OCALA—Health care freedom advocates decry any attempts to limit the access to necessary medications by regulations, laws, or force. But what kind of society would force drugs on its population without consent? Lest you think such a society is an abstract fiction of some Orwellian nightmare, you should know that we are all living in such a place today. The medicine being forced on you and your loved ones is fluoride, and according to countless experts and studies, you and your family could be in danger.
Over 50 years into the practice of intentionally fluoridating municipal water with this industrial waste, the American Dental Association still maintains that it is both safe and effective; “The Association has continually reaffirmed water fluoridation as the most effective public health measure for the prevention of dental caries and strongly urges that its benefits be extended to those served by communal water systems.”
The Center for Disease Control touts, “Nearly all water on earth contains naturally occurring fluoride at levels below, equal to, or above those used in community water fluoridation. Investigation of the decay preventing effects of naturally occurring fluoride in water led to the start of community water fluoridation in 1945.” What they don’t mention is that the fluoride being put in your water isn’t the naturally occurring type - it’s the poisonous kind.
Water fluoridation is the practice of adding compounds to water “with the intended purpose of reducing tooth decay in the general population.” But the research that led to this radical idea of “mass medication” has been called into question by numerous authorities that point to inconclusive results and the possibility of serious negative health effects associated with water fluoridation.
According to the Florida Department of Health, Gainesville holds the unique distinction of being the first city in Florida to fluoridate the water.
“Beginning in Gainesville in 1949, Florida cities have embraced the concept of water fluoridation for their citizens. At present, approximately 12.9 million people are benefiting from fluoridation in Florida. Nationally, over 170 million people benefit from water containing fluoride at the recommended level for controlling dental decay,” it boasts.
But in order to discuss fluoridation, it’s important to define some terms. Fluorine is a naturally occurring gas. When fluorine combines with another element, it becomes a “fluoride.” In nature, it combines to make compounds like sodium fluoride.
The initial research that led to the idea of fluoridation centered around areas where naturally high levels of fluorides caused a deformity in children’s teeth called mottled enamel, what we now call “dental fluorosis.”
Although the teeth were yellowed and malformed, researchers noticed that they had a lower level of cavities.
While the correlations between naturally-high fluoride content and less cavities seems fairly well established, fluoridation opponents point to the fact that the chemicals used in municipal water fluoridation are not the naturally occurring sodium fluoride or calcium fluoride, but hexafluorosilicic acid. The “fluoride” in municipal water is actually the waste collected from the smokestack scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry to prevent the severely carcinogenic substance from escaping into the atmosphere.
The American Dental Association and fluoridation advocates like to refer to the various types of fluorides as though they were interchangeable, yet the acid in drinking water has the corrosive potential of hydrofluoric acid, one of the most toxic and corrosive substances known to man. It is so corrosive that it cannot be stored in glass or even unlined metal containers.
The Environmental Protection Agency actually limits the release of this toxic waste and other compounds like it, but when these very same poisons are intentionally added to drinking water, the EPA defers authority to the Center for Disease Control.
“The EPA was pressured by supporters of fluoride, however well-meaning, and by states that would have to remove excess fluoride, to raise the standard to a level that now borders on unsafe, according to EPA’s own scientific review. EPA’s actions were not driven by science, but by political pressure from supporters of fluoride,” reported the Journal of the Academy of General Dentistry when the EPA finally moved on the issue because of health concerns.
Professor Albert Schatz, Ph.D. (Microbiology), discoverer of streptomycin and a Nobel Prize winner, called fluoridation, “the greatest fraud that has ever been perpetrated.” He further stated, “There is no well-designed research which provides convincing evidence that fluoridation is safe and reduces the incidence of dental caries. This is why it has been banned in many countries.”
Director of “Alternative Therapies Training Center” Patrick Hamouy explains that “Most of the fluoride added to drinking water is hydrofluoric acid – a compound of fluorine that is a chemical byproduct of aluminum, steel, cement, phosphate, and nuclear weapons manufacturing. Fluoride is also the active toxin in rat poisons and cockroach powder. It is nothing but a carcinogenic industrial waste product, passed off on the public as a ‘nutrient’ with necessary health benefits, to benefit the nuclear arms, aluminum, and phosphate manufacturers financially, to the tune of about $10 billion per year.”
Another expert and natural health advocate, Dr. Mercola states, “The fluoride added to water is a toxic industrial byproduct in a form nature could never have come up with. Once you realize this simple fact, you will be able to see the rest of the (ADA’s) website whitewash in its proper light.”
If there is so much evidence that water fluoridation is questionable or even harmful, why is it that those in power seem so resistant reconsidering the hypothesis?
“To reverse the policy of fluoridation now would be for the ADA, the EPA, the FDA, and the U.S. Public Health Service, Congress, and all the municipal water polluters in the US to admit that they made a mistake. Not a good move for re-election. To criticize fluoridation as a policy would challenge the billions of tons of fluoride being released into the air and water,” Dr. Mercola explains. “If fluoridation stopped, a multi-million dollar gravy train of research grants, propaganda contracts, and sweetheart arrangements between government and industry would vaporize overnight.”
A wide range of studies over a period of 50 years has linked water fluoridation to a plethora of potential health problems including; osteoporosis, arthritis, hip fractures, cancer, infertility, brain damage, Alzheimer’s, thyroid disorder, as well as the proven and admitted problem of dental fluorosis.
A study in China found that fluoridation lowers the intelligence capacity of humans, with children being especially susceptible. IQ levels were significantly lower than children not exposed to fluorides in all age groups listed.
Dean Burk, Chief Chemist at the US National Cancer Institute, testified at congressional hearings, stating, “fluoride causes more cancer, and causes it faster, than any other chemical.”
A 1994 study by the Journal of the American Medial Association found that, “Drinking fluoridated water will double the number of hip fractures for both older men and women. Extremely low levels of water fluoridation 0.1 ppm still produced statistically significant increased hip fractures.”
And what of the supposed benefits of water fluoridation? Among communities where water fluoridation was halted, not a single statistic can be cited showing any significant increase in the occurrence of cavities. But even if there were, would a lower cavity count be worth the risk of dental fluorosis, let alone the all the other potential health issues?
Some even call into question that most basic assumption about fluoride’s effectiveness.
“I now realize that what my colleagues and I were doing was what the history of science shows all professionals do when their pet theory is confronted by disconcerting new evidence: they bend over backwards to explain away the new evidence. They try very hard to keep their theory intact — especially so if their own professional reputations depend on maintaining that theory,” wrote John Colquhoun, Principal Dental Officer of Auckland New Zealand in Why I Changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation.
While all these studies can be disputed, perhaps the most powerful argument against public water fluoridation isn’t a scientific argument, but rather a legal one. That is the issue of “Informed Consent.”
This field of bio-ethics usually refers to the idea that the uninformed are at risk of mistakenly making a choice not reflective of their values. It does not specifically mean the process of obtaining consent or the specific legal requirements for decision-making capacity. Patients can elect to make their own medical decisions, or can delegate decision-making authority to another party. They are also entitled to make decisions for their children.
Fluoride is most clearly a drug, by even the loosest definition of the term. The FDA defines a drug as “any articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease” and “articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or other animals.”
One of the most important things to remember when taking a drug is the significance of dosage. Too little will not have the desired effect, and too much can cause unwanted or dangerous side effects.
Too much fluoride can cause the following side effects; discolored teeth, weakened tooth enamel, changes in the appearance of your teeth, stomach upset, headache, or weakness. Overdose symptoms may include nausea, vomiting, stomach pain, diarrhea, drooling, numbness or tingling, loss of feeling anywhere in your body, muscle stiffness, seizure (convulsions), and death.
Yet the mass medication introduced by municipal water fluoridation does not discriminate between a full-grown man and a three-year-old child. To further complicate matters, dosage is not simply dependent on how much water an individual drinks because there is any number of possible sources of fluoride in people’s diet that can increase the dosage any one person receives.
Public water fluoridation violates the principles of “informed consent” by subjecting everyone to the same “drug” without any acquiescence by the subject or consideration of other factors.
Dr. Hardy Limeback, Head of Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto writes, “The issue of mass medication of an unapproved drug without the expressed informed consent of each individual must be addressed. The dose of fluoride cannot be controlled. Fluoride as a drug has contaminated most processed foods and beverages throughout North America. Individuals who are susceptible to fluoride’s harmful effects cannot avoid ingesting this drug. The rights of individuals to enjoy the freedom from involuntary fluoride medication certainly outweigh the right of society to enforce this public health measure, especially when the evidence of benefit is marginal at best.”
When asked about the ethical implications of medicating an entire population via the use of its drinking waters without consent, Gainesville Regional Utilities representatives simply pointed to the position of the American Dental Association.
“If they stand behind it, then so do we,” he told the Sentinel.
Paid Political Ad by Samm Simpson for Congress
The Liberty Sentinel
Liberty Sentinel Media, Inc.