 for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 01:27
STAY INFORMED!---SIGN UP Today for FAN's http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDx5C_6Rf24&feature=related/watch?v=uN1qUeId for Hobbit - Wed, 08/20/2008 - 20:48 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4072416559052593081&hl=en for oruval - Mon, 07/28/2008 - 18:11 No one else can make you happy or unhappy. It is solely up to KAT. for Hobbit - Mon, 07/28/2008 - 13:03 FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK July 28, 2008 It gives me enormous satisfaction and pleasure to announce that we have finally uploaded onto Google video the Lennon-Connett debate on fluoridation that took place on the Isle of Man on November 20, 2007. For this to be possible we owe a huge debt of gratitude to Kevin Glynn, the leader of the successful campaign to keep fluoridation out of the Isle of Man. Not only did he pay to have the whole debate videotaped but he also spent a lot of time hunting down a missing fragment of the debate (where the tapes were being changed). The whole debate lasts just under 60 minutes and I think you will be tickled by the postscript. In this Walter Graham explains the basis for huge opposition to fluoridation in Northern Ireland (the Republic of Ireland has had mandatory fluoridation since 1963). Here is the URL for the debate: Professor Michael Lennon is the chairman of the British Fluoridation Society (BFS), which, with British government money, has been promoting fluoridation in the UK for years. Lennon was on the advisory committee of the York Review and was reported to have been extremely disappointed with their findings. He partially salvaged this huge blow to fluoridation in the UK by being appointed to a committee for the Medical Research Council (MRC). This committee was set up to determine what research was necessary to fill in the gaps of knowledge identified by the York review. Lennon helped to dramatically limit this research. The MRC report gave a higher level of priority on more research into dental fluorosis (more money for dental researchers) than studies on fluoride's impacts on the brain, the endocrine system or the kidney! But Lennon's influence does not stop there. He is also a big wheel in a key dental committee of the World Health Organization, which continues to offer its platitudinous support of fluoridation at 1 ppm even while recommending a safe drinking water standard of 1.5 ppm. You will notice that: 1. Lennon speaks about no other tissue than the teeth. 2. For evidence of the safety of fluoridation he cites "endorsements" not primary studies. 3. For tooth decay all his statistics are on PRIMARY teeth, and not permanent teeth, and he provides no discussion on baby bottle tooth decay (BBTD) which might well be the cause of so many kids having extractions under general anesthesia. BBTD cannot be prevented by water fluoridation. 4. He claims that surveys (paid for by the BFS) have shown consistently that 60-80% of the people are in favor of fluoridation. First, one has to wonder how the questions were worded in these surveys but more importantly, unless the public in question have heard from both sides on the matter, they merely reflect the prevailing establishment views. To this one has to add the fact that over many years people have been indoctrinated by millions of dollars of advertising from toothpaste manufacturers that fluoride is good for teeth. They have heard little or any information about side effects. 5. I find it is interesting that Lennon continues to push the idea that fluoridation has special benefits to children from low income families when the York Review (and he was on the advisory committee for this review) could not find convincing evidence of this relationship. 6. He gives no citations to published literature for the dental statistics he cites. 7. At the lunchtime debate before the Manx parliamentarians, Lennon in response to my reference to the National Research Council report (NRC, 2006) said that he had a copy in his briefcase. However, between lunchtime and the evening debate he didn't bother to check out this report. Or if he did he realized that it wouldn't help his case. 8. Another point not obvious from the evening debate is that even though he had about 5 hours between his lunchtime presentation and his evening presentation, he chose not to address a single point I had made in my lunchtime presentation. 9. He treats fluoride as a nutrient but cites no evidence to support that claim. 10. He talks about an "optimal" dose, but doesn't define how this is derived. 11. He does, however, admit that today some areas in Britain do not need fluoridation and that he does not advocate universal fluoridation. That will come as a big surprise to many of his international colleagues because Lennon through the WHO and other international organizations is advocating fluoridation for the whole world! 12. My impression is that Lennon's influence - such that it is - is gained by style rather than substance. He comes over as authoritative, understanding and even kindly. His whole demeanor suggests that he would not knowingly do anything to hurt any one - he just wants to help out poor kids. It seems to me that this would be very effective with audiences who know little about the issue and there is no one present to point out his errors (in this case largely of omission). What do you think? The late Jane Jones of the National Pure Water Association in the UK first challenged Professor Lennon to debate me in 1997. He refused. Instead, I had to debate a wooden chicken (made by John Graham) in the Oxford city council chambers (that was fun for a Cambridge man!). I had to wait 10 years for this debate. I think readers will find it very informative to compare the presentation of Dr. Peter Cooney, Canada's Chief Dental Officer, in Dryden on April 1, 2008 with Lennon's defense of fluoridation in this videotaped debate. Do you notice any similarities? Do you note any differences? Again your feedback would be very welcome. The latest count on the number of professionals calling for an end to fluoridation worldwide is 1782 and the number of citizens calling for US Congressional Hearings on this practice is over 13,800. We need many more. Paul Connett for Hobbit - Wed, 07/16/2008 - 23:48 FAN Bulletin 988: Obeying orders FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK July 16, 2008 In the last bulletin I discussed the CDC's promotion and expansion. (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), July 11, 2008, 57(27);737-741) on which a recent press release was based. As far as fluoridation is concerned these MMWR reports read less like scientific articles than instruction manuals for those who blindly serve CDC policy. This particularly applies to the state dental directors. Fortunately, the CDC, in its acknowledgements for services rendered within this report, identified these high level individuals for us. Please check out your state's fluoridation representative from the list printed out below. There seem to be 6 missing. Can anyone fill in the gaps? I do not use the words "blindly serve" lightly. In my view, and having met some of them in person, and read several of their media statements, they do not appear to have minds of their own or have read the primary literature for themselves. They do not make independent judgments. In my view, they simply obey orders. That's their job. If they challenge CDC policy it would be like sending in their resignation. In other words, the CDC runs its operations like a military campaign. In certain situations such a chain of command would seem reasonable, for example if they were fighting the spread of smallpox. But in the case of fluoridation it would be a lot healthier for the nation if these high level employees had a mind of their own. After all they are allowing themselves to be part of a campaign which would force fluoride, a known highly toxic substance on every man, woman and child in the nation whether they want it or not; whether it works or not or whether it is safe or not. In a rational world one would hope that highly paid civil servants would be exercising due diligence on each of these matters. Instead all they can tell us is that they "believe" that this practice is ethical, safe and effective. They have no solid science to back these claims up. Sadly, the taxpayers unwittingly fund this campaign, and they will continue to do so - with no oversight - until someone in Congress has the guts to call them to account. Well, at least, we have their names. Our challenge is to try and introduce some accountability into the CDC's "chain of command." If any one of these representatives resent the descriptions "blindly serve" or "obeying orders", I will publicly withdraw those descriptions if they will sign and provide documentation to support one or more of the following three statements: 2) I have read the NRC (2006) report "Fluoride in Drinking Water" in full and I am satisfied that there is an adequate margin of safety to protect everyone in society from the adverse effects described in this report. This is based upon the following written analysis... 3) The evidence of ingesting fluoride for reducing dental decay is overwhelming and I strongly disagree with the assessment of Dr. David Locker, University of Toronto Department of Dentistry, who in a review of the studies on fluoridation's effectiveness for the Ontario government, concluded that, "The magnitude of (fluoridation's benefits) is not large in absolute terms, is often not statistically significant and may not be of clinical significance" (Locker 1999). I would point to the following large population studies which refute Locker's assessment... If you haven't done so yet please sign the ONLINE message to Congress and get all your friends and colleagues to do likewise. Paul Connett PS: Please consider making an online donation to our campaign to end fluoridation worldwide. Please indicate if you would like your tax-deductible donation used to help get people to the Toronto Triple event in August. The CDC's State Fluoridation representatives are: B Laughlin, Alabama Dept of Environmental Management; for Hobbit - Tue, 07/15/2008 - 22:53 FAN Bulletin 987: Public Relations VERSUS Public Health FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK July 15, 2008 Thanks to Carol Kopf, FAN's media officer and campaign strategist, we have found out more about the public relations outfit hired by the ADA to push fluoridation. The company is Chlopak, Leonard, Schechter and Associates (CLS). From their own description of their work for the ADA it is apparent that CLS is working in 20 states to promote (mandatory?) fluoridation and fight off community efforts to stop fluoridation. They write: Under the banner of the ADA's State Public Affairs Program, CLS currently manages efforts around multiple legislative issues in 20 targeted states through research, lobbying, advertising and media relations, guiding local communications firms and working with state dental societies. CLS helps each state society develop a legislative agenda to improve oral healthcare, build a coalition in support of that agenda, and advance it through outreach to elected officials and other decision makers. In addition, CLS provides rapid response support to help state societies successfully address adverse legislation and regulation." (my emphasis, PC) What is glaringly absent from both the CDC press release and the MMWR article is any reference to the NRC (2006) review - with its warnings that subsets of the population are already exceeding safe doses of fluoride - nor to the fact that the US EPA office of water after 28 months has not completed (have they even started?) the health risk assessment to determine a new safe drinking water goal for fluoride or MCLG (maximum contaminant level goal) as recommended by the NRC panel. Such a determination if done scientifically (don't hold your breath) would yield an MCLG less than 1 ppm and kill fluoridation overnight. Shouldn't state officials have been warned about this possibility? Shouldn't the serious scientific health issues related to over-exposure to fluoride as outlined in great detail in the NRC's massive 507-page review, have been communicated to those the CDC wishes to continue "science-based education of the public about the established safety of fluoridation"? MMWR is more like a newsletter than a scientific journal. It is not externally peer-reviewed and as far as fluoridation is concerned it is more like an instruction manual to those who blindly serve CDC policy. So with both the ADA and the CDC gearing up for a fresh onslaught we really have our work cut out for us. We may be looking at as many as another 20 mandatory fluoridation bills in the pipeline. We may even see a move for a national mandatory fluoridation bill. And even an international declaration! Look at this chilling phrase which emerged from a "Global Consultation on Oral Health Through Fluoride" jointly convened by the World Health organization (WHO), the FDI World Dental Federation (this organization has huge industrial financial support) and the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), held in Geneva, Switzerland and Ferney Voltaire in France, November 17-19, 2006. This joint meeting declared that "universal access to fluoride for dental health is a part of the basic human right to health." So what can we do? 1) Clearly, our first priority is to get as many citizens activists and scientists to the Triple event in Toronto August 7-11. This will be a chance to meet and strategize with fluoridation fighters from Canada, the US, Australia, Japan, New Zealand and the UK. 2) We need to increase the number of people signing the ONLINE message to Congress at http://congress.fluoridealert.org. We desperately need Congress to hold federal agencies accountable for the support they give to this practice, either by commission (CDC) and by neglect of due diligence (EPA and the FDA). We need Congressional Hearings to put these people under oath. Please circulate and ask all your friends and family members to sign on. We have been stuck in the 12,000's for several weeks. Ditto the Professionals' statement. Stuck in the 1700s. 3) We need to rejuvenate and expand our "early warning" state networks which can spring into action the moment we hear about a statewide mandatory fluoridation effort in your state. Please send us contact details if you wish to be involved at paul@FluorideAlert.org and Carol Kopf at NYSCOF@aol.com 4) Please send a tax-deductible Online Donation to FAN: we are going to need every penny to fight this monster in the months ahead. Please specify if you want the money to be earmarked to help get people to the Toronto Triple event. 5) I never expected my involvement in this issue to go on for as long as this (12 years) and that is a short time compared to some of our members! We desperately need new ideas, new blood - especially young blood - involved. More than anything we need your creative ideas and the willingness to help carry them out. There is no question that the promoters have the power, the influence and the money. But creativity can go a long way to outmaneuver the forces against us, especially when we know that the truth and the science is on our side. For example the moronic slogan being used in Arkansas newspapers (the ads are partially funded by the CDC!) in the first steps to get mandatory fluoridation in that state in 2009, is "Got Teeth, Get Fluoride." That slogan cost the promoters a lot of money. Here is our creative and FREE response: "Got Brains, Reject Fluoride." This coupe with all the documentation on fluoride's impact on the brain and the list of 18 studies indicating fluoride can lower IQ in children could make a stunning leaflet. So what skills do you have that we could deploy creatively to help fight off this foolish practice? Are there any other retirees who are prepared to donate a large chunk of time to organizing locally, statewide, nationally or internationally? For those who are not retired, do any of you do a lot of international travel and can act as personal ambassadors to increase the human side of our networking? Paul Connett for Under the banner of the ADA's State Public Affairs Program, CLS currently manages efforts around multiple legislative issues in 20 targeted states through research, lobbying, advertising and media relations, guiding local communications firms and working with state dental societies. CLS helps each state society develop a legislative agenda to improve oral healthcare, build a coalition in support of that agenda, and advance it through outreach to elected officials and other decision makers. In addition, CLS provides rapid response support to help state societies successfully address adverse legislation and regulation. At the national level, CLS oversees an ongoing national research project to help ADA better communicate to the general public about dentistry and oral health issues. CLS has helped the ADA respond to federal agency regulatory actions, third-party statements opposing ADA positions, and developments in scientific research affecting ADA's oral health recommendations. With CLS's help, the State Public Affairs Program has had many successes thus far. In the area of increased access to dental care, CLS worked with state dental societies to successfully add adult dental care to Missouri's new Medicaid program and achieve the first increase to Connecticut's dental Medicaid coverage in nearly 20 years. In the restoratives area, CLS worked with the New Mexico Dental Association to develop an education program encouraging their members to adopt environmentally sound best management practices in dealing with dental office wastewater. And CLS worked with the Maine Dental Association to block efforts that would have ended community water fluoridation in Bangor, the state's third largest city. 2) The CDC Press release (July 10, 2008): Contact: CDC?s National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Communication, Community Water Fluoridation Now Reaches Nearly 70 percent of U.S. Population Nearly 70 percent of U.S. residents who get water from community water systems now receive fluoridated water, according to a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The proportion of the U.S. population receiving fluoridated water, about 184 million people, increased from 65.8 percent in 1992 to 69.2 percent in 2006, said the study in this week?s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports. "Community water fluoridation is an equitable, cost-effective, and cost-saving method of delivering fluoride to most people," said Dr. William Maas, director of CDC?s Division of Oral Health. "We?ve seen some marked improvements; however, there are still too many states that have not met the national goal. The national goal is that 75 percent of U.S. residents who are on community water systems be receiving fluoridated water by 2010." Fluoride, a naturally occurring compound in the environment, can reduce or prevent tooth decay. Adding or maintaining tiny levels of fluoride in drinking water is a safe and effective public health measure to prevent and control tooth decay (dental caries). The second half of the 20th century saw a major decline in the prevalence and severity of dental caries, attributed in part to the increasing use of fluoride. Based upon studies and a systematic review, the U.S. Task Force on Community Preventive Services reported that fluoridation resulted in a median 29.1 percent relative decrease in tooth decay. The report, "Populations Receiving Optimally Fluoridated Public Drinking Water-United States 1992-2006," provides the most recent information on the status of fluoridated water by state. The report says the percentage of people served by community water systems with optimal levels (which are defined by the state and vary based on such things as the climate) of fluoridated water ranged from 8.4 percent in Hawaii to 100 percent in the District of Columbia. Twenty-five states and the District of Columbia have met or exceeded national objectives, while 25 states need improvements. Three states (Colorado, Delaware and Nebraska) that previously reached the national objective dropped below the target by 2006. During 1998-2006, CDC developed the Water Fluoridation Reporting System (WFRS), a Web-based method to support management of state fluoridation programs and to collect these data. The state has administrative oversight on water fluoridation and CDC relies on state dental or drinking water programs to provide fluoridation data, including populations served, fluoridation status, fluoride concentration, and fluoride source for individual community water systems. for Hobbit - Sun, 07/13/2008 - 01:06 FYI! http://www.dentist.net/mint-free-toothpaste.asp for krmaya2 - Thu, 07/17/2008 - 02:51 for Hobbit - Fri, 07/18/2008 - 00:24 FYI: Many people around the world suffer from Canker Sores, also known as "mouth ulcers". The mouth sore or oral ulcers can disrupt life. Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) is known ingredient in certain toothpastes, mouthwashes, shampoos and other cosmetic products and known to cause to canker sores. The harshness of this chemical has been proven to create microscopic damage to the oral tissue which lines the inside of your mouth, which then leads to Canker Sores. Toms Of Maine Antiplaque plus Whitening - Cinnamon Clove Toothpaste (Fluoride Free) * SLS-free AND Toms Of Maine Sensitive Care Toothpaste for stick - Sun, 07/13/2008 - 01:36 this is what I use: the peppermint flavor It is by far the best tasting toothpaste I have ever tried. All the standard toothpastes are too sweet and in fact made my teeth hurt from all the pseudo-sugar in them. Tom's is the shizzle. Other places in the world are finally getting the message but not here. If we didn't move backwards at all times, we wouldn't move at all. _________________ "Keep you hands off my stack." Web address: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041122093050.htm ScienceDaily (Nov. 22, 2004) — The Agricultural Research Service has launched a database that lists the level of fluoride in 400 separate food and beverage items. The list will be important to researchers who strive to estimate the amount of fluoride that individuals consume daily. For more than half a century, to prevent tooth decay, small amounts of fluoride have been added to many U.S. municipal water supplies. That fluoride, as well as naturally occurring fluoride from wells and other water sources, subsequently finds its way into water-based beverages and foods. An Adequate Intake level has been set for fluoride at 3 milligrams (mgs) daily for women and 4 mgs daily for men. But until now, scant data existed on the quantity of fluoride in the national food supply. The USDA National Fluoride Database of Selected Beverages and Foods was posted last month on the World Wide Web. The project was coordinated by nutritionist Rena Cutrufelli with the ARS Nutrient Data Laboratory, which is part of the agency's Beltsville (Md.) Human Nutrition Research Center. The project is part of an interagency agreement between the ARS Beltsville laboratory, the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, both in Bethesda, Md. The new compilation is based on acceptable data extracted from reviews of existing scientific literature, as well as on data analyzed by scientists at the University of Iowa College of Dentistry, in Iowa City. The data is also part of a food-and-beverage intake survey tool now being developed by researchers at the University of Minnesota Nutrition Coordinating Center (NCC). That tool will be used to assess the amount of fluoride individuals consume from dietary and nondietary sources, including fluoride supplements and toothpastes. To access the new database on the Internet, go to: http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=6312 for stick - Sun, 07/13/2008 - 00:53 for stick - Sun, 07/13/2008 - 01:03 I believe the Nazi's know the answer to this question for stick - Sun, 07/13/2008 - 00:23 By the way, I have not ingested fluoride (to my knowledge) in about a month. My brain is feeling pretty groovy right now and it seems to be firing on [almost]all cylinders again. Dear U.S.A. please stop putting your fucking rat poison in my water and my food and my life. Thanks, for krmaya2 - Sun, 07/13/2008 - 00:48 http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Fluoride/Fluoride.html Unless you eat everything local, fresh and not processed at all you are getting fluoride. Column "C" numbers are parts per million. THE GOVERNMENT only ecommends 3-4 ppm per day. for stick - Sun, 07/13/2008 - 00:54 FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK July 11, 2008 Dear Jonathan, Less than 50% of Canadians drink fluoridated water. The figure stood at 42% before Quebec City stopped fluoridation on April 1, 2008. Following on the heals of several towns in the Niagara Region halting the practice, other major towns and cities in Ontario are considering following suit. These include Hamilton and Waterloo. This week the Hamilton City Council held a public meeting which lasted over 5 hours without the issue being resolved. There are many reasons which are precipitating this flurry of interest. First, the chemicals are in short supply and are costing more; second, much of the ancient equipment needs replacing; third, growing concerns about the increased corrosion caused by the fluoridating chemicals; fourth, the rapidly increasing number of active citizens who are finding out from the internet about the inflated claims of effectiveness and the health risks involved; fifth, some important Canadian journalists have written in depth pieces on the issue; sixth, Dr. Hardy Limeback, one of Canada's leading dental researchers - at some personal cost to his own career - has spoken out very forcefully on the issue, and finally, Canadians appear to be less doctrinaire about this and are more likely to seek out honest answers to honest questions. Efforts to fluoridate Thunder Bay and re-fluoridate Dryden in Western Ontario were spurned by local officials and citizens alike. Now comes news that Drayton Valley, a small town in Alberta, has halted fluoridation (see story below). Even though this may be only temporary it is another good omen. All of this makes for a terrific setting for the TRIPLE event coming up in Toronto in August. 1. Aug 7-10. The 28th conference of the International Society for Fluoride Research. Host and coordinator: Dr. Hardy Limeback. Full details can be accessed from the top item on our home page. This triple event will allow citizen activists and scientists to meet each and both to share information with the general public in Toronto. If you have friends in Ontario and Quebec please encourage them to go to one or more parts of this triple event. At the very least persuade them to take advantage of the free public sessions on Monday, August 11 (3-5 and 7-10 pm). If you have been involved in this issue in the US this is an event that you really need to attend. I heard today that the ADA's public relations firm is working in 20 states, so more mandatory fluoridation bills are almost certainly in the works. These people will not be happy until every last remaining hut has fluoridated water. Based on the last two FAN conferences we know that people had fun; learned a lot of high quality information; enjoyed meeting the people they had only read about in emails; connected with many kindred spirits and left the conference with more friends and more hope that beating this foolish practice was possible. We are very aware of the daunting costs involved, but as the saying goes: every problem is an opportunity in disguise. If you belong to a anti-fluoridation group perhaps the whole group can chip in to get one person there. If you live East of the Mississippi you might consider car-pooling. This would avoid air fares and split 3 or 4 ways even the gas costs will be more reasonable. It also avoids the need to get a passport - you can cross the border by foot or car with a driving license and a copy of your BIRTH CERTIFICATE. It would also be a bit of an adventure. Dan Stockin is already planning to drive all the way from Georgia. Arthur James LaPlante is driving from Amherst, Massachusetts. If you haven't made your summer holiday plans yet, then why not bring your family? Accommodation and food on the University campus are extremely reasonable and Toronto is a beautiful city, especially in August. It is clean, it is safe and there's plenty to do. You work, they play! Any one got any other creative ideas? Hope to see you there. Meanwhile, if you can't come please consider a small contribution to help others to get there. Please use FAN's ONLINE donation link. But please drop us an email to say that you have done so, so that we keep an accounting. Paul Connett Town temporarily turns tap of fluoride Graham Long There will be no fluoride in Drayton Valley's water supply, for the next few months at least. Last week town council moved to temporarily stop the practice of adding the chemical until administration had investigated the costs of installing new equipment and updated handling procedures. Fluoride has been added to Drayton Valley's water supply as a safeguard against dental disease since the mid-1960s. However, there is a growing school of thought which argues that the chemical does more harm than good to overall human health. The Town has been reexamining the pros and cons of fluoridation at the urging of Drayton Valley water plant manager Bernie Berube. While a final decision on whether or not to continue with the practice is still a long way off, the decision was made last week to temporarily stop fluoridation. The equipment used in the water plant to add fluoride to the water is in need of replacement so council voted to stop the process in order to protect the health of those handling the chemical. Town manager Manny Deol says it could take as long as 12 months for a final decision on fluoridation, with the possibility of Drayton Valley residents being asked to vote on a plebiscite on the issue. The Town will not be spending any money on new equipment until that decision has been made. Mayor Moe Hamdon says he hopes the decision can be made sooner than that. "Let's deal with it once and get it dealt with, whether we keep, it or whether we don't," he says for Hobbit - Thu, 07/10/2008 - 07:50 FAN Bulletin 985: Fluoride's Effect on the Brain, FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK July 9, 2008 While dentists in the US continue to treat fluoride as if it only effects one tissue in the body (the teeth), researchers around the world continue to study fluoride's effects on other areas in the body. Of particular concern is a growing number of studies suggesting that fluoride can interfere with the brain, particularly the developing brain of the fetus, infant, and toddler. In 2006, the US National Research Council (NRC) provided a much-needed wake up call with an excellent summary of the available literature on fluoride. According to the NRC, "it is apparent that fluorides have the ability to interfere with the functions of the brain." In its review, the NRC examined the studies showing an association between fluoride and reduced IQ in children and concluded that "the consistency of the results appears significant enough to warrant additional research on the effects of fluoride on intelligence." Since the NRC review was released, 4 additional studies on fluoride and IQ have been published -- from Mexico, Iran, India, and China. In addition, an investigation last year by Fluoride Action Network revealed that there are many important studies on fluoride and the brain which the NRC was unable to review because they have only been available in Chinese. To help get these studies in the hands of western scientists and government regulators, FAN paid to have them translated and has worked to get them published in an English-language journal. We are extremely happy to announce, therefore, that 12 of the studies that FAN paid to get translated have just been published in the journal Fluoride (with more translations expected to be published in the coming months) -- marking the first time these studies (with one exception) have ever seen the light of day in an English-language journal. The studies published this week - available online at http://www.fluorideresearch.org -- provide a wealth of additional data confirming fluoride's ability to damage brain development. As noted in an introduction by Dr. Albert W. Burgstahler, Editor of Fluoride, the studies "are of great importance worldwide for a fuller understanding of how fluoride can affect neurological development, function, and performance." For example, a 1996 study by researchers at Guiyang Medical College (Yu 1996) details how fluoride exposure among pregnant mothers can disrupt the synthesis of neurotransmitters and receptors in the brain cells of the fetus. Such effects could lead to long-lasting defects in brain function after birth. (Click here to read this study) Another study details how infants born to mothers with a history of high fluoride exposure exhibit differences in neuro-behavioral function shortly after birth, including delayed reaction to visual and auditory stimulus (Li 2004) . According to the authors: "The present observations indicate that fluoride, as a toxic material to nerve development, can have an adverse impact on the neurobehavioral development of neonates." (Click here to read this study) Other studies include five additional human studies showing a correlation between elevated fluoride intake and reduced intelligence in children (Li 2003; Hong 2001; Guo 1991; Chen 1991; Qin 1990) , along with two animal studies finding that fluoride produces "considerable deterioration" in the learning and memory abilities of mice (Sun 2000; Zhang 1999) . And it doesn't stop here. FAN is now working on getting an additional 7 Chinese studies published for the first time in English-language journals by the end of the year. These additional studies include two studies showing that fluoride can pass the placenta and damage the brain of the fetus, and 5 more studies finding a reduction in IQ among children exposed to excess fluoride. New Review of Fluoride/IQ Studies In addition to the studies published this week, I am happy to announce that a review co-authored by Michael Connett of FAN, was presented over the weekend at the conference of the International Association of Dental Research (IADR). The poster presentation, which Michael co-wrote with Dr. Hardy Limeback from the University of Toronto, examines the findings from all existing fluoride/IQ studies conducted worldwide, including all of the IQ studies accessed via FAN's extensive investigation last year (see abstract below). In all, the review identified 20 studies which have investigated the link between fluoride and IQ. Of these 20 studies, 18 found that high fluoride exposure was significantly correlated with reduced IQ. While there are some limitations and inconsistencies with this data, the fact that 18 of 20 studies found a correlation between fluoride and reduced IQ should raise a huge red flag about the purported safety of ingested fluorides. At the very least, we hope the presentation will stimulate much greater attention to this issue among the pro-fluoride dental researchers who attended the conference. Fortunately, there have been indications - following the NRC report -- that scientists in the US are beginning to take notice of the fluoride/IQ connection. Earlier this year, a panel of prominent child health experts issued a consensus statement on chemicals that may cause "neurodevelopmental disorders." Based on one of the fluoride/IQ studies, as well as fluoride's potential to impair thyroid function, the panel included fluoride as a chemical that may cause neurodevelopmental harm. Imagine, however, what the panel's conclusion would have been if they had considered the 17 other studies showing the same result! Meanwhile, I can't help thinking about the "Got Teeth? Get Fluoride" slogan that many pro-fluoridation campaigners are using these days. Based on the evidence, the more fitting slogan would seem to be: "Got a Brain? Avoid Fluoride." Paul Connett #### http://iadr.confex.com/iadr/2008Toronto/techprogram/abstract_105335.htm Fluoride and its effect on human intelligence. A systematic review Objectives: A systematic review was undertaken to examine if fluoride (F-) exposure is associated with a decline in human intelligence (IQ). Methods: Ovid MEDLINE and its allied versions, CINAHL, AMED, EMBASE, Cochrane DSR, ACP Journal Club, DARE, CCTR, CMR, HTA, and NHSEED, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, HealthSTAR, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts were searched from the earliest record until January 2008. Only original human studies examining the effect of F- on IQ were selected. Elevated F- in drinking water was the primary variable but studies where F- was elevated in the urine as a result of pollution were also included. Hand-searching of the bibliographies of the selected studies, as well as a separate search strategy in Cab Direct and online Chinese databases (Chinese version of Google Scholar and several others) were performed and the relevant studies were translated into English. Results: Of a total of 224 papers searched for relevancy from their titles, abstracts and full copy, 20 original studies met our inclusion criteria, were read in full and critiqued. Only 6 of the studies were reviewed by the 2006 US NRC Subcommittee on Fluoride in Drinking Water and 4 studies were published after 2006. The extent of F- exposure was reported in all but one study and 9 studies reported urinary F-. Most papers omitted important details (blinding, confounders, randomization). All but 2 reported statistically significant (t-tests) declines in IQ in children exposed to elevated levels of F-. Only 1 study reported a bivariate analysis and another a multiregression analysis. Three studies were conducted outside of China, suggesting that this is not just a relationship that is limited to one country. Conclusions: While the evidence is not conclusive, we identified 18 ecological studies that purport an association between high fluoride exposure and decreased human intelligence (IQ). Seq #212 - PTT Poster Session #2 for Hobbit - Wed, 07/09/2008 - 00:01 FLUORIDE ACTION NETWORK July 8, 2008 We lose in Louisiana. Despite the hundreds of messages sent to Governor Jindal - both from inside Louisiana and from around the world - he has signed the bill (SB 312) which brings mandatory fluoridation to that state. I am afraid our arguments about how unfairly the bill was slipped through the legislature with hardly a citizen in the state knowing about it - and how unwise it is to subject a whole population, especially children, to a toxic substance on a daily basis at levels which are over 200 times the level in mothers' milk, fell on deaf ears. If Jindal has any intentions of running for higher office he might live to regret his lack of leadership on this matter. But our heartfelt thanks to all of you who tried - many times - to get this message through to the Governor. The take-home lesson is that we must never let the pro-fluoridation lobbyists get so far again before we find out about it. We need a better early warning system and we need to put in place and expand the teams (networks) of people in each state which are ready to spring into action the moment the threat becomes apparent. If you want to be part of the network in your state please let us know. Please email me at paul@fluoridealert.org and Carol Kopf nyscof@aol.com, who has kindly agreed to help coordinate this network building in each state. Expanding and organizing these networks will be an important part of our strategizing at our third FAN conference in Toronto, August 10-11. If we are successful then the promoters may well look back on Louisiana as a battle won, but a defeat in the overall battle for the decent opinion of humankind. After all what kind of public health policy has to be conducted by stealth, instead of open debate? Thank you again to all those who tried to win this uphill battle and everything else you do to end this foolish practice. Paul Connett PS: Is anyone planning to drive to the FAN conference? We would like to try to help people get rides and share gas expenses if possible. We are also still looking for donations to help get some deserving and active members to this conference. Money is tight right now so any contribution to these travel expenses would be a very important way you could support this effort. You can make your tax-deductible donation through the donate button on our web page or by sending a check to FAN, 82 Judson Street, Canton, NY 13617. Please make checks out to AEHSP (conference help). For Hobbit - Sat, 06/21/2008 - 20:26 for stick - Sat, 06/21/2008 - 19:54 haha people at work laugh at me when I walk in with my bag of water bottles that contain filtered de-fluoridated water, as they sit there and slurp down their cokes full of HFC and other random chemicals and of course fluoride. It sure is funny to kill ourselves. I of course use that time to talk to them about the dangers of fluoride, citing the National Kidney Foundations announcement and talk about how the Canadian doctor that promoted it here was lead to believe that it was going to be calcium fluoride not industrial waste stannous and sodium fluoride and how the nazis and commies used University of Texas studies to decide what poison they should put in their prison waters to keep the captives docile, and on and on. Of course most people roll their eyes and call me crazy, but hey that's the life of the informed i guess. for Hobbit - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 19:11 The new video -- which is available at http://www.FluorideAlert.Org -- features 3 scientists: Dr. Kathleen Thiessen, a member of the National Research Council's groundbreaking review of fluoride; Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, a toxicologist who has published seminal research on fluoride toxicity; and myself for brightdRRkness - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 02:32 http://www.eveningsun.com... Group wants more flouride in public water Health advocates rallied in the Capitol Monday for a bill to require more fluoride in public drinking water, saying it would help low-income people avoid serious dental problems and save taxpayer money. The rally was led by PAFluorideNOW, a new coalition of public health advocates who are backing a bill sponsored by Rep. Stephen Barrar, R-Delaware. The bill would require water systems with at least 500 connections to have the recommended level of fluoride. About half of the state is served by water systems with the optimal level of fluoride, advocates say. All water has a small amount of fluoride because it occurs naturally, but not enough to satisfy backers of Barrar's plan. "We need to get people treatment before they have mass decay in their mouths," said Robin Rohrbach of the Healthy York County Coalition, which has been pushing for higher fluoride levels for more than 13 years. While the bill is also backed by groups such as the Pennsylvania Rural Health Association, fluoridated water is a controversial issue. Some critics claim it poses hidden dangers, such as the potential to cause bone disease, and they say mandating it would be an unwanted government intrusion. Barrar's bill won initial approval from the House Health and Human Services Committee last year, and it is now pending in the Appropriations Committee, where its fate is uncertain. Committee spokeswoman Johnna Pro said lawmakers have varying opinions on the issue and she could not predict if Barrar's bill will move. York Water Co. does not add fluoride to its water, but will add it only to water in West Manheim Township when it takes over the township's system later this year. The company agreed to continue adding fluoride when it agreed last year to acquire the township system. York Water Co. president Jeff Hines said he sees fluoride as a health policy matter that should be decided by elected officials, and the company would comply if the state mandates it. He also questioned why the debate centers on water and not other liquids. "I guess my philosophical question is: Why put it in water and not something that gets ingested like milk, orange juice or soda?" Hines said. While backers of Barrar's bill admit it would cost more to add fluoride to water systems, they say it would save money over the long term by cutting Medicaid payments for the insured with acute dental problems. "If you think you're not paying for it now, you are," said Rep. Eugene DePasquale, D-York, a co-sponsor. Barrar cited estimates that at least $38 would be saved for every dollar spent on fluoridating water. Go over there and let the commenting commence.... Flouride loving Nutjobs.... for Hobbit - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 13:05 ~Link: http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/fluoride.htm Docile people are easier to Round up.....
for Hobbit - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 00:03 MEDIA COVERAGE of PROFESSIONAL STATEMENT [ABOUT FLUORIDE]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRVYXLBqHV4&eurl=http://www.fluoridealert... for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 23:55 Fluoride: Top 10 Scientific Developments of 2007 2007 was yet another important year in fluoride research, with studies not only questioning long-held views about fluoride's benefits, but raising new concerns about its impact on human health. To give an indication of this recent research, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) has selected the “Top 10” scientific developments of the year. They are as follows: 1) New Evidence on Fluoride & the Developing Brain for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 23:50 for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 23:39 1. Fluoride exposure disrupts the synthesis of collagen and leads to the breakdown of collagen in bone, tendon, muscle, skin, cartilage, lungs, kidney and trachea. A.K. Susheela and Mohan Jha, " Effects of Fluoride on Cortical and Cancellous Bone Composition," IRCS Medical Sciences: Library Compendium, Vol. 9, No.11, pp. 1021-1022 (1981); Y. D. Sharma, " Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Collagen Cross-Link Precursors," Toxicological Letters, Vol. 10, pp. 97-100 (1982); A. K. Susheela and D. Mukerjee, " Fluoride poisoning and the Effect of Collagen Biosynthesis of Osseous and Nonosseous Tissue," Toxicological European Research, Vol. 3, No.2, pp. 99-104 (1981); Y.D. Sharma, " Variations in the Metabolism and Maturation of Collagen after Fluoride Ingestion," Biochemica et Biophysica Acta, Vol. 715, pp. 137-141 (1982); Marian Drozdz et al., " Studies on the Influence of Fluoride Compounds upon Connective Tissue Metabolism in Growing Rats" and "Effect of Sodium Fluoride With and Without Simultaneous Exposure to Hydrogen Fluoride on Collagen Metabolism," Journal of Toxicological Medicine, Vol. 4, pp. 151-157 (1984). 2. Fluoride stimulates granule formation and oxygen consumption in white blood cells, but inhibits these processes when the white blood cell is challenged by a foreign agent in the blood. Robert A. Clark, " Neutrophil Iodintion Reaction Induced by Fluoride: Implications for Degranulation and Metabolic Activation," Blood, Vol. 57, pp. 913-921 (1981). 3. Fluoride depletes the energy reserves and the ability of white blood cells to properly destroy foreign agents by the process of phagocytosis. As little as 0.2 ppm fluoride stimulates superoxide production in resting white blood cells, virtually abolishing phagocytosis. Even micro-molar amounts of fluoride, below 1 ppm, may seriously depress the ability of white blood cells to destroy pathogenic agents. John Curnette, et al, " Fluoride-mediated Activation of the Respiratory Burst in Human Neutrophils," Journal of Clinical Investigation, Vol. 63, pp. 637-647 (1979); W. L. Gabler and P. A. Leong, ., " Fluoride Inhibition of Polymorphonumclear Leukocytes," Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 48, No. 9, pp. 1933-1939 (1979); W. L. Gabler, et al., " Effect of Fluoride on the Kinetics of Superoxide Generation by Fluoride," Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 64, p. 281 (1985); A. S. Kozlyuk, et al., " Immune Status of Children in Chemically Contaminated Environments," Zdravookhranenie, Issue 3, pp. 6-9 (1987) 4. Fluoride confuses the immune system and causes it to attack the body's own tissues, and increases the tumor growth rate in cancer prone individuals. Alfred Taylor and Nell C. Taylor, " Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Tumor Growth," Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine, Vol. 119, p. 252 (1965); Shiela Gibson, " Effects of Fluoride on Immune System Function," Complementary Medical Research, Vol. 6, pp. 111-113 (1992); Peter Wilkinson, " Inhibition of the Immune System With Low Levels of Fluorides," Testimony before the Scottish High Court in Edinburgh in the Case of McColl vs. Strathclyde Regional Council, pp. 17723-18150, 19328-19492, and Exhibit 636, (1982); D. W. Allman and M. Benac, " Effect of Inorganic Fluoride Salts on Urine and Cyclic AMP Concentration in Vivo," Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 55 (Supplement B), p. 523 (1976); S. Jaouni and D. W. Allman, " Effect of Sodium Fluoride and Aluminum on Adenylate Cyclase and Phosphodiesterase Activity," Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 64, p. 201 (1985) 5. Fluoride inhibits antibody formation in the blood. S. K. Jain and A. K. Susheela, " Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Antibody Formation in Rabbits," Environmental Research, Vol. 44, pp. 117-125 (1987) 6. Fluoride depresses thyroid activity. Viktor Gorlitzer Von Mundy, " Influence of Fluorine and Iodine on the Metabolism, Particularly on the Thyroid Gland," Muenchener Medicische Wochenschrift, Vol. 105, pp. 182-186 (1963); A. Benagiano, "The Effect of Sodium Fluoride on Thyroid Enzymes and Basal Metabolism in the Rat," Annali Di Stomatologia, Vol. 14, pp. 601-619 (1965); Donald Hillman, et al., " Hypothyroidism and Anemia Related to Fluoride in Dairy Cattle," Journal of Dairy Science, Vol. 62, No.3, pp. .416-423 (1979); V. Stole and J. Podoba, " Effect of Fluoride on the Biogenesis of Thyroid Hormones," Nature, Vol. 188, No. 4753, pp. 855-856 (1960); Pierre Galleti and Gustave Joyet, " Effect of Fluorine on Thyroid Iodine Metabolism and Hyperthyroidism," Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, Vol. 18, pp. 1102-1110 (1958) 7. Fluorides have a disruptive effect on various tissues in the body. T. Takamorim " The Heart Changes in Growing Albino Rats Fed on Varied Contents of Fluorine," The Toxicology of Fluorine Symposium, Bern, Switzerland, Oct 1962, pp. 125-129; Vilber A. O. Bello and Hillel J. Gitelman, " High Fluoride Exposure in Hemodialysis Patients," American Journal of Kidney Diseases, Vol. 15, pp. 320-324 (1990); Y. Yoshisa, " Experimental Studies on Chronic Fluorine Poisoning," Japanese Journal of Industrial Health, Vol. 1, pp. 683-690 (1959) 8. Fluoride promotes development of bone cancer. J.K. Mauer, et al., " Two-Year Cacinogenicity Study Of Sodium Fluoride In Rats," Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 82, pp. 1118-1126 (1990); Proctor and Gamble " Carcinogenicity Studies with Sodium Fluoride in Rats" National Institute of Environmenrtal Health Sciences Presentation, July 27, 1985; S. E. Hrudley et al., " Drinking Water Fluoridation and Osteosarcoma," Canadian Journal of Public Health, Vol. 81, pp. 415-416 (1990); P. D. Cohn, " A Brief Report on the Association of Drinking Water Fluoridation and Incidence of Osteosarcoma in Young Males," New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton, New Jersey, Nov. 1992; M. C. Mahoney et al., " Bone Cancer Incidence Rates in New York," American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 81, pp. 81, 475 (1991); Irwin Herskowitz and Isabel Norton, " Increased Incidence of Melanotic Tumors Following Treatment with Sodium Fluoride," Genetics Vol. 48, pp. 307-310 (1963); J. A. Disney, et al., " A Case Study in Testing the Conventional Wisdom: School Based Fluoride Mouth Rinse Programs in the USA," Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, Vol. 18, pp. 46-56 (1990); D. J. Newell, " Fluoridation of Water Supplies and Cancer - An Association?," Applied Statistics, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 125-135 (1977) 9. Fluorides cause premature aging of the human body. Nicholas Leone, et al., " Medical Aspects of Excessive Fluoride in a Water Supply," Public Health Reports, Vol. 69, pp. 925-936 (1954); J. David Erikson, " Mortality of Selected Cities with Fluoridated and Non-Fluoridated Water Supplies," New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 298, pp. 1112-1116 (1978); " The Village Where People Are Old Before Their Time," Stern Magazine, Vol. 30, pp. 107-108, 111-112 (1978) 10. Fluoride ingestion from mouth rinses and dentifrices in children is extremely hazardous to biological development, life span and general health. Yngve Ericsson and Britta Forsman, " Fluoride Retained From Mouth Rinses and Dentifrices In Preschool Children," Caries Research, Vol. 3, pp. 290-299 (1969); W. L. Augenstein, et al., " Fluoride Ingestion In Children: A Review Of 87 Cases," Pediatrics, Vol. 88, pp. 907-912, (1991); Charles Wax, " Field Investigation Report," State of Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, March 19, 1980, 67 pages; George Waldbott, " Mass Intoxication from Over-Fluoridation in Drinking Water," Clinical Toxicology, Vol. 18, No.5, pp. 531-541 (1981) Other Facts The contents of a family size tube of fluoridated toothpaste is enough to kill a 25 pound child. In 1991, the Akron (Ohio) Regional Poison Center reported that "death has been reported following ingestion of 16mg/kg of fluoride. Only 1/10 of an ounce of fluoride could kill a 100 pound adult. According to the Center, "fluoride toothpaste contains up to 1mg/gram of fluoride." Even Proctor and Gamble, the makers of Crest, acknowledge that a family-sized tube "theoretically contains enough fluoride to kill a small child." Fluorides have been used to modify behavior and mood of human beings. It is a little known fact that fluoride compounds were added to the drinking water of prisoners to keep them docile and inhibit questioning of authority, both in Nazi prison camps in World War II and in the Soviet gulags in Siberia. Fluorides are medically categorized as protoplasmic poisons, which is why they are used to kill rodents. The September 18, 1943 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, states, "fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, changing the permeability of the cell membrane by inhibiting certain enzymes. The exact mechanisms of such actions are obscure." Fluoride consumption by human beings increases the general cancer death rate. In 1975 Dr. John Yiamouyiannis published a preliminary survey which showed that people in fluoridated areas have a higher cancer death rate than those in non-fluoridated areas. The National Cancer Institute attempted to refute the studies. Later in 1975 Yiamouyiannis joined with Dr. Dean Burk, chief chemist of the National Cancer Institute (1939-1974) in performing other studies which were then included in the Congressional Record by Congressman Delaney, who was the original author of the Delaney Amendment, which prohibited the addition of cancer-causing substances to food used for human consumption. Both reports confirmed the existence of a link between fluoridation and cancer. (Note: Obviously Dr. Burk felt free to agree with scientific truth only after his tenure at National Cancer Institute ended, since his job depended on towing the party line). Fluorides have little or no effect on decay prevention in humans. In 1990 Dr. John Colquhoun was forced into early retirement in New Zealand after he conducted a study on 60,000 school children and found no difference in tooth decay between fluoridated and unfluoridated areas. He additionally found that a substantial number of children in fluoridated areas suffered from dental fluorosis. He made the study public. There is no scientific data that shows that fluoride mouth rinses and tablets are safe for human use. In 1989 a study by Hildebolt, et al. on 6,000 school children contradicted any alleged benefit from the use of sodium fluorides. A 1990 study by Dr. John Yiamouyiannis on 39,000 school children contradicted any alleged benefits from the use of sodium fluorides. In 1992 Michael Perrone, a legislative assistant in New Jersey, contacted the FDA requesting all information regarding the safety and effectiveness of fluoride tablets and drops. After 6 months of stalling, the FDA admitted they had no data to show that fluoride tablets or drops were either safe or effective. They informed Perrone that they will "probably have to pull the tablets and drops off the market." The fact that fluoride toothpastes and school based mouth rinses are packaged in aluminum accentuates the effect on the body. In 1976, Dr. D. Allman and coworkers from Indiana University School of Medicine fed animals 1 part-per-million (ppm) fluoride and found that in the presence of aluminum, in a concentration as small as 20 parts per billion, fluoride is able to cause an even larger increase in cyclic AMP levels. Cyclic AMP inhibits the migration rate of white blood cells, as well as the ability of the white blood cell to destroy pathogenic (disease-causing) organisms. Reference: Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 55, Sup B, p. 523, 1976, " Effect of Inorganic Fluoride Salts on Urine and Tissue Cyclic AMP Concentration in Vivo". (Note: It is no small accident that toothpaste tubes containing fluoride are often made of aluminum) "Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century" Robert Carlton, Ph. D., former U. S. EPA scientist on " Marketplace" Canadian Broadcast Company, Nov. 24, 1992 "Regarding fluoridation, the EPA should act immediately to protect the public, not just on the cancer data, but on the evidence of bone fractures, arthritis, mutagenicity and other effects" William Marcus, Ph. D., senior EPA toxicologist, Covert Action, Fall 1992, p. 66 for see-thru (not verified) - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 23:47 well jeeeez. dude. i'm sold. i guess i could find what i need at home depot?? You will not find this at Home Depot. In Mass. Atlas Water Systems Link: http://www.atlaswatersystems.com/index.cfm?event=residential offers full service, you may want to Google similar in your area. Or if you want to do it yourself: Link: http://www.equinox-products.com/FluorideMaster.htm Link: http://www.advancedwaterfilters.com/ OR Google : RO Filters and see what comes up. My concern about Reverse Osmosis is that it removes the "good" minerals too. But perhaps that is better than the alternative. delete edit reply flag this Hobbit - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 00:48 Here is an RO system I just found that restores natural calcium and magnesium minerals lost in the reverse osmosis process to balance pH. They are not cheap...Fluoride does not even belong in our water---it is like another tax you must pay if you want to be rid of it. Link: http://www.advancedwaterfilters.com/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=... Tap Master® Artesian Reverse Osmosis Water Filtration System Tap Master® Artesian Reverse Osmosis Water Filtration System Price: $359.95 Code: TMA Quantity: The Tap Master Artesian® pH Balanced Reverse Osmosis System MINERAL WATER ON TAP™ Tap Master Artesian® Highlights * pH balanced purified water – restores natural calcium and magnesium minerals lost in the reverse osmosis process to balance pH. Smooth, delicious mineral water quality without the inconvenience or high price of buying bottled mineral water. Guaranteed or your money back! Produces the best tasting coffee you will ever have. Superior design - uses filters built into filter housing for quick and easy annual filter changes. Just unplug and go, no wrenches necessary! Also, no permanent canister filter housings that can weaken and burst with age. Advanced long lasting filters – 2,500 gallons or 1 year between filter changes Exceptional purification - Can remove up to 99% of chemicals, heavy metals, sediments, and other contaminants while balancing pH (7.0)* more info Included Fast Flow RO! Kit - Double the flow from your faucet to fills your cup twice as fast as standard RO systems, without the need for a larger, more costly membranes that do nothing to produce results from the faucet where it counts. 100% total satisfaction guaranty for 90 days or your money back; 5 year limited warranty Free Nalgene Bottle with every Tap Master Artesian purchase. The Tap Master Artesian® pH Balanced Reverse Osmosis System achieves a perfectly balanced pH by first stripping the water clean of contaminants during the reverse osmosis process, then the water is allowed to flow through the advanced remineralization filter, so that it can take up lost calcium and magnesium minerals, where its natural pH (pH 7.0) is restored. The Tap Master Artesian® creates the best drinking water, coffee and tea you will ever have. Guaranteed or your money back. The “steady” water flow from a typical home RO system will take about 40 seconds to fill a pitcher or large spaghetti pot. This level of performance was unacceptable to the water wizards here at AWF, so we devised a Fast Flow RO!™ kit for the Tap Master which effectively doubles the water flow from your RO sink spigot! We never stop searching for new ways to satisfy. Watch the Tap Master with integrated Fast Flow RO™ kit Action Video! One thing you will notice about the Tap Master RO system is that our filters are incorporated into the filter housing, so that when it comes time for the annual filter change, the filter, and the entire filter housing, are disposed of. This is to prevent water related problems under your sink. The leading competitors “canister” type RO system keeps the same filter housing year after year, subjecting it to constant high water pressure, water erosion, and wear from maintenance. Only the filter element is changed. After about 5 years the walls and seals of the competitors canister filter housing can begin to weaken and decay, eventually failing, potentially causing serious water damage to your home. Advantage – Tap Master! The second thing you should notice about the Tap Master RO system is the high grade filters designed to yield a year or more worth of purified water, with both carbon stages made from coconut shell carbon, and filtration down to 5-microns. The competition typically uses lower grade filters made from less effective coal carbon with one 5-micron filter and one 10-micron filter. The competition also uses unnecessary extra filter stages and recommends multiple filter changes per year in order to compensate for their poor quality filters. Advantage – Tap Master! In designing the Tap Master RO a sophisticated combination of flow restriction components were integrated into the system architecture to regulate pressure to and from the 50 gallon per day membrane chamber for optimized water purification and minimized wastewater production. Only the most sophisticated components certified to NSF (national science foundation) standards are included in the design and construction of our products. For further system efficiency improvement please consider a permeate pump which will reduce waste water, increase production, and allow your tank to fill fuller. The Tap Master reverse osmosis drinking water purification system is a premium product designed to convert your tap water into pure, delicious drinking water. The advanced membrane used in the Tap Master can safely eliminate up to 99% of dissolved solids, metals, and harmful chemicals from your tap water. For more information see our FAQs page. The Tap Master Advanced RO consists of two separate units connected by 3.5 feet of tubing for numerous mounting options, and has the following dimensions: Purification unit - 16” high x 8” wide x 5” deep; Reserve tank - 15” high x 11” diameter. Advanced Water Filters sells high quality, long-lasting products that save money and make life a little easier. Compare and save! Stats * All components FDA / NSF certified. All components meet FDA food grade materials standards, and/or NSF and California performance standards where applicable. Tap Master Artesian® Contents: 1 - Instruction book: detailed descriptions including color photos and troubleshooting guide. 1 - 10” Sediment pre-filter: 5 micron bonded spun poly with high holding depth, 1-year service life; all fittings and connecting hardware. 1 - 10” Carbon filter: 5 micron granular activated carbon (coconut shell carbon), 1-year service life and; all fittings and connection hardware. 1 - 10” Artesian filter: 5 micron granular activated carbon (coconut shell carbon) with advanced remineralization media, 1-year service life; all fittings and connection hardware. 1 - Thin Film Composite membrane - 0.001 micron ultra-fine pore, 50 gallon per day, 4-5 year service life; all fittings and connection hardware. 1 - Flow restriction architecture: integrated flow restrictor and water check valve, central auto shut-off valve; all fittings and connection hardware. 1 - Drain saddle; all fittings and connecting hardware. 1 - Reserve tank: 3.2-gallon capacity, mounting stand, ball valve, quick connect fittings and hardware. 1 - Lead free chrome long reach sink faucet; quick connect fittings and hardware. (Other colors and finishes available) 1 - EZ adapter with ball valve & self-piercing valve; all fittings and connection hardware. The Tap Master Artesian® comes fully assembled, ready for simple installation for stick - Fri, 06/06/2008 - 01:06 I have a Berkey with the PF-2 arsenic and fluoride reduction elements. What is your opinion of this unit as the Black Berkey elements make the same claim of 99.999% reduction of heavy metals and contaminates along with the PF-2 filters that claim to remove enough of the fluoride ions to render it undetectable. for Hobbit - Fri, 06/06/2008 - 18:07 I seen their website, they claim to offer decent products, my suggestion, get you water tested for Fluoride; it cost me about $350 to have my water tested, but I had it tested for EVERYTHING. The next level of testing that tests for Flouride was around $200. A basic water test is less than $100, or free, but it will not test for Fluoride. for see-thru (not verified) - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 00:50 cool. that's not too bad. i was expecting that price. for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 13:28 TAKE ACTION! Sign the Online Message to Congress!
~Link: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2477/t/2782/campaign.jsp?campaign_K... Tell your Congressional representatives you want an end to fluoridation now! Over 1,700 professionals have signed a STATEMENT being distributed by the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) calling for an end to water fluoridation worldwide. Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the landmark 2006 National Research Council report on fluoride’s toxicology, three officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the Executive Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, leading fluoride researchers, and medical, dental, scientific and environmental professionals from around the world. Below is your chance to send an immediate email to your own US Senators and Representative supporting the Professionals' call to end fluoridation and asking for a new Congressional Hearing on Fluoridation. If you like, you can personalize this message by adding (or removing) words of your own. Providing your address information will allow us to send your message to your own Senators and US Representative. ~Link: http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2477/t/2782/campaign.jsp?campaign_K... for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 13:20
for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 13:10 Professional Perspectives: Fluoride in Tap Water for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 12:51 Hidden Danger in Your Drinking Water and Toothpaste From Mary Shomon, About.com Health's Disease and Condition content is reviewed by our Medical Review Board Fluoride and Fluoridated Water's Link to Thyroid Disease This common additive to your water supply, and ingredient in the toothpaste you and your children use may be contributing to the increased rates of hypothyroidism -- and other health concerns -- in the U.S. . . without improving dental health What is Fluoride? Fluoride is an element from the halogen group, as are iodide and chloride. It is commonly added to the water supply as hydrofluosilicic acid, silicofluoride or sodium fluoride. Fluoride is also found as an additive in toothpastes and some mouthwashes, as a tooth decay preventive ingredient. Why is Fluoride Used? Fluoride is used to fight tooth decay in children. The key initial studies purporting to demonstrate its effectiveness as an anti-cavity fighting compound were performed back in the 1940s. Those studies, conducted in Grand Rapids, MI in 1945, in Newburgh, NY in 1945, in Brantford, Ontario in 1945, and in Evanston, IL in 1947, are now being called into question. According to Dr. Philip Sutton, author of "The Greatest Fraud: Fluoridation" *A Factual Book, Lorne, Australia, 1996), these studies are actually of dubious scientific quality. More recently, other studies attempting to document the effectiveness of fluoride have been conducted. Dr. John Yiamouyiannis examined the raw data from a large study that was conducted by the National Institute for Dental Research (NIDR). He concluded that fluoride did not appear to have any decay preventing success, as there was little difference in the DMFT values (the mean number of decayed, missing or filled teeth) for approximately 40,000 children. It did not matter whether they grew up in fluoridated, non-fluoridated or partially fluoridated communities. (Yiamouyiannis, J.A. "Water Fluoridation and Tooth Decay: Results from the 1986-87 National Survey of U.S. Schoolchildren", Fluoride, 23, 55-67, 1990). A larger study has been conducted in New Zealand. There, the New Zealand National Health Service plan examines the teeth of every child in key age groups, and have found that the teeth of children in non-fluoridated cities were slightly better than those in the fluoridated cities. (Colquhoun, J. "Child Dental Health Differences in New Zealand", Community Healthy Services, XI 85-90, 1987). Although children's teeth have improved steadily from the 1930s to the 1990s, this improvement appears to be independent of the addition of fluoride to the water. A study has yet to be conducted that specifically addresses whether the addition of fluoride affects the quality of teeth, while controlling and accounting for other factors and other sources of fluoride. Despite growing questions about the effectiveness of using fluoride to fight tooth decay - and increasing concerns of the safety of this practice -- over 60 percent of the United States' water supply is fluoridated. Most of those cities are in the eastern part of the U.S. What are the Concerns Associated with the Addition of Fluoride to the Water Supply? The most recognized problem with the ingestion of too much fluoride is dental fluorosis. This condition is characterized by the failure of tooth enamel to crystallize properly in permanent teeth. The effects range from chalky, opaque blotching of teeth to severe, rust-colored stains, surface pitting and tooth brittleness. This condition, though worrisome, may not be the key concern , at least according to some researchers. Dr. Phyllis Mullenix believes, based on her research, that fluoride acts in a way that lowers the I.Q. of children ("Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats", Mullenix, P. Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 17 (2), 1995). Dr. William Marcus, believes that a study conducted by Battelle for the National Toxicology Program on the toxicology of fluoride shows that there were dose-related increases in bone cancer in male rats. Dr. Marcus also questions the removal by peer reviewers of cancers at other sites in the rats as well. Especially worrisome to Dr. Marcus is the fact that that levels of fluoride that caused the cancers in the rats were lower than those seen in humans who ingested lower amounts, but for a longer period. These levels are generated because fluoride is accumulated in the body and is not secreted. Dr. Marcus was formerly the chief toxicologist for the EPA's Office of Drinking Water, but was fired in 1991 after insisting that an unbiased evaluation of fluoride's cancer potential be conducted. Marcus fought his dismissal, and was able to be reinstated after demonstrating in court that it was politically motivated. An article in the Irish Times of Dublin on August 16, 1999, reports that Dr. Hans Moolenburgh's research in Holland found that up to 4 percent of people using fluoridated water experienced health problems. These problems ranged from gastrointestinal disorders to mouth sores to rashes to headaches to forms of arthritis to more serious concerns such as cancers and neurological complaints. for see-thru (not verified) - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 15:09 THANK YOU for posting that info. i don't like it but i really need to confront this. i hate being duped. i stopped using toothpaste with fluoride last year, but don't drink filtered water yet. for Hobbit - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 21:02 Well, only Distilled, Reverse osmosis or Activated Alumina or Crushed Bone removes Fluoride, a carbon filter will not... For Bottle water I recommend SMART WATER... for Kat - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 12:36 This is what I was looking for, as most RO systems DO NOT remove flouride. Our RO system we use for the aquariums at our store came with a hefty price and alot of boasting but still does not remove this chemical. for krmaya2 - Sat, 06/21/2008 - 16:15 for Kat - Wed, 06/04/2008 - 13:59 for see-thru (not verified) - Tue, 06/03/2008 - 22:08 |
|||
 |
Hidden PlacesLife outside of the mainstream |
|
|
|
|
