| 
F.A.N.'s 2nd Citizens' Conference on Fluoride
(July 28 - August 1, 2006) - Click
photo for larger image
NEW!
Conference Featured in American Chemical Society magazine
The 2nd Citizens' Conference on Fluoride: A Summary
by Paul Connett, PhD,
Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network
84 people from 23 states, DC and 3 provinces in Canada, gathered
over the weekend of July 29-30 to attend the Second Citizens' Conference
on Fluoride. The conference was held on the beautiful campus of
St. Lawrence University in Canton, located in Northern New York
State.
In addition to several other important speakers, the audience at
this 2-day conference heard at length from three members of the
National Research Council (Dr. Bob Isaacson, Dr. Kathleen
Thiessen and Dr. Hardy Limeback)
which on March 22, 2006 had published a 450 page review entitled
"Fluoride
in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards".
The NRC panel concluded that the current safe drinking water standards
were not protective of health and that the MCLG (Maximum Contaminant
Level Goal) of 4 ppm should be lowered. The NRC called on the US
EPA to carry out a health risk assessment to determine what that
new MCLG should be. It was this panel's findings and recommendations
which largely shaped the conference.
The conference opened on Saturday morning with a presentation by
Dr. Kathleen Thiessen who gave an overview of the
multiple risks fluoride poses to the endocrine system, including
the thyroid and parathyroid glands, the pineal gland and the pancreas.
According to Dr. Thiessen, and the NRC report, there is sufficient
scientific evidence to classify fluoride as an “endocrine
disrupter”, although more research needs to be conducted to
determine the doses, circumstances, and mechanisms that cause the
effects. (Read transcript of FAN's
interview with Dr. Thiessen)
Thiessen's talk was followed by part 1 of Dr. Bob Isaacson's
two talks on the brain. In the first part Isaacson gave
an overview of the evolution and functioning of the brain and in
the second part he addressed some the specific actions of fluoride
on the brain and several other systems. This included a discussion
of his own group's findings (Varner et al, 1998) that rats exposed
to fluoride in their water at 1 ppm had an increased uptake of aluminum
into their brains along with the formation of beta amyloid deposits
characteristic of Alzheimer's disease. According to Isaacson, “our
studies show that very, very low doses of aluminum fluoride, and
sodium fluoride, have extraordinarily important negative effects
upon the operation of the brain.” Isaacson concluded his presentation
with evidence supporting an association between exposure to fluoridated
water and Down’s syndrome births among young mothers.
Between the two parts of Dr. Isascson's talk on the brain, Chris
Neurath gave an overview of the studies exploring the possible
association between fluoride and cancer, particularly the association
with childhood osteosarcoma, a rare but frequently fatal bone cancer.
Neurath’s presentation culminated with a discussion of Elise
Bassin's thesis at Harvard in 2001 and its eventual publication
in May 2006. Neurath gave some of the specifics of FAN's discovery
of Bassin's thesis and how her adviser at the Harvard Dental School,
Professor Chester Douglass, had tried to keep her findings hidden
from the scientific community and his funders. Neurath responded
to some of the criticisms of Bassin's thesis and explained the more
serious limitations of the long-awaited study by Douglass, Hoover
and Whitford, which is still not published but is widely seen as
an attempt to "counter" Bassin's findings. (See
copy of Neurath's presentation)
On Saturday afternoon, Dr. Donald Taves gave a
presentation on how to break the impasse on the fluoridation debate.
Taves has been involved in the fluoridation issue for over 50 years,
first as a health officer in California, then as a researcher at
the University of Rochester and then as a commentator. He authored
the fluoride section on the National Academy of Sciences report
“Drinking Water and Health” in 1977. In his presentation,
Taves outlined the studies he felt would prove once and for all
whether fluoridation was safe and effective. Based on the available
evidence, Taves said he does not think new fluoridation programs
should be promoted where they do not currently exist, although he’s
not yet convinced that fluoridation programs already in place should
be terminated.
Following Taves, a panel of dentists (Dr. Bill Osmunsen,
Dr. David Kennedy and Dr. Hardy Limeback) explained how
they moved from their previous pro-fluoridation positions to being
officially opposed to the practice.
The first day concluded with a presentation by Jeff Green.
Jeff is the Executive Director of Citizens for Safe Drinking Water.
He described the methods and rationale for the "safe drinking
water" initiatives being pursued in different parts of the
country. He explained that these initiatives did not focus on fluoride
specifically but rather on "the inalienable right of citizens
to clean water" and the legal requirements that need to be
instituted when it comes to adding anything to the water
designed to treat people rather than the water itself.
Sunday began with a moving opening ceremony conducted by Henry
Lickers, a biologist and Director of the Akwesasne Environmental
Task Force. The first scientific presentation was then given by
Dr. Hardy Limeback, who is Head of Preventive Dentistry
at the University of Toronto, a former President of the Canadian
Association for Dental Research, and a practicing dentist as well.
After describing the harassment he received after publicly changing
his position on fluoridation, Limeback discussed the damage fluoride
causes to both teeth and bone. (See
copy of Dr. Limeback's presentation)
Following Limeback's presentation, the three NRC panel members
were joined by several other participants (Dr. Albert Burgstahler;
Dr. William Hirzy; FAN researcher Chris Neurath; Dr. Donald Taves
and Dr. Paul Connett) for a two hour discussion on the
relevance of their review to the issue of water fluoridation. All
participants in this discussion were in agreement that - contrary
to assertions made by the CDC and the ADA – the NRC report
was extremely relevant to water fluoridation. Both Limeback and
Isaacson recommended a new MCLG of zero and Thiessen discussed standard
margin of safety calculations which would yield a new MCLG less
than 1 ppm for several of the end points discussed in the NRC review,
particularly for lowered thyroid function.
On Sunday afternoon, Dr. Ella Haley, who teaches
sociology in Alberta, recounted her long involvement with fluoride
pollution from the phosphate fertilizer industry. She wrote her
PhD thesis on the topic and for several years has helped an impacted
community in Alberta. She was followed by Henry Lickers,
who described both the physical and cultural damage that fluoride
emissions from nearby Aluminum smelters had wreaked on the Akwesasne
nation on Cornwall island which is located in the St. Lawrence River
between the US and Canada.
Next Dr William Hirzy, who is Vice-President of
the Union that represents professionals at the EPA HQ in DC, explained
the need for Congress to become involved in investigating the reasons
why civil servants at the CDC continue to avidly promote water fluoridation
even while more and more evidence mounts of the dangers of this
practice. He also stressed the need to support his union's call
for the EPA to conduct an honest reassessment of the MCLG for fluoride
and do it in a timely manner. (See text
of Dr. Hirzy's presentation)
Hirzy was followed by Michael Connett, who discussed
the controversy over the EPA's recent approval of Dow AgroSciences'
use of sulfuryl fluoride as a fumigant on food in warehouses and
processing plants. Connett explained that sulfuryl fluoride breaks
down to free fluoride ion and as a result the EPA had approved very
large new tolerances (residues) to accommodate this use. These include
70 ppm on all processed foods, 130 ppm on wheat flour, and 900 ppm
on powdered eggs. Connett further explained that the health risk
assessment conducted by the EPA on these tolerances was based entirely
on the safety of the MCLG of 4 ppm, which the NRC panel has described
as unprotective of health. Connett also explained how the EPA Pesticide
Division manipulated the MCLG, “making a bad standard even
worse,” by increasing the allowable safe dosage for children
twice during their risk assessment, resulting in a safe dosage for
infants that is ten times higher than it was previously, and ten
times higher than it currently is for adults. Connett concluded
by giving the details of the petition by FAN, the Environmental
Working Group and Beyond Pesticides to revoke EPA’s approval
of sulfuryl fluoride as a food fumigant. (See
Connett's Power Point presentation)
Then Cathy Justus, a horse farmer from Pagosa
Springs, Colorado, explained the health problems (including debilitating
colic and arthritis) that her horses experienced after water in
her community was fluoridated. Her talk was illustrated with some
disturbing photos and video. (See
research paper documenting Cathy Justus' experience)
The Sunday sessions were completed by Dr. Deborah Moore,
the Director of Second Look. She explained some of the recent activities
of her group including the Fluoride Toxicity Research Collaborative.
Moore introduced Aliss Terpstra who is part of
that collaborative. Aliss was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan, the
first city in the US to fluoridate its water. She currently resides
in Toronto. Both she and her children have experienced health problems
from fluoride exposures, and she explained how the vast majority
of doctors are completely ignorant of the damage that fluoride can
cause to those, like her, who are hypersensitive to this substance.
She concluded by giving the details of the Fluoride Illness Handbook
she is putting together to help both afflicted citizens and doctors
understand their symptoms, so that this condition can be recognized
more quickly and treated more rationally.
Finally the meeting came to an end with a closing ceremony by Henry
Lickers.
In summary, I think it's fair to say that this conference lived
up to its endorsement from consumer Ralph Nader.
According to a statement issued before
the conference, Nader wrote:
"Attendance of scientists from the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and three of the National Research Council's panel
members, among others, makes the Fluoride Action Network's conference
more than ordinary. The NRC's review of the EPA's safe drinking
water standards and the Harvard study on fluoridation and osteosarcoma
this past May provide contemporary material for opening the public
debate further and deeper.... May this conference do so with the
open mind that is the essence of the scientific attitude and the
underlying principles of democratic decision-making in the open."
News Articles on Conference:
Fluoride
Risks Still a Challenge - Chemical & Engineering
News, September 4, 2006
Fluoride
Fixation - NOW Magazine, July 27, 2006
Scientist
to speak in Canton about fluoride risks - Watertown
Daily Times, July 25, 2006
Selected Materials from Conference:
Fluoride & Human Health
- An Interview with Dr. Kathleen Thiessen
Fluoride & the Endocrine
System (power point file) - Dr. Kathleen Thiessen,
Senior Scientist, Center for Risk Analysis, SENES Oak Ridge Inc.
The Fluoride-Cancer Connection:
History & Current Science - Chris Neurath,
FAN Researcher
How Fluoride Damages the Teeth
of All Ages (pdf file) - Dr. Hardy Limeback, University
of Toronto
Unfinished Business: Congress and Fluoride
(pdf file) - Dr. J. William Hirzy, Vice President, EPA Headquarters
Union
The Case Against Sulfuryl Fluoride
(power point file) - Michael Connett, Project Director, Fluoride
Action Network
Fluoride
Poisoning of Horses from Artificially Fluoridated Drinking Water
(pdf file) - Cathy Justus & Dr. Lennart Krook
|