I am increasingly uncomfortable about the fluoridation of our water supplies, not so much to do with whether or not fluoride reduces tooth decay; but due to the action of the chemical on thyroid function.
Why am I writing about this? Because the readers of my articles tend to be on the "older" side of young and may be among those most affected by thyroid- related health problems.
We have an epidemic of thyroid disorders:
My testing of more than 2,000 adults indicates that as many as 80% may have some degree of thyroid dysfunction!
Many are on medication for thyroid disorders.
Does fluoridating water actually reduce tooth decay?
Maybe: Maybe not. There is no reliable evidence that putting fluoride in water actually reduces tooth decay; Whereas it may be effective when applied topically. For an opinion by a chemistry expert with no conflicting interests about this matter, I recommend this position statement by Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D.
Alternative to fluoridation: Invest in dental health services
The most effective and safest way to get fluoride onto tooth enamel is to get the dentist or dental nurse (Now called a "Dental Therapist") to expertly apply it to the teeth twice a year. But - Hey! We can't do that because the Ministry of Health has been quietly degrading the school dental service for years. How do I know that? Because I have a sister who has been a dental nurse - sorry - dental therapist, practising since about 1970, and I have been witness to this gradual rundown. There are not enough dental therapists to properly treat children's teeth and many families and individuals can not afford regular visits to the dentist.
Rather than invest in effective dental health measures, let's just add a toxic chemical to the water supply - problem solved - Really?
Fluoride damages the thyroid gland
Fluoride damages the thyroid gland by clogging its iodine receptors, preventing the uptake of iodine. Women are most vulnerable due to their greater need for iodine than men (Breast tissue and the ovaries are heavy users of iodine). The end result is thyroid disease that causes a cascade of health issues, mostly affecting women.
For more about iodine deficiency: Google "Gary Moller iodine deficiency" or
When using a medically validated test for iodine status, I have discovered that 90% or those tested are deficient with about 80% of them suffering outright iodine starvation. This is consistent with high rates of medication for thyroid dysfunction.
The thyroid can not work properly without adequate amounts of iodine.
low iodine = poor thyroid health
When the iodine receptors in the thyroid (and tissues like the breast, ovaries and prostate) are empty, or near empty, as is the case with 90% of people in New Zealand, then this gland and other tissues are a sitting duck for becoming clogged by toxic halides such as fluoride. Once fluoride is embedded, its highly reactive nature ensures that it stays there, preventing the less reactive iodine from ever occupying that receptor. The effect lasts for years - maybe for decades. We can now measure this clogging effect, using the "Thyrodine" test, developed by ex-pat Kiwi, Dr Daryl Turner and only available since late 2013. The consequence of low iodine in the presence of fluoride is dysfunction of the thyroid.
The toxic halides, in descending order of reactivity, are: Fluorine, chlorine and bromine. In the Periodic Table of the Elements, these halides sit on top of the halide: Iodine. Chlorine and bromine are variously found in household and industrial cleaners, plastics, many medicines, fire retardants and in water treatment. Bromine is used to fumigate imported grains, fruit and vegetables. Chlorine is used to treat municipal water supplies.
The consistently worst performers on the Thyrodine test are competitive swimmers who are heavily exposed to pool water that contains chlorine, sometimes bromine and often fluorine.
The other halides may be equally problematic
The toxic halides, in descending order of reactivity, are: Fluorine, chlorine and bromine. In the Periodic Table of the Elements, these halides sit on top of the halide: Iodine. Chlorine and bromine are variously found in household and industrial cleaners, plastics, many medicines, fire retardants and in water treatment. Bromine is used to fumigate imported grains, fruit and vegetables. Chlorine is used to treat municipal water supplies.
The consistently worst performers on the Thyrodine test are competitive swimmers who are heavily exposed to pool water that contains chlorine, sometimes bromine and often fluorine.
An obvious question to ask:
Rather than adding to the body burden of toxic halides, by putting fluoride in water supplies, doesn't it make sense that we would be better off seeking ways to reduce our total environmental exposure to these harmful substances?Iodine deficiency is linked to the following:
– Thyroid disease
– Prostate cancer
– Breast cancer
– Ovarian cancer
– Endometrial cancer
– Ovarian cysts
– Fibrocystic Breast Disease
- Fibromyalgia (strong evidence supports fibromyalgia is simply iodine deficiency)
Signs that things may be going wrong with the thyroid:
- Thinning hair / hair loss
– Fatigue / tiredness (Sounds like depression?)
– Feeling cold
– Brain fog / memory problems
- Muscle pain
- Basically all symptoms of hypothyroidism!
– Fatigue / tiredness (Sounds like depression?)
– Feeling cold
– Brain fog / memory problems
- Muscle pain
- Basically all symptoms of hypothyroidism!
If 90% of the population are already iodine deficient; then the last thing we should be putting into our bodies is fluoride!
The element fluorine is extremely toxic: Yet it is apparently completely safe for Human Beings when added to their water - according to the health experts who control public health. Which is really weird when one looks at some of the uses it is put to:
Fluorine is found in chemicals designed to kill pests:
- It is found in rat poison and opossum bait. For example: 1080 poison (sodium fluoroacetate).
- President Assad of Syria manufactured Sarin nerve gas with fluoride as an essential ingredient: (Sarin: methylphosphonofluoridate).
If a dictator gases pesky men, women and children with fluoride: That's a
"crime against humanity"
Fluoride as a "Health Measure" - Really?
- Fluorine is found in many powerful medicines such as fludrocortisone, fluoxetine and flucloxacillin (notice they all have "flu" in the name which is reference to the fluorine element). Each of these drugs comes with a list of nasty side effects.
- Fluoride is added to water supplies to "strengthen" teeth (Commonly as hexafluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6).
If a doctor or health official gives you fluoride in your medicine and your water: Then that's a
"health measure"
There's something perverse about this, if you ask me!
"You can trust us - We are from the Government"
Yeah - Right! Yet another one for a Tui advert.
The precautionary Principle
"The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking an action.
The principle is used by policy makers to justify discretionary
decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from
taking a particular course or making a certain decision when extensive
scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking.
The principle implies
that there is a social responsibility
to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific
investigation has found a plausible risk. These protections can be
relaxed only if further scientific findings emerge that provide sound
evidence that no harm will result."
In my opinion, the Precautionary Principle should be applied to fluroide and all of it applications with human beings and until such time as the burden of proof is that it does no harm. Until then, it should be removed from our municipal water supplies (and medicines for that matter), while being kept available for topical application to teeth by those who want it.
I don't want it; but I can't avoid it for as long as I live in Wellington City (Unfortunately, our water is still fluoridated).
___________________________________________
Further reading on this controversy:
Saturday, 8 March, 2014 - 12:24
By Mary Byrne on behalf of Fluoride Action Network NZ
It's open slather on administering drugs via our water supplies, and now many other ways. How about the air we breathe? Judge Hanson’s ruling sets a dangerous precedent.
The ruling on the legality of fluoridation comes down to the fact that Judge Hanson believes an action only constitutes a medical treatment if it is confined to "direct interference with the body or state of mind of an individual and does not extend to public health interventions". Using this logic, it is now perfectly legal for councils to add whatever they like to the water supply so long as they say it’s a "public health intervention". The Government could even spray things into the air.
So what will be next? Will councils start adding an anti-obesity drug or a cholesterol lowering drug as a public health measure to reduce diabetes or health attacks? Or perhaps even the Ministry of Health will grant themselves permission to start spraying vaccines into the air down the streets of Wellington because the delivery mechanism does not involve direct interference? They may justify it every time there is an outbreak of measles or whooping cough. This is no more preposterous than adding highly toxic chemicals to the public drinking water to treat dental decay.
Judge Hanson ruled that fluoridation does not come under the Medicines Act as a "food" does not include a drink. So when is a liquid medicine a drink and when is it a medicine? Does this mean anyone who wants, can claim a therapeutic purpose and provide medical treatment to others, if they add their medicine to water?
It was also very surprising that Judge Hanson saw no material distinction between fluoridation and chlorination of water or the addition of iodine to salt. This is one of the most basic mistakes people make when considering fluoridation. Chlorine is added to many water supplies to make the water drinkable. Councils are required to provide drinkable water. Adding fluoridation chemicals to the water is vastly different in that it is added to treat the people and there is no requirement for councils to do this. In fact, only 22 councils out of 67 currently do so.
It is also vastly different than adding iodine to salt in that iodine is an essential nutrient, fluoride is not, and people can chose whether or not to buy iodised salt. It would only be similar if they added it to the water supply. Fluoridation is even more bizarre though, because it is generally accepted, as stated by Judge Hanson, that it works topically i.e. on the outside of the tooth, not systemically as was believed for many years.
This ruling goes against common sense and the growing opposition to fluoridation. To quote Arvid Carlsson, Nobel Prize winner in Medicine in 2000; this is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It’s really obsolete…those nations that are using it should feel ashamed of themselves. It’s against science."
It's open slather on administering drugs via our water supplies, and now many other ways. How about the air we breathe? Judge Hanson’s ruling sets a dangerous precedent.
The ruling on the legality of fluoridation comes down to the fact that Judge Hanson believes an action only constitutes a medical treatment if it is confined to "direct interference with the body or state of mind of an individual and does not extend to public health interventions". Using this logic, it is now perfectly legal for councils to add whatever they like to the water supply so long as they say it’s a "public health intervention". The Government could even spray things into the air.
So what will be next? Will councils start adding an anti-obesity drug or a cholesterol lowering drug as a public health measure to reduce diabetes or health attacks? Or perhaps even the Ministry of Health will grant themselves permission to start spraying vaccines into the air down the streets of Wellington because the delivery mechanism does not involve direct interference? They may justify it every time there is an outbreak of measles or whooping cough. This is no more preposterous than adding highly toxic chemicals to the public drinking water to treat dental decay.
Judge Hanson ruled that fluoridation does not come under the Medicines Act as a "food" does not include a drink. So when is a liquid medicine a drink and when is it a medicine? Does this mean anyone who wants, can claim a therapeutic purpose and provide medical treatment to others, if they add their medicine to water?
It was also very surprising that Judge Hanson saw no material distinction between fluoridation and chlorination of water or the addition of iodine to salt. This is one of the most basic mistakes people make when considering fluoridation. Chlorine is added to many water supplies to make the water drinkable. Councils are required to provide drinkable water. Adding fluoridation chemicals to the water is vastly different in that it is added to treat the people and there is no requirement for councils to do this. In fact, only 22 councils out of 67 currently do so.
It is also vastly different than adding iodine to salt in that iodine is an essential nutrient, fluoride is not, and people can chose whether or not to buy iodised salt. It would only be similar if they added it to the water supply. Fluoridation is even more bizarre though, because it is generally accepted, as stated by Judge Hanson, that it works topically i.e. on the outside of the tooth, not systemically as was believed for many years.
This ruling goes against common sense and the growing opposition to fluoridation. To quote Arvid Carlsson, Nobel Prize winner in Medicine in 2000; this is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It’s really obsolete…those nations that are using it should feel ashamed of themselves. It’s against science."
No comments:
Post a Comment