Tooth Decay?

Questions overlooked in flouridated water

Over 45,360 cities, that’s approximately 226 million people, are subject to a mandatory fluoridation of their drinking water. Though many believe that fluoride is good for you, there are a substantial amount of people standing up against this mandatory fluoridation.

Some of these critics point to a Harvard study that came out on Dec. 30, 2011, before it was accepted on July 20, 2012. The study proves that the consumption of fluoride has no beneficial effect on the body. Actually on the contrary, fluoride is toxic at 1.0 parts per million (ppm), and a Harvard study shows that fluoride, a known neurotoxin, ingested at a young age in large quantities causes IQ reduction. At such a young age the brain is susceptible to many toxins that can cause devastating effects.

Now, this is not always the case. Not every young child has been affected, as is obvious, but any avoidable percentage of people is desirable.

Fluoride is not the only chemical put in the water for medical treatment. Many of the people against fluoridation are aware of the most dangerous of the concoction of chemicals injected into the municipal water; hydrofluorosilicic acid, also known as hexafluorosilicic acid. Hydrofluorosilicic acid is also commonly used for water fluoridation in several countries including the United States, the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. In the United States, about 40,000 tons of hydrofluorosilicic acid is recovered from phosphoric acid plants.

Hydrofluorosilicic acid releases hydrogen fluoride when evaporated, so it has similar risks. It is corrosive and may cause fluoride poisoning. Inhalation of the vapors may cause lung edema.

Also, fluoride excess is sometimes stored in the bones, which is linked to weak bones. The results of more than five studies indicate increased bone fractures in both naturally and artificially fluoridated areas. The incidence of bone fracture is also increasing more rapidly than can be accounted for by aging of the population. There are numerous studies, including Harvard study, which undeniably prove that fluoride’s cumulative effect on bone is devastating.

It is well known that chronic ingestion of fluoride, which in this day and age is almost impossible to counter unless you buy an expensive and advanced water filter, can cause osteofluorosis or skeletal fluorosis, a crippling bone disease.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration classifies fluoride as “A drug, because it is used to prevent or mitigate disease. As a matter of basic logic, adding fluoride to the water for the sole purpose of preventing tooth decay.” On an aside, tooth decay is not a waterborne disease, but they add fluoride as a form of medical treatment. All other water treatment chemicals are added to improve the water’s quality, which fluoride does not.

Another argument is that the fluoridation of public water is unethical. As a standard of medical practice, informed consent is a key moral right of the patient, or in this case 226 million people. For this reason, most of western Europe has ruled against the mandatory fluoridation of the drinking water.

Another reason against fluoridation is that it’s impossible to control the dosage. Once it’s dispersed in the public water, it’s up to the person to understand the toxic dosage of fluoride. Different people drink different amounts of water.

For example, construction workers consume much more water than a desk clerk. It is the moral reasoning for any doctor (or in this case city or state government) to inform the patient of the toxicity, what it is and how much the patient is consuming.

A Nobel Peace Prize winner for medicine, Dr. Arvid Carlsson, is even against the forced fluoridation of citizens. “I would advise against fluoridation. … Side-effects cannot be excluded. … In Sweden, the emphasis nowadays is to keep the environment as clean as possible with regard to pharmacologically active and, thus, potentially toxic substances.”

So even the Nobel Peace Prize winner of medicine is taking a stand against fluoridated water. Recently many cities across the nation are standing up against the forced fluoridation of the municipal water. Portland, Ore., is fighting for clean water after being the longest standing city to not fluoridate its water. In 2010 Portland held a quiet city meeting to fluoridate the water, telling the public afterwards that it had decided to fluoridate the water. Immediately the people started complaining about the fluoride. Although Portland is still fighting, this may be another victory for the people.

To bring this home, Cedar Falls fluoridates its water. On the Cedar Falls website, continuing on to the utility page, states, “The Municipal Water Utility was formed in 1888. Cedar Falls’ water comes from eight groundwater wells drawing from the Silurian-Devonian limestone aquifer. The wells range in depth from 147 to 275 feet. The water from this source is of such high quality that little treatment is needed; only chlorine and fluoride are added at the well sites. CFU’s water distribution system includes four towers and 199 miles of water mains.”

Do we want fluoride in our drinking water? Do the Cedar Falls citizens agree with the forced fluoridation of our children, elderly, parents and everyone who doesn’t have the time or the resources to filter out the fluoride with the expensive filters mentioned earlier? Do we want to be forced to take a pharmacological, known to cause a drop in IQ and other ailments?

I believe that fluoride should be taken out immediately, but that means any people on the side of non-fluoridation need to take action and show what democracy really means.