as a country, completely inundated with fluoride.
Kentucky would have been a very good place to set up camp and watch for the long-awaited dental miracle to happen, because Kentucky was 100% "optimally fluoridated" in 1992, and remained over 96% "optimally fluoridated" in 2000, in spite of eight more years of patient but meaningless miracle-waiting.
Despite this grand level of fluoridation, in a 2002 article in the Cincinnati Enquirer it was noted that, "In Kentucky, nearly half of the commonwealth's 2- to 4-year-olds have cavities." This is approximately twice the national average.
In 2003 the American Dental Association and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) gave Kentucky a "Fifty Year Award," which is an award given to states in recognition of their community water fluoridation. In 2002, however, in a Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, the CDC named Kentucky as the top state in the U.S. in which residents had lost all of their teeth. According to the CDC report, 42% of Kentucky's adults are completely edentulous.
Given the steady flow of fluoride coursing through Kentucky and its residents and given the over half-century-old promise of dental benefits, one might have realistically expected a very different dental score for this state that has complied so thoroughly with the demands and pressures to become "optimally fluoridated."
The little-known truth, however, is that this edentulous outcome and problematic score is exactly what might be expected from a highly fluoridated population.
Fluoride is known to precipitate and exacerbate periodontal disease, because it stimulates the body's production of prostaglandins. The wording in a patent claim filed in the U.S. Patent office in 1996 for a topically applied fluoride product clearly states this fact -
"The term periodontal diseases relates to conditions in which the gingiva and underlying alveolar bone are attacked...We have found that fluoride, in the concentration range in which it is employed for the prevention of dental caries, stimulates the production of prostaglandins and thereby exacerbates the inflammatory response in gingivitis and periodontitis."
In order to prevent the fluoride-induced periodontitis from occurring, the above claim for a patent describes a product that also delivers a dose of an NSAID (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) to counteract the expected problems caused by the delivery of fluoride.
One cannot help but wonder if this might be the real reason behind the national push for Americans at risk of heart attacks to take one aspirin a day to help prevent further cardiac problems. Aspirin is categorized by Merck as one of the NSAIDs that relieves inflammation by blocking prostaglandins. According to the FDA, prostaglandins appear to be associated with heart attack.
Sadly, and in keeping with this question, the leading cause of death in Kentucky is heart attack. Also falling into place is the fact that Kentucky is among the top five states in which the people are suffering from and struggling with one of the highest percentages of obesity in the United States. Fluoride - as cannot be stated often enough - interferes with the functioning of thyroid hormones. Sadly, however, very few physicians appear to be currently aware of this.
Because influential groups such as the American Dental Association continue to make their unproven medicinal claim about water fluoridation while at the same time demanding that all Americans be subjected to this dental treatment via their drinking water regardless their age or existing medical conditions, it is time for the rest of the medical community to begin taking a serious look at the potential problems associated with fluorine and fluoride compounds, the most serious problem being the complete lack of awareness and education pertaining to the toxicity of this substance.
Studies on the effects of systemic ingestion of fluoride via drinking, breathing and bathing in it are medically indicated and long overdue. The suggestion that "the dose is the poison" is also overdue for an overhaul. Fluorine readily attaches to other substances, not only altering biochemical properties, but at times potentiating toxic effects many fold.
Fluoride is known to interfere with the functioning of thyroid hormones, it is a neurotoxin, it is a potent liver toxin, it has been found to be grossly accumulating within the pineal gland, it is associated with cancer, it is the substance that turns Sarin into a deadly nerve gas, and when it is added to water, it can eat its way through a titanium container. According to the PDR, "Fluoride absorbed from the stomach appears to be absorbed as hydrofluoric acid." According to a study on its toxicity that can be found on eMedline, "Once absorbed, fluoride binds calcium ions and may lead to hypocalcemia."
Clearly, this is not a substance that the majority of an entire nation should be forced to swallow, bathe in, inhale, cook with, and ingest via their drinking water on a daily basis.
The other group mentioned by the USDA above as endorsing the "fluoride Adequate Intake" levels, is the American Dietetic Association. According to information that was located on their website on November 13, 2004, this group not only joins hands with the other ADA in promoting fluoride via mass-medication, but it is also endorsing the USDA's "Food Pyramid," despite published evidence indicating the Food Pyramid is a deliberately altered fraud. The Food Pyramid is, in fact, so fraudulent, that no one who truly values their health or the health of their family should be following the dietary recommendations contained within it.
The deliberately altered Food Pyramid encourages Americans to consume as the primary base of their diet, the "Bread, cereal, rice and pasta group: 6-11 servings" a day.
The correct, actual and true suggested servings for whole grain cereals and grains had actually been capped-off at 2 to 4 servings, maximum, with the 4 serving's level set aside for larger, physically active males. Baked goods, crackers, etc., had been removed from the "daily" area, and placed into the "occasional treat" area. The real suggested base of our diet before the behind-the-scenes switch took place was 5 to 9 servings a day of fresh fruits and vegetables.
My information about the alteration of the real Pyramid has been obtained directly through personal discussions with Luise Light, M.S., EdD., the nutrition expert who was recruited by the USDA to create the Food Pyramid. It was she and her team who actually created the real Food Pyramid.
Dr. Light and her team were later stunned to find that their Pyramid had been completely altered prior to its being given to the unassuming American public. Instead of the fresh fruits and vegetables that the team of nutrition experts had suggested as the base of our diet, the base had been switched to "6 to 11 servings" of starchy foods daily. It was a switch that created a potential windfall profit for industries marketing such refined goods, as well as a windfall profit for those who would profit from treating the problems caused by such a diet.
"In fact," Luise stated, "the health consequences of encouraging the public to eat so much refined grain, which the body processes like sugar, was frightening!"
Perhaps it is at this point that we should pause for a moment and consider that it has been individuals holding key government positions who have permitted and promoted the mass-medication of Americans via fluorinated drinking water, and individuals holding other government positions who have told us to eat "6-11 servings" of starch a day. It is time for Americans to begin asking questions, and to take an active role in protecting their own health.
Add to the daily overload of starch, a daily dose of fluoride, which is known to interfere with thyroid functioning, and one has the perfect recipe for creating an entire nation of formerly robust people who are now struggling with their weight, their teeth, their bones, their depression, their inflamed GI tracts, and so on. Add to that picture the push on soy products, which also interfere with thyroid functioning, and one might begin to understand why there is an epidemic of obesity and diabetes in the United States.
The conditions, however, are being blamed on lifestyle, laziness, lack of personal willpower, too much computer time, lower education. Blame is attached to everything but the real, underlying cause.
Strangely synchronistic, it was while I was looking at the "causes" suggesting the victims are somehow to blame for their problems, when I received an email from a veterinarian whose observations indicate the problem has nothing to do with laziness, computers or educational status. She stated that when she moved from a rural area served by well-water to the fluoridated area where her new practice is currently located, she observed numerous dogs and cats in that new practice being medicated for hypothyroidism. She had not seen this in her previous practices.
"The latest diagnosis of hypothyroidism in a dog here was just last week," wrote Mary Emerick, DVM, adding, "Diabetes in both dogs and cats seems more prevalent here, and more so within the last 5 years."
In addition to the animals being subjected to the same water that their owners are receiving, some commercially prepared animal foods now contain soy and grains.
To this picture of a nation of people - plus their pets - in need of medications, enter now the pharmaceutical industry, one of the most profitable industries on the face of the earth.
With the agrochemical corporations forming partnerships with the pharmaceutical corporations, and pharmaceutical corporations now somehow openly partnered with the government, itself, ("Homeland Health"), a large and unhealthy picture begins to take shape. It is a picture we should look at very carefully, because it represents a growing corporate entity that is powerful but without conscience. It is this insatiable entity that is deciding for us what we shall eat and drink, how we will be medicated with or without our consent, and it now even appears to be venturing on, unchecked, into spiritual realms, wherein its gods of choice have been chosen.
Immediately following the parroted endorsements mirrored by the two fluoride promoters - the ADA and the ADA - the following statements are then made, based in part on an article found in the Journal of the American Dental Association: "Fluoride works primarily via topical mechanisms to inhibit demineralization, to enhance remineralization, and to inhibit bacteria associated with tooth decay."
A statement suggesting the exact opposite of the above claim that fluoride works "to enhance remineralization," can be found on Chapter 3, Page 54 of the Surgeon General's 2004 study on bone problems in the United States, (Table 3-3, American Society for Bone and Mineral Research). We find here, in the Surgeon General's study, that fluoride has been placed into a well-deserved category reserved for substances that are known to cause "Direct impairment of mineralization."
More importantly, however, is the statement that fluoride works "primarily via topical mechanisms."
"Topical," means applying something to the surface.
If this is the mechanism by which fluoride primarily works, then where is the prudence, the soundness of judgment, the practical intelligence of putting this HAZMAT toxic waste into our drinking water under the false and tired claim that it is good for us - and worse, telling us that it is good for our children?
It is not natural or normal for an entire nation of people - and their pets - to be suffering to such an extent that the United States is now requiring the largest amount of pharmaceuticals on Earth in order to treat its symptoms on a daily basis.
Happiness, joy, compassion and well-being are normal states of existence for the human being.
Unfortunately, our normalcy has been traded in for anxiety, depression and the long list of warning signs now plaguing this country as our bodies and our minds have become "optimally fluoridated."
It is also not normal for an entire nation of children to be suffering from heartburn and gastrointestinal disorders. Yet, according to a 2002 report by Reuters, the number of drugs used to treat heartburn and other gastrointestinal disorders in children alone has "increased by 660 percent over the past five years." Small stomachs are not meant to be absorbing hydrofluoric acid.
While some hopeful studies have suggested that perhaps fluoride might be of some use in the treatment of osteoporosis (surely it must be useful for something other than making bombs, rat poison, insecticides, nerve gas and nuclear reaction), other studies have found that the bone produced by fluoride "has an abnormal texture and is less mineralized and relatively less strong." Reports have found, "An increased fracture incidence was observed." A Dutch study also states, "Fluoride often causes upper gastrointestinal complaints and a lower extremity pain syndrome, which is caused by stress fractures."
In one study in the Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 164: 1525-1530, No. 14, July 26, 2004, "National Trends in Osteoporosis Visits.1988-2003," the authors discovered that, "The number of physician visits for osteoporosis increased 4-fold between 1994 (1.3 million visits) and 2003 (6.3 million visits), whereas it had remained stable in prior years."
Now, with Americans thoroughly riddled with fluoride due to a sixty-year-old medical experiment that never produced its promised results - now, with most of the entire nation currently suffering from gastrointestinal complaints, mood and sleep disturbances, bizarre aches and pains, elevated blood pressure, bone density problems, cancers, heart problems, liver problems, kidney problems, dental problems, thyroid problems and obesity, attention is finally being paid to the cumulative effects of fluoridating the water supply.
Because fluoride is foolishly added into drinking water rather than prescribed individually as are other medications that may cause severe allergic symptoms in some individuals, and may be contraindicated in many others, it should not come as too great a surprise to learn that the American food supply is also now riddled with fluoride. In fact, this inevitable development has been known for some time, and yet the corporate entities now partnered with, and masquerading as our government have blindly ignored this. Giving credence to the charge that they are without conscience, they have continued on in their efforts to "optimally fluoridate" 100% of America by every means possible. Fluoridating the current two-thirds of the nation is not enough to satisfy them. They want the whole country.
The new National Fluoride Database lists the amounts of fluoride found in selected foods and beverages in micrograms per 100 grams. (One hundred grams is about 3.5 ounces - a few swallows. Most popular beverages come in 12-ounce containers.) Among the most concentrated sources of fluoride in this database is brewed tea, which is calculated at 381 mcg/100g, when brewed in the "South." Other geographical oddities can also be observed because some areas of the US are more "optimally fluoridated" than others.
While drinking a Pepsi in the West will only add 13 mcg of fluoride per 100g to one's daily "Adequate Intake," drinking a Pepsi in the South will add 45 mcg of fluoride/100g. Drinking a Coca-Cola in the West is calculated at 36 mcg of fluoride/100g, while having a Coke in the South will result in 57 mcg of fluoride/100g added to the human being. Drinking a Sprite in the West will add 29 mcg of fluoride/100g, while a Sprite down South will add 59 mcg of fluoride/100g. This is potentially troublesome because those living in hotter climates (i.e., the "South"), might normally be expected to consume more beverages, including the ever-popular beverage of the South - iced tea.
Of the baby foods tested, all but two of the products were positive for fluoride contamination. The worst was "apple and cherry juice," at 67 mcg/100g.
All of the baked products, breakfast cereals and cereal grains and pastas were positive for fluoride contamination. Oddly, however, the majority of the testing that was done on this group - the starch group - took place back in the 1980s, indicating that fluoride contamination has been known, quietly acknowledged and studied since at least the 1980s. Nationwide fluoridation has increased overall since the 1980s, however, not decreased. This means that the rates of contamination in our foods are ostensibly much higher now.
We need a database showing us the contamination rate of the starch group in the current century rather than what it was in the 1980s. This is especially important, since some poor souls are still attempting to follow the fraudulent Food Pyramid's advice to consume "6 to 11" servings of starch daily.
Of the bottled waters, Dannon's "Fluoride to Go" was predictably among the highest, with fluoride at 78 mcg/100g. However, another unnamed, carbonated, fruit-flavored water topped even the "Fluoride to Go" with 105 mcg of fluoride in it. Other bottled waters ranged from 2 mcg up to 34, but calcium content was not included in this study. The calcium content would be of great importance because some of the spring waters contain generous amounts of calcium. According to statements found in this USDA report, calcium plays an important role in blocking the absorption of fluoride.
For the most part, according to this Database, fresh fruits and vegetables contain the least amounts of fluoride. However, it appeared in this report that cooking the products resulted in greatly increased levels. For instance, "carrots, raw" contained only 3 mcg of fluoride versus "carrots, cooked" containing 47 mcg fluoride/100g. How or why this occurred was not explained in the report. It is not known, for instance, if the laboratory was using nonstick cookware that was also releasing fluoride into the foods during the heating process, or if it was the municipally fluoridated water that caused the increased fluoride content - or perhaps it might have been a combination of both. Cooking times were also not mentioned, and this is also of importance because lengthy cooking times with fluoridated water will result in more concentrated amounts of fluoride being left behind in the boiling water as the pure vapor or steam escapes.
Perhaps the most important observation about the National Fluoride Database is what is missing from it.
One cannot look only at our drinking water, our foods, our nonstick cookware, our inundation with pesticides and fertilizers, our ever-present plastics and our ever-present air pollution - and assume that we have covered all of the bases regarding our potential exposure to toxic levels of fluoride.
One must also look at the growing number of fluorinated pharmaceutical products that have been widely prescribed, including, but certainly not limited to: Lariam, Cipro (ciprofloxacin), Crestor, Flonase, Lipitor, Luvox, Diflucan, Lexapro, Paxil, Lescol, Prozac, Stelazine, Haldol, Levaquin (levofloxacin), Celexa, Celebrex, Prevacid, Zagam, Tequin, Halfan, Propulsid, Advair Diskus, Flovent, Baycol, Avelox, Redux, Trovan, Casodex and so on. Some of the above named pharmaceuticals have already been removed from the market due to side effects.
According to a recently released study showing data gathered by the government on trends and healthcare in the US, 44 percent of Americans take prescription drugs, and 17 percent of the population takes three or more prescription drugs. Between the study range of 1994-96 and 2000-02, the number of doctor's visits by school-aged children requiring antidepressants rose from 1.1 million to 3.1 million. It would be particularly helpful for the physicians and patients to know the amounts of fluoride contained in their medications, as well as the "bioavailability" of the fluoride. Bioavailability would indicate the amount, rate, extent and degree to which the drug or its metabolite actually reaches the circulatory system.
In looking at fluoroquinolones, for instance, a group of fluorinated antibiotics, information appears that warrants further study and further questions.
The chemical name of the fluoroquinolone known as levofloxacin is: "(-)-(S)-9-fluoro-2 ,3-dihydro-3-methyl-10-(4-methyl-1-piperazinyl) -7-oxo-7H-pyrido[1,2,3-de]-1, 4-benzoxazine-6-carboxylic acid hemihydrate." Its empirical formula is C18 H20 FN3 O4 1/2 H2O. Its molecular weight is 370.38. The atomic weight of fluorine (F) is approximately 19. A 750 mg dose of the above was looked at for the purpose of finding out how much F would be contained in a high dose.
According to professionals, the formula for determining this would be:
19/370.38 = 0.0512986 X 750 = 38.47.
This means there are 38.47 mg of F in one 750 mg dose of levofloxacin. The question that must then be asked is: what is the bioavailability of all that F? Is it safely bound so that it cannot be metabolized into free F ions in the body?
Another of the fluoroquinolones is ciprofloxacin. It is "1-cyclopropyl-6-fluoro-1, 4-dihydro-4-oxo-7-(1-piperazinyl)-3-quinolinecarboxylic acid." Its molecular weight is 331.4. Its empirical formula is C17 H18 FN3 O3. Again, a 750 mg dose was looked at to see the amount of F it contained.
Therefore, 19/331.4 = 0.0573325 X 750 = 42.99.
Even the fluoride promoters have decided that our "Tolerable Upper Intake Level" of F should be capped-off at 10 mg a day if we are over eight years of age. The PDR takes a slightly different view, and specifically states, "Intakes of fluoride of higher than 4 milligrams daily for adult males and 3 milligrams daily for adult females are not recommended."
It would appear, therefore, that a dose of F nearing 43 mg might be something worthy of notice. It is certainly a dose in which we, the potential recipients, are deserving of answers. Again, the first question that must be asked pertains to the bioavailability of F. Have actual tests been done to see what the levels of F are in the blood or urine after ingestion of ciprofloxacin?
It appears that one such study was actually done in 1995 by the Department of Pediatrics at All India Institute of Medical Sciences. What they found was, "After the first dose of ciprofloxacin (10 mg/kg), serum fluoride levels increased at 12 h in 15 of 19 (79%) patients; 24-h urinary fluoride excretion was higher on day 7 compared with basal values in 16 of 18 (88.9%) patients." They concluded their study stating there is a need for further studies to evaluate the tissue accumulation of fluoride and its potential to cause toxic effects."
According to Michael Connett of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), "The findings of this study heighten the importance of testing other fluorinated drugs to see if they, too, could increase the body-burden of F in a similar manner."
While studies of carefully measured doses of medications might show us how much F we can expect to receive from them, finding the dose we can expect to ingest via mass-medicated drinking water is next to impossible to determine at this time.
We might know that a person taking ciprofloxacin can expect to have an elevation of F in their systems. Before even sitting down to a typical American breakfast of starch, sugar and fluoride, however, the overall intake of the day's fluoride quickly becomes utterly impossible to determine for anyone who dares to start the day off with an "optimally fluoridated" shower or bath.
Although it has been known since 1932 that people with overactive thyroids could be effectively treated by bathing in water containing a fluoride compound, it is still not clearly known - or apparently even of concern - how much of the fluoride from municipal waters we are absorbing via our skin and inhalation while showering and bathing. In addition, people suffering from diabetes also suffer from excessive thirst. The amount of water actually ingested that has been "optimally fluoridated" by a toxic waste never approved by the FDA, is unknown.
Upon reaching this point in this paper that is focused on fluoride and its associated toxicities, we have covered not only the known toxic effects of fluoride, but we have also covered nine of the principles contained within the Nuremberg Code of medical ethics. The paragraph below pertains to the tenth and final principle of medical ethics.
Those administering the fluoride to the public in the United States of America are not medical or scientific experts, and many of them do not even know what the "optimum dose" is. A two-year study published in 2001 examined the knowledge level of operators controlling both small and large water plants. The two-year study found that only 64 percent of plant operators knew the correct fluoride concentration to be added for their plant. In small plants, however, "Only one-fourth of operators were able to maintain the fluoride concentration to within 0.1 mg/L of the optimal concentration."
There are ten principles contained in the Nuremberg Code of medical ethics. The fluoridation of America's water is in violation of all ten.
The USDA's National Fluoride Databank gives us clear evidence now showing us that we have contamination of fluoride on a national level. Immediate countermeasures should be taken in all communities that are adding to this contamination problem. An immediate moratorium should be responsibly announced banning the deliberate addition of further fluoride wastes to our drinking water.
Fluoridation has been an uncorrected mistake for almost sixty years. An uncorrected mistake of this magnitude is better described as a national disgrace.
The Nuremberg Code
Permissible Medical Experiments
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
"Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 2, pp. 181-182.. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949."
* * * * * * * * *
Mary Sparrowdancer is an investigative journalist, a spiritual seeker of the truth, and is the author of "The Love Song of the Universe," published in 2001 by Hampton Roads. Her ongoing studies have included bacteriology, microscopic analysis, hematology, electroencephalography, ornithology, veterinary studies pertaining to wild animals and biblical translations from Latin, Hebrew and Greek. She was a wildlife rehabilitator for a number of years, during which she cared for over 20,000 wild birds and animals, including endangered species. She and her two children reside in Tallahassee, Fl(u)orida.
I wish to thank the following people for their time and patient assistance:
Valerie Guernsey, D.O., psychiatrist specializing in adolescent behavior; Luise Light, M.S., EdD, nutrition expert recruited by the USDA to create the Food Pyramid; Michael Connett of the Fluoride Action Network, an international coalition working to broaden public awareness on fluoride's impact on human health and the environment; Dr. J. William Hirzy and Dr. James Murphy of the EPA NETU 280 headquarters professional employees union, who along with many other government professionals are completely opposed to fluoridation; Arthur Evangelista, former investigator for the FDA and head of the Public Health and Medical Fraud Research Cooperative, dedicated to accurate public health education and exposing corporate and regulatory malfeasance or corruption; Mary Emerick, DVM who took time to alert me to hypothyroidism in dogs and cats in the fluoridated area of her clinic; Diane Heather Phillips, MB, BS, BSc for her kind help pertaining to F; Wade Frazier, whose educational writings are a must-read, and can be seen here, http://www.ahealedplanet.net/home.htm; and to "CJ," who first alerted me to the fluoride problem.
* * * * * * * * *
REFERENCED and CITED WORKS, and SUGGESTED LINKS and READING
Fluoride Action Network -
Parents of Fluoride-Poisoned Children -
Journal, International Society for Fluoride Research -
USDA National Fluoride Data Base of Selected Beverages and Foods. October, 2004. (11/2004)
ADA, Dental fluorosis "purely cosmetic," ADA Statement on Enamel (Dental) Fluorosis, 1/2004. (11/2004)
"Bread, ce real, rice and pasta group: 6-11 servings," undated instructions from Food Pyramid, in article titled, "Take the First Step to Eating Right" as found on the American Dietetic Association's website. (11/13/2004)
"The Battle of Darkness and Light," by Mary Sparrowdancer. A fluoride expose that is a permanent feature on the front page pf the website of Jeff Rense. 12/2003. (11/2004)
ADA, 2003 Community Fluoridation Awards, "Fifty Year Awards." 5/2004. (11/2004)
The Cincinnati Enquirer; Solvig, Erica. "Special Report: Cincinnati's Dental Crisis." Oct. 2002. (11/2004)
CDC, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), "Populations Receiving Optimally Fluoridated Public Drinking Water - United States, 2000." Feb. 2002. (11/2004)
CDC, Kentucky. Heart Disease. (11/2004)
CDC, "The Oral Health of Older Americans,"
March, 2001. (11/2004)
CDC, "Retention of Natural Teeth," 2002. Kentucky 42% edentulous. (11/2004)
Alberg,et al. "NSAID/fluoride periodontal compositions and methods," US Patent and Trademark Office, 5,807,541. Sept. 1998, filed April 1996. (11/2004)
Merck Medical Manual, NSAID, aspirin. (12/2004)
"Toxicity, Fluoride," Geofrey Nochimson, M.D., August 2004. (12/2004)
FDA: "'An Aspirin A Day' - Just Another Cliché?" FDA Consumer. 1999. (12/2004)
Bone Health and Osteoporosis, Report of the Surgeon General, Chapter 3, Diseases of the Bone, 2004. (11/ 2004)
"Kids Very Hot Market For Prescription Drugs," Franklin Lakes, NJ, Reuters, 09/19/2002. (11/2004).
Luke, Jennifer, "Fluoride deposition in the aged human pineal gland," "Caries Research," March 2001, (11/2004)
Lips, P. "Fluoride in Osteoporosis: still an experimental and controversial treatment." August, 1998. (11/2004)
Search drug names, molecular weights, chemical names and empirical formulas:
PDR: Fluoride. (11/2004)
National Conference of State Legislatures. "Who Knows." Interview with Representative Glenn Donnelson of Utah. (11/2004).
Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, "Safety of ciprofloxacin therapy in children." 1995. (12/2004)
National Conference of State Legislatures. "Investigation of the Possible Associations between Fluorosis, Fluoride Exposure, and Childhood Behavior Problems." "Fluoridation Knowledge Level of Water Plant Operators." (12/2004)
Chartbook on Trends in the Health of Americans. (44 Percent taking prescription drugs.) (12/2004)
Journal of Public Health Dent., Spring 2001. NCBI, PubMed. "Fluoridation Knowledge Level of Water Plant Operators." (12/2004). Only one quarter could maintain proper levels.
Nuremberg Code of medical ethics. "1. Voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential." (11/2004). Step-by-step explanation.
Alert Webmaster & Moderators|
|DISCLAIMER Information available on this page and on CureZone is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for the advice provided by a healthcare professional or any information contained on or in any product label or packaging. You should not use the information on CureZone for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, or prescribing any medication or other treatment. Answers, comments and opinions provided on CureZone are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. CureZone does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in messages, comments or articles on CureZone. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms and those published here. Read more ...|