By: chuckanoo
12/07/2008
12:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
* Fluoridation is not about "children's teeth". Rather, it is about industry ridding itself of crude hazardous waste products, silicofluorides, for a profit. Silicofluorides are 85 times more toxic than naturally-occurring calcium fluoride.
* Fluoride is more toxic than lead and like lead in minute doses, accumulates in and can be damaging to brain/mind development of children, producing abnormal behavior in animals and reducing IQ in humans, especially in conjunction with deficiencies of key nutrients such as calcium, iodine and vitamins. It can also contribute to many disease processes. Because it is almost as toxic as ar.senic, fluoride's ability to play havoc in the human body should surprise no one.
* There is as much, or more, dental decay in fluoridated communities as there is in the non-fluoridated areas; however, the dental costs are higher in fluoridated communities due to dental fluorosis. Drinking fluoridated water may delay decay, but it does not prevent it. |
|
By: tonegunman1
14/07/2008
8:46 am Yahoo! Profile:
tonegunman1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The American Dental Association Journal has published research that proves that dentists in fluoridated areas make 17% more profit than unfluoridated areas.
"Impact of Water Fluoridation on Dental Practice and Dental Manpower"
This is at odds with their claims that it protects the public and saves them money. |
|
By: chuckanoo
16/07/2008
9:51 am Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Here is a good site that can help in the fight against the Toxic Poison 'Sodium Fluoride' being 'dumped' into our water supply.
QUEENSLANDERS AGAINST WATER FLUORIDATION INC
http://www.qawf.org/ |
|
By: chuckanoo
17/07/2008
4:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"The American Dental Association Journal has published research that proves that dentists in fluoridated areas make 17% more profit than unfluoridated areas.
"Impact of Water Fluoridation on Dental Practice and Dental Manpower"
This is at odds with their claims that it protects the public and saves them money."
tonegunman1..
If dentist's are making 17% more profit in fluoridated areas compared to unfluoridated, does that not make you wonder if Sodium Fluoride (even in toothpaste) actually causes tooth decay? |
|
By: mulnut
18/07/2008
6:40 am Yahoo! Profile:
mulnut Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
<<"The American Dental Association Journal has published research that proves that dentists in fluoridated areas make 17% more profit than unfluoridated areas.
"Impact of Water Fluoridation on Dental Practice and Dental Manpower">>
Could this also mean that people in flouridated area's care more about their teeth and visit the dentist more often or possibly dentists in those areas charge more? This debate cannot be fought with monetary figures. people in australia living in flouridated areas have fewer cavities than those in unflouridated areas. |
|
By: chuckanoo
19/07/2008
2:25 am Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Extracted from the November 2004
Queensland Household Survey
Summary Report
Prepared for
Department of Health.
"The data described in the following report was collected using the Queensland Household Survey conducted by the Office of Economic and Statistical Research in November 2004.
The survey was conducted by telephone and approximately 300 interviews of respondents aged 18 years and over were completed in each of ten regions in Queensland (see Figure 1).
These regions are mostly Statistical Divisions (SD), except for the western region which combines the North West, Central West and South West SDs, and the North and West Moreton, and South and East Moreton regions, which together comprise the Moreton SD.
Results presented in this report represent population estimates calculated from the sample.
These figures are benchmarked to an estimated adult population of Queensland in private dwellings of 2,861,175 and an estimated number of households of 1,428,593. The adult population is benchmarked at the age (6 categories) by sex by metropolitan versus non metropolitan level, by income and by whether have a university degree.
Overall
Of the estimated 2,861,175 Queensland residents aged 18 and over living in private dwellings, the majority (60.3%) were in support of the addition of fluoride to their water
supply. In contrast to this just less than one quarter (22.8%) was against and a further 10.0 percent were undecided or did not know."
The question is, how dare they say that 60% of the Qld population wants this poison in the water supply, when they only interviewed (approximately) 600 people (@ 2 Adults per house)?
The State Government is "RIGGING" the figures again!!!! |
|
By: tonegunman1
20/07/2008
1:26 am Yahoo! Profile:
tonegunman1 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
"people in australia living in flouridated areas have fewer cavities than those in unflouridated areas."
Bollocks.
Compare region to region and you will find that there is very small differences. For example some of the worst teeth in NSW are in areas of Sydney that is, and has been for decades, fluoridated.
Some areas that have no fluoridation will have better rates is some age groups but some others, or in fact one, may be worse, but in most cases not by much. NSW Health will use the one as a basis for saying their teeth are worse. But I don't expect you to believe me, I just ask that you go look at the figures - not my figures - their figures.
The state or territory with the worst DMFT rate on average is the NT (70% fluoridated). |
|
By: chuckanoo
28/07/2008
2:18 am Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
NO fLuorIdE
No Sewage
in our drinking water!
Public Seminar
Sunday 10th August 2008
Do You Know The Risks?
Come Too...Anglican Church Hall
Salerno Street, Isle Of Capri, Gold Coast.
Entry $5 (Incl. refreshments)
Book Now! Seating is Limited.
Joan (07) 55 703035
QLD State Government now control our water resources (illegally) and intend to add Fluoride Chemicals (Rated as S7 POISON) & Recycled Sewage to our Gold Coast drinking water by December 2008.
WHERE IS YOUR VOICE???????????
As received from www.qawf.org |
|
By: chuckanoo
31/07/2008
4:11 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
This report could help stop cavities without adding Fluoride to water.
Sugarless gummy bears may battle cavities
05:59 AEST
Thu Jul 31 2008
Reuters
Gummy bears containing a sugar substitute called Xylitol seem to reduce cavity-causing bacteria on young children's teeth suggesting, researchers say, that candy could be turned into a weapon against tooth decay.
Xylitol is a natural sweetener found in various berries, corn, birch and other plant sources.
Research has shown that the sugar substitute reduces levels of mutans streptococci (MS) bacteria, which are known to cause cavities.
This is because Xylitol differs from others sugars, like table sugar and glucose, which MS bacteria use for energy.
MS bacteria "take in" Xylitol, but can not break it down to use for fuel, explained lead investigator Dr. Kiet A. Ly of the University of Washington in Seattle.
"So in the process of trying to break down Xylitol, they expend energy and don't get any in return," Ly told Reuters Health. "That reduces their ability to reproduce and multiply and leads to a reduction in number."
Xylitol-containing chewing gum is available, but it's not considered suitable for young children.
So Ly and his colleagues tested the effects of xylitol-sweetened gummy bears in 154 elementary school children |
|
By: chuckanoo
31/07/2008
4:12 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Cont..
Each child was given four gummy bears, three times per day, during school hours.
Some children received Xylitol-containing gummy bears, while the rest were given candies sweetened with maltitol, another sugar substitute.
At the beginning of the study and six weeks later, the researchers measured the amount of bacteria in plaque samples from the children's teeth.
In the end, both the Xylitol and maltitol gummy bears reduced levels of MS bacteria in the children's mouths, the researchers report in the online journal BMC Oral Health.
According to Ly, the findings suggest that gummy bears containing either sugar substitute could benefit children's oral health.
But, he added, there has been little research on maltitol, and more study is needed to confirm the current findings.
The next step is to show that Xylitol gummy bears actually prevent cavities in young children.
Ly said he and his colleagues are collaborating on just such a study with researchers at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.
He noted that the Xylitol gummy bears were created for the current study and are not yet on the market. |
|
By: chuckanoo
5/08/2008
8:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Top fluoride expert apologises for pushing poison 05/28/00
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/fluoride-expert.htm
Dr. Limeback is Canada's leading fluoride authority and until recently, the country's primary promoter of the controversial additive. In a surprising newsmaker interview this past April, Dr. Limeback announced a dramatic change of heart. "Children under three should never use fluoridated toothpaste," he counselled. "Or drink fluoridated water. And baby formula must never be made up using Toronto tap water. Never."
"Your well-intentioned dentist is simply following 50 years of misinformation from public health and the dental association. Me, too. Unfortunately, we were wrong." |
|
By: chuckanoo
6/08/2008
4:11 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Suppression of effects
http://www.fluoridation.com/censor.htm
Suppression of data documenting fluoride's adverse health effects and lack of benefit is wide-spread. Scientists and professionals have been persecuted, censored, or harassed when they oppose water fluoridation.
Neurotoxicity of brain
http://www.fluoridation.com/brain.htm
The carefully designed animal experiment which they report revealed subtle but very real changes in behavior patterns following fluoride ingestion: hyperactivity after prenatal exposure, and cognitive deficits after weanling and adult exposure. Fluoride accumulation in important regions of the rat brain, especially the hippocampus, was found to increase as the drinking water fluoride levels increased. These effects, and the sex differences observed, corresponded to those observed in other studies of hippocampal brain damage. |
|
By: chuckanoo
9/08/2008
5:47 am Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Professor Mark Diesendorf Bsc, PhD, (Director of Sustainability Centre P/L, Adjunct Professor of Sustainability Policy at Murdoch University & Adjunct Professor in the Environmental Science Program at University of Sydney)
"Fluoridation has been discontinued or never implemented in most of Europe. Now in only 6 countries of the world are the majority of people forced to drink fluoridated water: USA, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Columbia and Singapore.
Sadly, in these countries fluoridation is promoted by unscientific propaganda by dental and medical associations that prematurely endorsed fluoridation back in the 1950s. Fluoridation is a violation of medical ethics, since it is mass medication with an uncontrolled dose. Fluoridation is a medication because it is used to treat people, not to make the water safer to drink, and because it is not an essential nutrient."
www.sustainabilitycentre. com.au |
|
By: chuckanoo
18/08/2008
4:03 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Fluoride and Children's Intelligence: A Meta-analysis.
Tang QQ,, Du J, Ma HH, Jiang SJ,, Zhou XJ
Department of Pathology, Nanjing University School of Medicine, Nanjing Jinling Hospital, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210002, People's Republic of China.
This paper presents a systematic review of the literature concerning fluoride that was carried out to investigate whether fluoride exposure increases the risk of low intelligence quotient (IQ) in China over the past 20 years. MEDLINE, SCI, and CNKI search were organized for all documents published, in English and Chinese, between 1988 and 2008 using the following keywords: fluorosis, fluoride, intelligence, and IQ. Further search was undertaken in the website www.fluorideresearch.org because this is a professional website concerning research on fluoride. Sixteen case-control studies that assessed the development of low IQ in children who had been exposed to fluoride earlier in their life were included in this review. A qualitative review of the studies found a consistent and strong association between the exposure to fluoride and low IQ. The meta-analyses of the case-control studies estimated that the odds ratio of IQ in endemic fluoride areas compared with nonfluoride areas or slight fluoride areas. The summarized weighted mean difference is -4.97 (95%confidence interval [CI] = -5.58 to -4.36; p < 0.01) using a fixed-effect model and -5.03 (95%CI = -6.51 to 3.55; p < 0.01) using a random-effect model, which means that children who live in a fluorosis area have five times higher odds of developing low IQ than those who live in a nonfluorosis area or a slight fluorosis area.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18695947?dopt=A bstractPlus |
|
By: dms.8591
28/08/2008
2:01 am Yahoo! Profile:
dms.8591 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The most scientifically rigourous fluoridation review to date is the York Review 2000 whose authors say "There is a dearth of reliable evidence with which to inform policy" and "the review did not show fluoridation to be safe".
The Victorian Health Minister wrote to our group naming two dental studies that showed that fluoridation works. When you read the studies (he obviously hadn't) they don't show that at all. One of them, "Water fluoridation and children's dental health: The Child Dental Health Survey, Australia 2002, AIHW", shows that Victorian children (majority fluoridated) aged 5-6 had the highest percentage of decidious decayed-missing-filled-te eth (dmft) in the country at 77%, whereas unfluoridated Queensland children aged 5-6 had only 64.9%. The ACT (100% fluoridated since 1964) had 50.4% of 12yo children with no DMFT, whereas unfluoridated Queensland was better at 52.3%. Tasmania had the highest levels of decay of permanent teeth nationally, yet Hobart has been fluoridated since 1964.
The dental and government organisations that say how great fluoridation is don't read the studies they cite! There is a lot of snooty professional back-slapping going on with fluoridation. If you want to look enlightened, you make some amazing claims about fluoridation's magic powers, along with a bunch of dentists who don't have time to research it themselves, and you say you're doing it for the kids. Awwww.
But wait a minute. Did anyone think to ask parents for their permission before forcibly and artificially altering the structure of a body part of our kids? Forced fluoridation is a clear case of the government stepping over the line of intrusion into our lives, adding unnecessary chemicals into our drinking water against our wills. Dentists professional reputations are also on the line when they intrude into our lives to such an extent. |
|
By: meonrhw
28/08/2008
10:51 am Yahoo! Profile:
meonrhw Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
dentists are not doctors so why are they being given the say what we have to ingest.
One of the first tests with this in an inland NSW town indicated a rise in stomach complaints but this appears to have been swept under the carpet.
The first flouride used in out water was imported from europe and was derived from comercial waste.
dentists also don't tell you that flouride impacting directly with the teeth cause them to become brittle. |
|
By: chuckanoo
29/08/2008
1:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Both Parties Need Planks to Restore Scientific Integrity at the CDC
Press Release from Fluoride Action Network
(See original article)
NEW YORK, Aug 27, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- According to the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), there is a crucial need for both parties to restore scientific integrity to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on several policies. The most egregious is their continued unscientific support for water fluoridation.
"The simplest and quickest way to restore public trust in the CDC is for both Democrats and Republicans to put a commitment to end fluoridation into their party platforms," says Paul Connett, Ph.D., FAN's Executive Director.
According to Connett, "Fluoridated water contains 250 times more fluoride than in mothers' milk. In 1950, when the Public Health Service first endorsed fluoridation, no studies had investigated possible adverse health effects. Today, many published studies show fluoride is harmful, but the CDC is ignoring these studies and continues its relentless promotion and funding of this outdated practice."
The only risk that the CDC acknowledges is dental fluorosis - a tooth discoloration - which impacts 32% of American children (1). Both the ADA and the CDC now advise that fluoridated water not be used to prepare infant formula (2,3).
According to Connett, "this marking of the enamel indicates a child has been over-exposed to fluoride. We are concerned about how fluoride may be affecting the rest of the child's body. Over 20 studies show that fluoride can lower IQ (4,5)." |
|
By: chuckanoo
29/08/2008
1:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Cont..
A 2006 National Research Council fluoride report revealed many health risks, including potential damage to the bones, brain and thyroid gland. The panel concluded that drinking fluoridated water can pose risks to those with thyroid or kidney disorders, diabetics, high water drinkers and infants and recommended that the US EPA lower their safe drinking water standard (6).
This new research has prompted over 1,800 professionals to call for an end to fluoridation worldwide (7).
Meanwhile, researchers reporting in the British Medical Journal (Oct 2007) showed that tooth decay has come down as fast in non-fluoridated countries as fluoridated ones (8).
"It is clear that the CDC's Oral Health Division is misleading the public about the safety and effectiveness of water fluoridation," says Connett.
"They must be held accountable for this. We need both political parties to resist the well-heeled dental lobby. Our children's health and the public's trust in government health agencies is at stake," says Connett.
References: http://fluoridealert.org/pr.8-27-08.html |
|
By: chuckanoo
1/09/2008
7:54 am Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Water Fluoridation - The Need for a Referendum
The Queensland Government had admitted that without the express consent of the community, water fluoridation is unethical mass medication. The public have NOT been asked to consider this option. Only a Referendum can show community consent. Source: (Queensland Government Position Statement 2003). View this document at http://qawf.org/documents/Q_GOVT_POSITION_STATEMEN T.pdf
The fluoride chemicals added to our water are not vitamins or nutrients. Instead, they are the toxic byproducts of industry (Hydofluorosilicic acid, Sodium Silicofluoride and Sodium Fluoride) which are all S6 or S7 poisons. In fact, 14 Nobel Prize Scientists have called for a ban on water fluoridation over many years.
These toxic substances are intended to medicate people in the hope of preventing tooth decay (which has been shown at best to be only half a tooth difference). It is very different to adding chlorine to treat water. Fluorides are to treat people - it is mass medication. |
|
By: chuckanoo
1/09/2008
7:59 am Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Cont..
The problem with this type of mass medication is the adulteration of our most basic requirement - the right to a healthy water supply for all. The Government will do to you what no doctor can do to anyone -
medication for a lifetime
with no assessment of need
with no knowledge of an individual's medical history
with no individual monitoring
with no allowance for pre-existing medical conditions
with no control over dose received
On the 5th December 2007, Premier Anna Bligh announced that "she" had made the decision that Queensland's public water supplies were going to be forcibly fluoridated, intending that 4 million Queenslanders will be medicated through their water supply for their whole life. The Queensland Government has also removed all liability from any harm resulting from fluoridation.
The questions you need to ask yourself are these:
"Do I want a say in my medication?"
And, "should I have the right to choose"
No politician has the right to do this, It is up to the public to choose and Referendum gives the opportunity to show public support OR NOT.
Please support the call for a Fluoride Referendum, download Petition forms at www.qawf.org
If you would like to help, please visit the QAWF website www.qawf.org read Referendum WHY?, download the Petition, and ask your work colleagues, neighbours, friends and relatives to sign. Encourage people to collect their own petition (take spare forms with you). |
|
By: chuckanoo
1/09/2008
8:00 am Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Cont..
Please bring the Petition to the attention of your local Health Food or Organic store, Naturopath, Chiropractor and other Health professionals.
Perhaps you could "adopt" a small newspaper advertisement or a 30 second radio commercial to be placed in your local area. One radio advertisement that has already played on radio can be listened to via the QAWF website. This advertisement can be placed anywhere in Queensland. Costs of small newspaper ads can range from $100 - $200. Please contact QAWF if you would like to sponsor ads or help in any other way. Please share this email.
Authorised M Haines on behalf of Queenslanders Against Water Fluoridation www.qawf.org
for more information contact
mob 0418 777 112 or email referendum@bigpond.com
or write to PO BOX 149 ARCHERFIELD 4108 |
|
By: chuckanoo
3/09/2008
5:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK
http://www.FluorideAlert.org
FAN Bulletin 1000: Video interview with Dr. A.K. Susheela
Sept 2, 2008
We celebrate our 1000th FAN bulletin with the release of a videotaped interview I had with Dr. A.K. Susheela on August 12, 2008, after the recent Toronto events. This was filmed shortly before she departed for her return trip to India. It has been uploaded to Google video and can be accessed here.
I am sure many of you will be happy to have access to this interview because some of you - and me included - were very disappointed with the sound quality on the videotape of her excellent presentation at the ISFR conference, which I distributed a few days ago (see Dr. Bruce Spittle and Dr. A.K. Susheela video).
I don't think we can possibly underestimate the importance of what Dr. Susheela has to say. Fluoride poisoning (fluorosis) is a disease she has studied for 34 years. Like many of colleagues who came before her, her interest started with the obvious manifestations of this disease on the teeth and bones - dental fluorosis and skeletal fluorosis. What she has added to this issue is the careful description and treatment of the EARLIER and REVERSIBLE manifestations of fluoride's effects on the soft tissues. She argues convincingly that if fluoride is the cause of many common complaints (stomach pains, nausea, constipation, bloated feeling, headaches, excessive tiredness, depression, aching joints etc) and these are correctly diagnosed (based on measurement of fluoride levels in the urine and serum, and hemoglobin levels) it is very easy to cure the problem. The sources of the fluoride have to be identified and removed and the patient encouraged to eat plenty of fruit and vegetables to replenish the nutrients not being absorbed. |
|
By: chuckanoo
3/09/2008
5:53 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Cont..
On the latter point, this is where Dr. Susheela has gone beyond being an effective doctor tending her patients. She has drawn on a brilliant scientific mind. With every symptom she has tried to come up with a cogent scientific explanation as to how fluoride is causing the problem. In the case of fluoride's impacts on the gastrointestinal tract one thing we know is that once fluoride ion reaches the stomach (very low pH) it forms hydrofluoric acid which can then attack the cells of the lining. To demonstrate that this is actually happening Dr. Susheela has obtained a brilliant set of electron micrographs of the mucosal lining. These demonstrate the progressive deterioration of the cells of the lining as the level of fluoride in the water being drunk goes from low, to 1.2 ppm to 3 ppm. Two things can be seen: first, the goblet cells, which produce the mucous which facilitates the movement of the waste material through the system, are damaged and less mucous is produced. This would explain the constipation. Second, the microvilli which line the cells (and provide the huge surface area needed to efficiently absorb the nutrients that we need) are progressively damaged. At 3 ppm the cells are essentially bald. Thus, with fluoride in the diet or in the water, it is difficult for those susceptible to this condition, to get all the nutrients they need into their bodies - even though they may be in their diet. This would explain low hemoglobin levels and the feeling of excessive tiredness etc. It also explains why even when some anemic women are provided iron and folic acid tablets in India their hemoglobin levels do not increase and sadly, they still produce low weight babies. They are simply not able to absorb the iron.
This is not rocket science but it is beautifully elegant stuff and is enabling Dr. A.K. Susheela to help hundreds of pregnant women to increase their hemoglobin levels and have normal weight babies. That is the good news. |
|
By: chuckanoo
3/09/2008
5:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The bad news is that because doctors in the West have been indoctrinated by "professional" organizations like the American Dental Association, Australian Dental Association, British Dental Association, etc., into believing that ingesting fluoride is good for teeth and harmless for the rest of the body, they have never learned anything about fluoride's toxic effects. Thus the disease of "fluorosis" goes unnoticed until the damage becomes visible (dental fluorosis) and then it is dismissed as "merely a cosmetic effect." Consequently, fluoride is completely off the doctors' radar screen when their patients report these common complaints. Worse still, even when patients suspect fluoride is the cause, doctors and hospitals do not have ready access to labs that could measure the fluoride in the patient's blood or urine.
Estimates of the number of people who are being daily damaged by fluoride and going undiagnosed and untreated ranges from 1 - 4%. With upwards of 400 million people drinking artificially fluoridated water around the world that works out to be a potential of 1 to 4 million people being UNNECESSARILY harmed every day. What is the Hippocratic commandment again? First Do No Harm! |
|
By: chuckanoo
3/09/2008
5:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
chuckanoo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Cont..
When your bottle fed baby won't stop crying it may -or may not - mean that the fluoride in the tap water used to make up the formula is attacking his or her delicate stomach and intestinal lining.
Please share this video with your doctor and ask him or her to help end this foolish, unethical - and totally unscientific - practice of adding fluoride to our drinking water (remember 1 ppm is not small - it is 250 times the level found in human breast milk: 1 ppm versus 0.004 ppm). One way they can help is to sign the Professionals' Statement calling for an end to fluoridation worldwide, and another way is to discuss this issue with colleagues and at professional meetings. It is time the silent acquiescence was ended. They should also be encouraged to check out the 23 studies that link exposure to fluoride in high natural areas and lowered IQ in children - see Tang et al., 2008.
Again, I would welcome your feedback on this videotape.
Paul Connett
PS If you appreciate the work of the Fluoride Action Network please consider making a small financial donation to help us continue our work at our secure link. |
|
