Fluoride Action Network

Crescent City. Coastal Voices: Myriad reasons to dump fluoride

Source: The Daily Triplicate | Kelly helped spearhead the effort to put Measure A on the city ballot Nov. 2. She is a Crescent City resident.
Posted on October 20th, 2010

As a sponsor of Measure A that will appear on the Nov. 2 ballot, my first reaction in writing this article was to answer every one of the exaggerations and false claims that have been proposed by the so-called “health experts” who endorse the public policy.

But the exaggerations are so unbelievable and the denials of any evidence of adverse effects so absolute, that anyone taken in by those assurances may be shocked by the tremendous amount of contrary information at hand with just a simple Google search.

What you will find includes the Journal of the American Dental Association cover story in July 2000 that clarified for every dentist that the swallowing of fluoride presents no significant benefit, that if there is a benefit it would be from applying it to the surface of the tooth; or the CDC’s famous 2001 declaration that fluoridation was one of the top 10 achievements of the 20th century, but on page 4 of the same report CDC declares there is no correlation between fluoride incorporated in the enamel of teeth due to ingestion and the incidence of tooth decay.

Whoa! Shouldn’t this have halted fluoridation? Well not necessarily, because the support of fluoridation by seemingly prestigious groups was not about fact, it was about endorsements of the public policy goal.

But the dirty little secret is not that these groups who present themselves as being authorities in this arena didn’t do their homework and go beyond the grand idea of saving children’s teeth with a magical bullet. The dirty little secret is that if the proponents described the wondrous and magical nature of fluoride compounds and how they are incorporated in our everyday world, no one would think twice about drinking the stuff.

Take a look yourself: Fluorine is the element that is coupled together with another element to create a fluoride compound. Fluorine is the most negatively charged element in the world, the most aggressive seeker of another electron, the most interactive of all elements, and in short, the bully of the periodical chart. A friend of mine calls it promiscuous because it will readily give up what it is with to be with something it likes better.

Industry prizes fluoride compounds for their ability to disrupt molecular bonds; their ability to create tighter molecular bonds; their ability to inhibit enzyme activity and other pharmaceutical applications; and their corrosive uses.

Examples of disrupting molecular bonds: refining many heavy metals; separating lead and copper from brass; “cracking” petroleum products; cleaning and erasing computer chips; making ceramics more porous; etching glass; and the wartime secret of uranium hexafluoride separating the uranium isotopes that made the atomic bomb.

Examples of tighter molecular bonds: Scotchgard, Teflon, GoreTex, and the fluoride rinses to prevent products from penetrating packaging for longer shelf-life.

Inhibiting enzymes and pharmaceutical applications: Prozac, Zoloft, and almost all psychotropic drugs; almost all of the general anesthesias; Rohypnol, the date rape drug creating forced amnesia; Fen-Phen, the diet drug taken off of the market for heart valve damage; and of course the treatment of choice in the 1930s to slow down a hyperactive thyroid was to bathe in fluoridated water for 20 minutes’ exposure through the skin.

Or maybe the proponents could convince you to want it in your water by explaining how powerful sodium aluminum fluoride (Cryolite) is as a pesticide on lettuce, tomatoes, potatoes, grapes, raisins, and fruits, or how effective sulfuryl fluoride is for tent-fumigating for termites or imported nuts.

How to cut through the rhetoric? Do your own due diligence, but know that the fluoride that is injected in Crescent City water is hydrofluosilicic acid, not these other fluorides. Ask the “smartest expert” in the room to produce a toxicological study on the health and behavioral effects of continued use of the “it” that is actually injected into the water.

Hint: U.S. EPA told a Congressional investigation in 2000 that they couldn’t identify even one chronic toxicological study for hydrofluosilicic acid. The first was published in April 2010, showing higher lead concentrations in children’s blood.

The nature of fluoride doesn’t change because you swallow it. Vote “yes” on Measure A to manage your own health and decide for yourself. Visit www.delnortecleanwater.org to learn more about what we’re really putting in our water.