Moms2B Avoid Fluoride
During pregnancy Moms know to protect their babies by avoiding
- smoking
- alcohol
- medications
- raw meat and seafood
- high-mercury fish
AND NOW WE SHOULD ADD
- fluoride in water, food, and drinks
Why add fluoride to the list?
In 2017, a 12-year-long government-funded study was completed. It showed significant reductions in children’s IQ when their mothers were exposed to fluoride during pregnancy. In this carefully-controlled study of Mexican mother-offspring pairs by American and Canadian researchers, mothers were receiving the same fluoride doses as mothers in the US who live in communities that add fluoride dental treatment to their water.
What should pregnant women know about this study?
The results of the 2017 study by Bashash et al. included up to 299 pregnant women and their offspring. Fluoride exposure was determined by measuring fluoride in the urine of the pregnant women because that is a very reliable measure of total fluoride exposure. The researchers found a correlation between the urine fluoride of the pregnant mothers and a loss of up to 6 IQ points in their children when the children were tested at age 4 and again between 6-12 years of age. This study was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives in September 2017.
Is there another mother-offspring study?
Yes, a second study by Thomas et al. was presented at a conference in March 2018. The researchers reported lower IQ scores due to prenatal fluoride exposure when the children were tested between the ages of 1 and 3.
Is this new information?
Yes. While there are another 53 published studies reporting an association of fluoride exposure with a lowering of IQ in children, and over 200 animal-fluoride studies reporting damage to the brain and reduced learning and memory ability, the surprise came with the release of these mother-offspring fluoride studies. Why? Because they have clearly demonstrated, for the first time, that pregnancy is the most critical period for exposure to fluoride. The fetus now ranks as the most vulnerable of our species to fluoride’s toxicity.
Pregnant women should know about these studies in order to take the necessary steps to protect their child’s brain.
Who funded these studies?
The two mother-offspring studies were funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
For more info on these studies use the links
in the Select-a-Topic at the top
How is a pregnant woman exposed to fluoride?
Fluoride is added to approximately 70% of public drinking water systems across the U.S. as non-consensual dental treatment. Exposure to fluoride mainly occurs by ingestion or inhalation. The greatest exposure to fluoride for the majority of Americans comes from drinking fluoridated water and using it in food preparation to make soups, rice, coffee, tea, infant formula, etc. Fluoride also has many industrial uses, so living close to a fluoride/fluorine emitting industry is also a concern. For more information on industrial releases, see the EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory for fluorides.
What water should I drink if I am pregnant? — Find out here
Questions & Concerns? Check out the Q & A
New Study on Neurotoxic Effects of Fluoridation – Pregnant Mothers Produce Children with Cognitive Defects
There are many studies showing the neurotoxic effects of flouridation. The latest study show mothers who drink flouridated water product children with lower IQ.
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/ehp655/
See also a summary article.
Michael Davis Reports After 16 Years with the EPA
A Statement For GeoengineeringWatch.org From Scientist Michael Davis
My name is Michael Davis, I was employed as an Environmental Engineer for nearly 16 years in the National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) Programs Branch of the Water Division in Region 5, Chicago of the USEPA. I was terminated as a public servant performing a public service for raising the issues of anthropogenic deposition of aluminum due to atmospheric geoengineering.
Geoengineered skies, Woodland, Michigan. Photo credit: Kacy Blair
In addition, I brought up the industrial hazardous waste byproduct of fluoride known as HFSA (being sold primarily by the phosphate fertilizer and aluminum industries) to drinking water utilities for disposal into the nation’s drinking water systems. This does not include pollutants that are discharged from wastewater reclamation facilities into receiving waters.
The issue regarding anthropogenic deposition of aluminum due to atmospheric geoengineering came up in May 2013 when a colleague in the NPDES Programs Branch sent a general email to everyone regarding “NPDES and Climate Change”. I sent a six (6) bullet point one – sentence response to my colleague. Nearly six (6) weeks later my supervisor (at the time) set up a conference call to inform me that I would be receiving a Letter of Reprimand for making false, malicious and unfounded statements against colleagues, supervisors, management and elected public servants. Furthermore, my then supervisor claimed that my statements damaged the integrity and reputation of the agency.
In April, 2014, my last supervisor assigned me to the Beloit, Wisconsin wastewater reclamation facility DRAFT permit review. I asked the permit writer why fluoride (a poison) was be disposed of in Beloit’s drinking water supply? She could not provide an explanation. Approximately two (2) weeks later my supervisor placed a “gag order” on me barring me from having any communication written or verbal with anyone unless he approved ahead of time and was present on all conference calls. It was claimed by my supervisor (and management) that the “gag order” would remain in place to prevent me from making statements that would further damage the integrity and reputation of the agency.
Furthermore, my supervisor kept giving me assignments like Beloit, Wisconsin where fluoride, along with other pollutants knowing that I would describe the adverse human, animal health effects along with adverse environmental effects of them in my DRAFT Permit review reports. The adverse human, animal and environmental effects were completely ignored by my supervisor.
This was even more profound when it came to the issue of fluoride as HFSA being deposited into the drinking water system. This is in violation of (1) EPA’s Policy on Scientific Integrity, (2) The Precautionary Principle, (3) 5 U.S.C. §2302(b)(8) and (4) Informed Consent. My supervisor informed me that the EPA does not regulate fluoride in the drinking water systems under either the Clean Water Act (CWA) or the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). However, FDA under Health and Human Services (HHS) regulated fluoride in the drinking water systems.
I eventually crafted a general description of the adverse human and animal health effects in an email to my supervisor and upper level management. Initially was ignored by all of them. I had to send the original descriptive email several times over about a six (6) month period of time before I received a reply from the water division director who just parroted the corporate agenda pertaining to fluoride disposal into the nation’s drinking water systems.
The label in the photo above should be shocking to any that are even slightly awake. Highly toxic industrial waste that is officially labelled as a “drinking water additive”.
In doing my own research into the issue of anthropogenic deposition of aluminum from atmospheric geoengineering (as well as fluoride and other pollutants) in an attempt to determine why there was strong opposition from my supervisor and the EPA in general it this (factual reports on the issues). It is because the EPA wants to continue their cover-up, collusion, and criminality pertaining to pollution and contamination being perpetrated by their puppet masters, the multinational corporations.
The EPA (like the FDA, CDC, etc) is a complete sham. Because the “P” in EPA stands for protection of corporate profits and not for protecting human, animal and environmental (or biosphere) health. The EPA like other governmental regulatory agencies are corrupt to the core, completely dysfunctional and have been completely hijacked by the multinational corporations. I will not allow any of my ex – supervisors, ex – branch chiefs, ex – divisions directors, ex – EPA acting regional administrator or ex – EPA administrator or other individuals either identified or unidentified to get away contaminating our one and only biosphere (soil, water and air), and causing untold adverse human and animal health effects.
Pseudoscience: The Use of Flouride in the Water Supply
The evidence continues to accumulate that flouride increases diabetes and ADHD and decreases IQ significantly when used at levels seen in the water supply. We have known this for 20 years, but progress against the flouride lobby has been slow, similar to the multi-decade battle against the tobacco industry where physicians were appearing in smoking ads saying smoking was good for you and lobbyists were arguing that there was insufficient scientific data to prove smoking was harmful, despite the fact that the tobacco companies had suppressed their own scientific studies showing smoking caused lung cancer. Futhermore, most of the flouride in water is industrial waste imported from China and is not food grade flouride, nor it is an approved medication by the FDA. If laws were strictly enforced it would be illegal to put industrial toxic waste in water and flouride in water is illegal in most western countries, the U.S. and Ireland being glaring exceptions.
Dr. Wright provides a summary of recent research on flouride in the January 2017 edition of Green Medicine.
“Community water fluoridation predicts increase in age-adjusted incidence and prevalence of diabetes in 22 states from 2005 and 2010.” That’s a very large amount of data, and rather difficult to contradict; so far no one has tried. At present, the strategy of public health “authorities” is to ignore these three reports (and many others about the adverse effects of water fluoridation), and very likely do what they can to make sure there’s little to no publicity.
Parents reported higher rates of medically diagnosed ADHD in their children in states in which a greater proportion of people receive fluoridated water from public water supplies.
The IQ-point loss caused by fluoride in the water was reported by a group of researchers from—no kidding—the Harvard School of Public Health, the School of Medicine at Mt. Sinai (New York), and the University of Southern Denmark. They reported that high fluoride exposure was associated with a 0.45 reduction in the standardized mean difference (SMD) in intelligence. Some fluoridation proponents have mistakenly interpreted this to mean that a half-point reduction in SMD equates to a half-point reduction in IQ. This, however, is NOT the case. As the research team confirmed, a reduction of 0.45 SMD is “approximately equivalent to seven IQ points for commonly used IQ scores.”
The ADHD researchers summarized their findings in just one sentence: “Parents reported higher rates of medically diagnosed ADHD in their children in states in which a greater proportion of people receive fluoridated water from public water supplies.”
The National Academies Press published a comprehensive reviews of Flouride in Drinking Water in 2006 and recommended lowering flouride exposure to reduce flourosis, particularly in children, and more studies on the impact of flouride on IQ and other health problems. There is enough scientific data available now to make a decision to stop drinking flouride.
The best way to deal with this is to avoid all substances containing flouride and to install a whole house filtration system that eliminates flouride from your showers and drinking water. This will also eliminate many other toxic substances regularly found in public drinking water. Even then frequencies available to subscribers need to be run regularly to eliminate flouride due to exposure to flouride in our contaminated food and beverage supply.
Fluoride Supplements Banned by the FDA?
On January 13, 2016, the FDA issued a Warning Letter to a pharmaceutical company (Kirkman Industries, Inc.), ordering the company to “discontinue marketing all of the unapproved prescription drugs manufactured at [the] facility immediately.” The unapproved prescription drugs that FDA identified were fluoride “supplements.”
Fluoride supplements are sodium fluoride containing drops, tablets, and lozenges that are sold for the purpose of preventing tooth decay. FDA’s Warning Letter makes clear that marketing fluoride supplements as cavity preventatives violates federal law because the FDA has never approved fluoride supplements as safe and effective for this purpose.
The FDA’s Warning Letter is a commendable step in the right direction, but FDA should not limit its enforcement action against fluoride supplements to Kirkman, as there are other,larger companies that are currently making and selling the very same fluoride supplements, and these drugs are being sold throughout the country by the nation’s four largest pharmacies:Walgreens, CVS, Rite Aid, and Walmart. Each and every one of the issues that FDA identified with Kirkman’s fluoride supplements applies with equal force to the fluoride supplements being manufactured and sold by these companies.
The unlawful actions of fluoride supplement manufacturers and sellers are unnecessarily placing millions of children in harm’s way.
An overwhelming body of evidence shows that fluoride works topically, not by ingestion, so there is no need for children to be swallowing *any* fluoride, whether in drops, tablets, or any other form. The prestigious Cochrane Collaboration has concluded that fluoride supplements are ineffective and unnecessary.
Fluoride supplements are not just ineffective, they’re dangerous. Fluoride is now classified as a developmental neurotoxin andendocrine disrupting substance. Ingesting fluoride during early childhood poses serious potential risks to brain development and thyroid health, as well as other harm, including dental fluorosis, bone fragility, and osteosarcoma.
The problem today is not under-exposure to fluoride, but over-exposure. The most recent national survey by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control shows that up to 64% of adolescents now have dental fluorosis, with up to 29% of children having advanced forms of this condition. Fluorosis is a visible mineralization defect of tooth enamel caused by excessive fluoride intake, which can be disfiguring when present on a child’s front teeth.
Rather than continuing to increase children’s intake of fluoride, the urgent need now is to find ways to reduce it. Removing unapproved, ineffective, and dangerous fluoride supplements from the market is one important and obvious way to do so.
The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) & International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (IAOMT) have filed a petition with the FDA calling on the Agency to take action against all companies selling these drugs. Please sign this letter to tell FDA that you agree!
All signatures collected will be uploaded to the FDA website before the comment deadline on the Petition.
Pseudoscience: Flouride is Good for You!
Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity Dr Philippe Grandjean, MDcorrespondenceemail, Philip J Landrigan, MD
Published Online: 14 February 2014
Summary
Neurodevelopmental disabilities, including autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and other cognitive impairments, affect millions of children worldwide, and some diagnoses seem to be increasing in frequency. Industrial chemicals that injure the developing brain are among the known causes for this rise in prevalence. In 2006, we did a systematic review and identified five industrial chemicals as developmental neurotoxicants: lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, arsenic, and toluene. Since 2006, epidemiological studies have documented six additional developmental neurotoxicants—manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers. We postulate that even more neurotoxicants remain undiscovered. To control the pandemic of developmental neurotoxicity, we propose a global prevention strategy. Untested chemicals should not be presumed to be safe to brain development, and chemicals in existing use and all new chemicals must therefore be tested for developmental neurotoxicity. To coordinate these efforts and to accelerate translation of science into prevention, we propose the urgent formation of a new international clearinghouse.
Pseudoscience: ADA Spokesperson Makes False Statements About NRC Study of Thyroid
Politics trumps science anytime money is involved. As new scientific journal articles continue to roll out on brain damage, tooth damage, thyroid damage, and other negative side effects of a toxic carcinogen like flouride, the so-called scientific proponents of flouride distort or ignore the findings. And our so-called health sites like WebMD promote the disinformation. Fortunately, some of the scientists doing the real studies are starting to complain about the nonsense inflicted on the American public.
See flouridealert.org for more complete documentation:
A spokesperson for the American Dental Association made an inaccurate statement in the media recently while criticizing the latest study showing hypothyroidism’s link to fluoridation.
Dr. Edmond Hewlett, ADA spokesman and a professor at the UCLA School of Dentistry has been quoted by numerous publications discounting the study, stating that other studies have not uncovered a link between fluoridated water and thyroid problems, saying:
“the 2006 report by the U.S. National Research Council (NRC) found no adverse effects on the thyroid even at levels more than four times greater than that used in fluoridation.”
The quote appeared in a number of articles including those by the Chicago Tribune,HealthDay, and WebMD. It’s an absolutely false statement, as FAN’s NRC Thyroid webpage makes very clear. What isn’t clear is whether Dr. Hewlett intentionally lied when making the statement, or if he just lacked the knowledge to make an accurate statement on the matter.
Kathleen Thiessen, Ph.D., who was one of the authors of the 2006 NRC report on fluoride, responded to the inaccurate statement with the following letter to the author of the HealthDay article that quoted Dr. Hewlett:
Regarding a recent HealthDay article by Alan Mozes, which has been used by the Chicago Tribune, WebMD, and probably others:
The article on fluoride and underactive thyroid, reporting on a recent publication by Stephen Peckham et al., quotes a representative of the American Dental Association as saying that “the 2006 report by the U.S. National Research Council found no adverse effects on the thyroid even at levels more than four times greater than that used in fluoridation.” This statement by the ADA spokesman is demonstrably inaccurate.
From the NRC report
pp. 262-263: Fluoride exposure in humans is associated with elevated TSH concentrations, increased goiter prevalence, and altered T4 and T3 concentrations. . . In humans, effects on thyroid function were associated with fluoride exposures of 0.05-0.13 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was adequate and 0.01-0.03 mg/kg/day when iodine intake was inadequate.
p. 260: The major endocrine effects of fluoride exposures reported in humans include elevated TSH with altered concentrations of T3 and T4. . . . These effects are summarized in Tables 8-1 and 8-2, together with the approximate intakes or physiological fluoride concentrations that have been typically associated with them thus far. Table 8-2 shows that several of the effects are associated with average or typical fluoride intakes of 0.05-0.1 mg/kg/day (0.03 with iodine deficiency). . . . A comparison with Chapter 2 (Tables 2-13, 2-14, and 2-15) will show that the 0.03-0.1 mg/kg/day range will be reached by persons with average exposures at fluoride concentrations of 1-4 mg/L in drinking water, especially the children. The highest intakes (>0.1 mg/kg/d) will be reached by some individuals with high water intakes at 1 mg/L. . . .
also
p. 266: Fluoride is therefore an endocrine disruptor.
p. 234: Thus, several lines of information indicate an effect of fluoride exposure on thyroid function.
(Note: I was one of the authors of the 2006 NRC report. The NRC report is available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/
Kathleen Thiessen, Ph.D.
Oak Ridge Center for Risk Analysis, Inc.
You might also be interested in:
Harvard IQ Researchers Respond to Pro-Fluoridation Criticism
The authors of the 2012 Harvard Meta-analysis that highlighted fluoride’s role as a developmental neurotoxin, Philippe Grandjean, MD, PhD, and Anna Choi, ScD, have written a letter responding to pro-fluoridation criticism of their work by Dr. Jonathan Broadbent. Broadbent’s counter-study and Grandjean’s letter in response were both published in the American Journal of Public Health. In his response Grandjean states,
“We are therefore concerned that the safety of elevated fluoride exposure is being exaggerated in ways similar to those employed by vested interests to misconstrue the scientific evidence of other neurotoxicants, such as lead, mercury, and certain pesticides. Firm dismissal of fluoride as a potential neurotoxic hazard would seem premature.”
This isn’t the first time Grandjean has responded to pro-fluoridation efforts to downplay the impact fluoride has on IQ. In December, he challenged the spin being used by fluoridation promoters. Grandjean’s commentary (Mottled fluoride debate) appears on his website (Chemical Brain Drain) and is printed in full below. Grandjean explained that for the children tested,
“Their lifetime exposures to fluoride from drinking water covered the full range allowed in the US. Among the findings, children with fluoride-induced mottling of their teeth – even the mildest forms that appears as whitish specks on the enamel – showed lower performance on some neuropsychological tests. This observation runs contrary to popular wisdom that the enamel effects represent a cosmetic problem only and not a sign of toxicity. At least one of five American children has some degree of mottling of their teeth.”
Flouride Associated with Hypothyrodism
Are fluoride levels in drinking water associated with hypothyroidism prevalence in England? A large observational study of GP practice data and fluoride levels in drinking water
S Peckham, D Lowery, S Spencer Centre for Health Services Studies, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK doi:10.1136/ jech-2014-204971
ABSTRACT: Background While previous research has suggested that there is an association between fluoride ingestion and the incidence of hypothyroidism, few population level studies have been undertaken. In England, approximately 10% of the population live in areas with community fluoridation schemes and hypothyroidism prevalence can be assessed from general practice data. This observational study examines the association between levels of fluoride in water supplies with practice level hypothyroidism prevalence.
Methods: We used a cross-sectional study design using secondary data to develop binary logistic regression models of predictive factors for hypothyroidism prevalence at practice level using 2012 data on fluoride levels in drinking water, 2012/2013 Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) diagnosed hypothyroidism prevalence data, 2013 General Practitioner registered patient numbers and 2012 practice level Index of Multiple Deprivation scores.
Findings: We found that higher levels of fluoride in drinking water provide a useful contribution for predicting prevalence of hypothyroidism. We found that practices located in the West Midlands (a wholly fluoridated area) are nearly twice as likely to report high hypothyroidism prevalence in comparison to Greater Manchester (non-fluoridated area).
Interpretation: In many areas of the world, hypothyroidism is a major health concern and in addition to other factors—such as iodine deficiency— fluoride exposure should be considered as a contributing factor. The findings of the study raise particular concerns about the validity of community fluoridation as a safe public health measure.
You may also be interested in:
Exposure to fluoridated water and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder prevalence among children and adolescents in the United States: an ecological association
41 Research Studies Show Brain Damage and Lower IQ From Flouride
There are 41 studies now showing flouride in water makes you stupid and damages the brains of your children. See the recent presentation by Michael Connett and the recent Flouride conference. 17 of these studies show damage at or below levels allowed in your water supply.
This, combined with fact that the flouride put in U.S. water (and banned in most other countries) is industrial waste from China often contaminated with asbestos and heavy metals makes it a publicly authorized criminal activity. Flouride in water is not food grade and would be illegal if the FDA classified it as a drug (which it is).
You are medicated against your will (which is illegal) by a known neurological poison. The supreme court of Israel banned flouride because of this. Legal actions are beginning in the U.S..
Much of the research on flouride is being carried out by the Chinese CDC because of the severe problems they have in Chinese children. They can show a clear dose response curve for children’s lower IQ with increasing flouride exposure.
Professor Prof. Xiang Quanyong, Jiangsu Province CDC,China ([email protected]) showed up to a 30% reduction in children’s IQ from flouride exposure. Any sane person studying this data would take action, but apparently a lot of Americans already have damaged brains from flouride.
As a former Professor of Radiology, Biometrics and Preventive Medicine and appointed by the governor of Colorado and former Congressman and Senator Tim Wirth to Chair the Health Effects Committee for the Rocky Flats Nuclear plant years ago, I am an expert in the toxicology of hazardous chemicals and radiation and know something about the political forces that damage the health of American communities. How the scientists at CDC can tolerate their grandchildren being exposed to flouride is beyond me. I know some of them object to giving their grandchildren mercury in common vaccines, but political interests force them to keep their mouth shut. Who is it that politically gains from poisoning our children with flouride?
Health Minister German Listens to the Science Instead of the Dentists
Health Minister German outlaws fluoridation of all tap water
By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH, The Jerusalem Post
08/17/2014 17:58
Contrary to the advice of public health and dentistry experts in her own ministry and academia, Health Minister Yael German has decided to prohibit the fluoridation of drinking water around the country.
She also issued her decision Sunday in contravention of a letter written exactly two years ago by Prime Minister (and then-official health minister) Binyamin Netanyahu, who told Knesset Interior Committee chairman MK Amnon Cohen that he [Netanyahu] “could not agree to the cessation of fluoridation” of potable water. Netanyahu continued that municipalities had requested to continue their fluoridation of water and that they should be allowed to do so.
The Health Ministry introduced mandatory water fluoridation in 1970 in cities, towns and settlements with over 5,000 residents, and indeed, 70 percent of Israelis have received fluoridated water delivered to their taps. But German opposed it as Meretz-Party mayor of Herzliya and stopped it in her city. Just weeks after entering office as health minister, she declared that she would stop fluoridation and, encountering fierce criticism from critics in leading Israeli schools of public health and dentistry and from her own ministry experts, she wavered and suggested as late as June that fluoridation could be an option instead of being outlawed.
German’s spokesmen said that only Ireland and Israel require fluoridation of drinking water, but her critics responded that everywhere else is it an option open to all local authorities except where barred completely only in Holland, Sweden and the Czech Republic.