ADA Untroubled By Yet Another Study Pointing To Fluoride’s Negative Health Impacts

in #politics7 years ago

Fluoridation was sold to Americans by none other than the father of  public relations himself, Edward Bernays — a nephew of Sigmund Freud,  who applied his uncle’s ideas on psychological persuasion for the  benefit of industry and government propaganda.


For decades, many groups have fought  against the inclusion of fluoride in publicly supplied water, arguing  that the risks of mass fluoride consumption outweigh the purported  benefits. Now, a new study published  in Environmental Health Perspectives has added to the scientific  literature that suggests that fluoride negatively impacts human  intelligence, especially in children and infants. The study, surprisingly, was widely reported  in the U.S. mainstream media despite the fact that its findings  contradict the government’s official position regarding the safety of  fluoride. 

The study examined nearly 300 sets of mothers and children living in  Mexico and tested the children’s cognitive development twice over a 12  year period. A drop in scores on intelligence tests was observed for  every 0.5 milligram-per-liter increase in fluoride exposure beyond 0.8  milligrams per liter found in maternal urine. While researchers found a  potential connection to prenatal fluoride exposure, they found no  significant influence of fluoride exposure on brain development once a child was born.     

While the study is likely to cause concern for mothers-to-be around the world, the findings of this study will be of particular concern for  those living in areas where public water is fluoridated. In Mexico,  where the study was conducted, fluoride is not added to public water  supplies and fluoride exposure largely occurs via naturally occurring  fluoride in the environment, fluoridated salt and supplements. In  contrast, three-quarters of the U.S. population is exposed to fluoride  through public water, in addition to other sources of fluoride such as  fluoridated toothpaste.

However, the American Dental Association (ADA) took issue with the study, stating, its  findings “are not applicable to the U.S. The ADA continues to endorse  fluoridation of public water as the most effective public health measure  to prevent tooth decay.” The ADA declined to state why the study’s  findings were not applicable to pregnant women in the United States,  given that fluoride consumption in the U.S. is much higher than in  Mexico due to public water fluoridation. 

Furthermore, contrary to the ADA’s claim, the inclusion of fluoride  in drinking water does not actually reduce the incidence of cavities at  all — instead causing a form of tooth decay known as dental fluorosis, a  widespread phenomenon that the government has admitted is linked to water fluoridation. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that about 41% of U.S. children  between the ages of 12 and 15 suffer from dental fluorosis. Excessive  fluoride consumption can also cause skeletal fluorosis, which results in  extreme joint and skeletal pain. 

Other studies have found yet other negative health effects related to fluoride consumption. For instance, a study  published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health in 2015  found that people drinking fluoridated water were 30 percent more likely  to have high levels of hypothyroidism compared to those living in areas  with low, natural levels of fluoride in their water. The study included  the largest sample population ever analyzed regarding fluoride  consumption.

From toxic industrial byproduct to toxic cavity-preventing “miracle”

This new study is hardly the first of its kind. In 2013, a Harvard University study  found that children living in areas with highly fluoridated water had  “significantly lower” IQ scores than children living in low fluoride  areas. Furthermore, more than 23 human studies and 100 animal studies have linked fluoride consumption  to brain damage. Some of these studies date back to the 1940s when mass  public fluoridation was just beginning in the United States. 

Back when the push to initiate mass public fluoridation began,  influential scientists such as Dr. Dean Burk spoke out against it. Burk,  co-founder of the U.S. National Cancer Institute and head of its  cytochemistry department for over 30 years, once called  fluoridation of the public water supply “public murder” after reviewing  several government-funded studies from the 1930s that showed that  fluoride consumption led to abrupt increases in the incidence of cancer.  However, these government studies were classified and suppressed  as a result of pressure from the aluminum and industrial fertilizer  industries, which supply the fluoride added to U.S. water supplies. 

The production of aluminum as well as industrial fertilizers produces  sodium silicofluoride and hydrofluorosilicic acid, byproducts that had  long been a headache for industry due to their toxicity. Following World  War II, when aluminum production was heightened to meet wartime demand,  hundreds of fluoride damage suits were filed around the country against  aluminum and chemical companies. Most of the lawsuits were settled out  of court, which avoided the establishment of legal precedents. However,  in one case in 1955, a federal court found  that an Oregon couple had sustained “serious injury to their livers,  kidneys and digestive functions” from eating “farm produce contaminated  by [fluoride] fumes” released by a nearby Reynolds aluminum plant.

Once fluoridation was approved and became public policy, these  industries began to sell their fluoride wastes to the government, which  then added them to public water supplies. These waste products,  incidentally, are classified as hazardous and toxic until they are added  to public water supplies, at which point they then become classified as  “preventing” cavities. The first scientist to suggest that fluoride had  cavity-reducing properties was Gerald J. Cox, whose work was largely funded by the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa). 

Following a deluge of industry-funded “science,” fluoridation was  sold to Americans by none other than the father of public relations  himself, Edward Bernays.  Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud, applied his uncle’s ideas for the  benefit of industry and government propaganda. His work led fluoride,  previously known for being marketed as a rat poison, to become associated in the American mind with gleaming smiles and brilliant white teeth. 

Nearly 70 years after water fluoridation began, the aluminum and chemical industries continue to benefit handsomely, as the practice  allows them to sell their waste to the government at a premium for  inclusion in public water systems. The governments seem happy to continue the agreement, despite the mounting evidence that fluoride  lowers intelligence, increases the risk of cancer, and gravely harms  public health.

Originally published at MintPress News.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.24
TRX 0.26
JST 0.041
BTC 95868.85
ETH 3448.93
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.40