Share |

PrintPrintable version



Information on fluoride isn't really new -- A recap on the poisoning of the public

| | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Nancy J. Tock Sarnia
The Sarnia Observer
December 1, 2008

So, the fluoride debate is on again.

The government has come to the conclusion that fluoride levels in drinking water should be no more than 0.7 milligrams per litre. Mike Bradley says any decision "should be based on science and health. It should not be based on politics."

I agree.

I also think the public should have the "new" information. Much of the information is, in fact, not new.

The Danish scientist Kaj Eli Roholm wrote of the dangers of fluoride in the 1930s. Phyllis J. Mullenix, a prominent U. S. neurotoxicologist, warned of its toxicity in the early 1990s. Many other prominent minds worldwide have added their voice.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Fluoride in the human body is cumulative and the daily amount of fluoride that any individual ingests through the public water system is variable and cannot be accurately controlled. Our bodies absorb fluoride from bathing and showering and it is present in many other substances, including various medicines.

It is very difficult, if not impossible, to avoid fluoride exposure in our society. Many of us are being "medicated" against our will and with little choice of alternatives. Those who choose fluoride for dental protection can opt for topical dental treatments and supplements where dosage can be more accurately controlled.

Fluoride was once used by the medical profession to reduce thyroid function in an overactive gland. Fluoride displaces iodine in the thyroid. Without sufficient iodine, the thyroid cannot function efficiently and this can lead to many problems

Cretinism in children has long been linked to malfunction of the thyroid. Heart disease, high cholesterol, learning disabilities, cancer, dementia, weight gain, arthritis and others have been linked to low thyroid function, which often goes undetected.

I find it interesting that in the 50 or so years since fluoride was added to the water supply, all of these health problems have increased dramatically.

I am not suggesting that fluoride is the only source of these diseases -- if only it were that simple -- however, by eliminating fluoride from our water, we can decrease the risk and possibly reduce some of our overburdened health service costs.

Let us consider finances. It cannot be inexpensive to fluoridate our water supply. What do we use this water for? Watering lawns, laundry, flushing toilets, bathing, food preparation and drinking.

Systemic fluoride has been shown to be useless in preventing tooth decay while topical applications may be of some help.

So, why are we adding this substance to the public water supply?

I do hope that our councillors -- those entrusted to protect the interests of the citizens of this area -- do their homework thoroughly before jumping into the fray. I think they will be appalled once they see how we have all been manipulated to become a dumping ground for this toxic chemical.



  • Currently 5/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 5/5 (5 votes cast)




0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Information on fluoride isn't really new -- A recap on the poisoning of the public.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.laleva.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1004

Leave a comment

Health Supreme News

Loading...
‚Äč
Powered by Movable Type 5.13-en

Receive updates

Subscribe to get updates of this site by email:

Enter your Email


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

Other sites of ours