Letter
Residents need to be informed about fluoride
07/28/2004
Source: Buffalo Reflex
Dear Editor,
Buffalo residents must answer the fluoride issue. It isn't going away by itself. If you have Internet, here are some sites to help your research and help you cast an informed vote.
From http://emporium.turnpike.net: "Fluoride in any fSend to Jimorm - drops, tablets or vitamins - has never been approved by the Food and Drug Administration..." "The alarming discovery that fluoride has never been approved as a prescription drug was announced by New Jersey State Assemblyman John V. Kelly in 1993...When the Honorable Mr. Kelly asked the FDA for the records of tests used to verify the safety of fluoride, the FDA initially refused to comply...Later, under the freedom of Information Act the FDA was required to turn over the required documents, and again they did not comply...Eventually they had to return to the court to explain themselves, they revealed that there is no drug application for fluoride approval and none has ever been submitted."
Under http://www.earthisland.org/ you can read how normal channels were bypassed by industry to put known toxic industrial waste into drinking water ("...fluoride is one of the most toxic substances known...") as a health measure even though "Airborne fluorides... have caused more worldwide damage to domestic animals than any other air pollutant." There are 10 pages in this report.
Robert J. Carton, Ph.D., has written a Critique of Peer Review Draft Report on a National Toxicology Program research, in which he writes, "I represent 1,100 professionals in Washington, D.C., mostly lawyers, scientists and engineers... The ethical climate at EPA leaves something to be desired...After reading this report (on cancer research recently completed) and discussing it with...experts,...I discerned that the report itself is a well-crafted piece designed to minimize the findings..." For the rest, check http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/000000 (5 pages).
Dr. Paul Connett, professor of Chemistry, St. Lawrence U., N.Y., was invited to Ireland to present concerns about water fluoridation to a panel there. He writes: "I presented the '50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation' and asked the panel to prepare a written, scientifically documented response and to make it publicly available." He states that years later, the '50 Reasons' document has not yet received a response from the pro-fluoride proponents of any country. While any one of the 50 are enough to make one pause, note reasons 15 "Fluoride has been shown to be mutagenic, cause chromosome damage and interfere with the enzymes involved with DNA repair..." and 16 "Fluoride forms complexes with a large number of metal ions, ...and metals...which are toxic to the body...it can help facilitate the uptake of aluminum and lead into tissues where these metals wouldn't otherwise go..."
Do you need more sites? There is no lack.
Try http:// www.fluoridealert.org or //www.mcw.edu/chorus/doc/01188.htm.
It seems the only information in short supply is why we still add fluoride to our water, or valid research to support such action.
Isn't it reasonable to demand proof that fluoride really helps before putting up the money to continue the practice? When pressed to do so, government agencies can't seem to find any real proof. They rely on assurances that have never been substantiated and say, in effect, "trust us!". That should scare you to start filtering your tap water. Unfortunately, fluoride isn't so easily removed.
Thank about this seriously before endorsing any more fluoridation for Buffalo. What you don't know about fluoride treatment could hurt many people and the entire environment. I still drink well water and have no intention of switching.
Margaret Hopper
©Ozarks Newsstand 2004
