The dilemma over fluoride safety
                is secondary to the fact
         that it is categorized as a drug
                         by the FDA.

              This means the public is
               being drugged in mass.  

                  That can't be right.

Below is a copy of the letter I wrote to my municipal water board.  You may feel free to copy and send it to yours.  Instead of stirring up the same old question of "is  fluoride safe or unsafe" I've brought up some issues that are hard to dispute.  

Bottom line...The FDA classifies fluoride as an "unapproved drug," even though it has been used for 60 years.  We know the position of the Center for Disease Control is that systemic use of fluoride does no good and that only a topical treatment shows any signs of improving dental health.  We also know that there are changes to the body when fluoride is used.  How then did this happen?   Somewhere in my soul, it feels like greed is involved.

Copy of my letter to my water district:

This short fact sheet gives an overview of my concerns and those of others who question the efficacy, the dangers and the “why” of adding fluoride to our water supply.  It is time to re-examine that decision.

Of course there is science on all sides of this issue that will conflict, but we must question the policy.  Without getting into the arguable science, I have listed a few points that don’t require opinion.  Should you like more scientific data, I am happy to provide it.

Fluoride Facts;

1.  Fluoride is added to the water, not for the purpose of improving water quality, but rather for the alleged purpose of preventing tooth decay.  The FDA qualifies the use of fluoride for this purpose as a drug.  

We are therefore drugging unsuspecting users without informed consent.  This is not legal.  Many are exposed against their will.  Filtering drinking water is not the answer as showering and other uses are exposing humans to the drug.

 2. The use of fluoride is not universally accepted.  Most of Western Europe has refused fluoride because of the controversy surrounding it and the concept of mass drugging.

3.  If in fact fluoridation was a positive influence, water is not the correct method for dosing.  People consume water based on need of the water itself and without regard to the amount of the drug being consumed.  

It is easy to see that the amount of fluoride taken into a body cannot be regulated via the municipal water supply.  We must be able to calculate the amount of fluoride that is absorbed during showering via the skin or through crop watering which is impossible for a user.  We must also consider a bottle fed infant that ingests levels of fluoride equal to those of an adult.  There is no research to warn what the outcome of this might be in the future.

4.  According to fluoridealert.com, fluoride is not an essential nutrient and no disease or tooth decay is caused by the lack of fluoride.  They also state that fluoride interferes with many enzymes and biological processes in the body.  They quote many studies that prove fluoride interferes with the body’s biochemistry in fundamental ways.

5.  In 60 years of forced fluoridation there are still no studies to prove efficacy or safety and still the  FDA classifies it as an “unapproved new drug.”  This should make the addition of fluoride without consent a criminal act.  

Although rather unscientific, I would also say that not one dentist has gone out of business because of fluoridated water.   There is no apparent threat to the dental industry and no data that proves dwindling numbers of patients.

6.  In 2001 the CDC concluded that the benefits of fluoride were topical and not systemic.  With this in mind, why are we risking what could be a horrific outcome?

7.  Studies of those fluoridated in comparison to those not fluoridated, show that each group has similar dental health in my research.  Even the NIH has studied fluoride and determined that there is no significant relationship between tooth decay and fluoride among children.

8.  Research shows that tooth decay does not increase when fluoridation is discontinued.

9.  Many resources agree that the studies that brought us fluoridation were flawed.  There is consistent evidence of potential harm and many resources, including the National Research Council, believe it may damage the brain.

10. Thirty-three independent studies from countries other than the USA report that exposure to fluoride will lower IQ.  Other studies focus on damage to the pineal gland, thyroid function, arthritis, bone density loss, kidney damage, bone cancer and infertility with fluoride contamination.

Is this not enough to ask yourself why we continue this practice?
I am asking this Board to reconsider our use of fluoride in the water supply and to ask that we begin purchasing non-fluoridated water. 

                        When you have the option of
                                  keeping baby safe 

​                                       Why Not?
                                                          

Before you make your vaccination decisions, listen to the reality you've never heard.  Bobby Kennedy, Jr. is being silenced and ridiculed for exposing the truth.   He will tell you that the US authority on health, The Institute of Medicine, which is an Independent branch of the US National Academy of Sciences, has warned that potentially 150 illnesses are being caused by vaccines.  They advise proper testing of vaccines.  The CDC, however, refuses to accept this authority and refuses to do the studies required to prove or disprove the validity of vaccines.  

Vaccines were given free rein by law to be produced in the case of emergencies.  The intent was that in the case of war or chemical attack, a vaccine could be produced without interference and lengthly trials.  Instead this law became a loophole for those with greed in their souls to create great wealth.  Follow the money.

         Lovely to look at and beautiful to hold...
         But they may be as toxic as they are bold.




​

As a woman who was poisoned by dinnerware for over 15 years and spent decades undoing the damage, the choice in dinner plates matters.  The biggest fear is lead, because the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, is permissive about it's use in dinnerware and actually has allowable levels that are said to be "safe".   The truth about lead and other lethal toxins that are casually allowed in consumer products is that their continued use adds up.  No matter who considers these toxins safe, your body might disagree.  

To your body, ingesting toxins means the chore of detoxing that toxin is being assigned.  If the dangers cannot be discharged fast enough, they will likely be stored in organs and tissue.  Stored toxicity is a time bomb.  You never know if or when it will become a burden that will manifest into a chronic condition or illness.  When it does, it will most likely be misdiagnosed and treated with drugs to ease symptoms while the true culprit remains in the body to do further damage.

Because the choices for lead-free dinnerware are few, Melamine looked like an exciting option.  It's lightweight, durable, inexpensive and comes in beautiful color and pattern options, but could there be a downside?  

Melamine has been used as an industrial fertilizer and the finished product for dinnerware does include formaldehyde.  Many will rely on the fact that it meets FDA requirements and that the potential of the toxicity leaching into foods is not likely, but the risk you take could be grand.

Melamine does have the potential to leach toxicity as stated by the FDA.  Long term exposure from storing food on plates, heat and  acidic foods allow the release more easily.  Cutting food with knives could also be a contributor.  Additionally, some Melamine products are not even dishwasher safe while others are limited to the top rack of dishwashers adding to the worry that dishwashing might also help spread the contaminants.

In 2007 150 brands of pet food were recalled because of Melamine contamination.  In simple, routine taste tests pets died from exposure.  The danger to humans is mostly related to the kidneys, with kidney failure, kidney infection, kidney stones, high blood pressure and death being the primary concerns.

To risk or not to risk is a personal decision, but being armed with the facts is essential.  Below are FDA responses to questions on their site, FDA.gov.  

Some interesting notes to consider give clue to the casual attitude of the Administration.  The warnings are softened by saying the risk is minimal.  They state that in one test 3 of 19 samples were considered a danger.  Nineteen samples is hardly adequate to safeguard consumers and where are those 3 brands that are hazardous if not on the same shelf as the other 16?  They say also that tests were done in exaggerated conditions of food being held at 160 degrees for 2 hours.  Personally, I do not consider these conditions extreme or exaggerated.  Warming plates, dishwashing, microwaving and many kitchen uses allow for these temperatures to be used commonly.  

The FDA admits that acidic foods are at a higher risk and claim that because these foods are only about 10% of the normal diet, all should be fine.  This seems an incredible response to the question, "Could Melamine be harmful to my health?'  Using the logic provided, those with a healthier diet will be at a higher risk than those who do not incorporate such foods.

Melamine in Tableware: Questions and Answers by FDA.gov:
What is melamine?
Melamine is a chemical that has many industrial uses.  In the United States, it is approved for use in the manufacturing of some cooking utensils, plates, plastic products, paper, paperboard, and industrial coatings, among other things. In addition, although it is not registered as a fertilizer in the U.S., melamine has been used as a fertilizer in some parts of the world.  Melamine may be used in the manufacturing of packaging for food products, but is not FDA-approved for direct addition to human food or animal feeds marketed in the U.S.  
I recently read that plastic tableware from China contained high levels of melamine.  Can the melamine from these products get into foods and drinks?
The Taiwan Consumers' Foundation recently tested plastic tableware made in China and found that it contained melamine at a level of 20,000 parts per billion.  This type of tableware is manufactured with a substance called melamine-formaldehyde resin. It forms molecular structures that are molded, with heat, to form the shape of the tableware.  A small amount of the melamine used to make the tableware is "left over" from this chemical reaction and remains in the plastic. This left-over melamine can migrate very slowly out of the plastic into food that comes into contact with the tableware.   
If melamine from plastic tableware can get into foods and drinks, does it make the foods or drinks harmful to health?
It has been found that melamine does not migrate from melamine-formaldehyde tableware into most foods.  The only measured migration, in tests, was from some samples (three out of 19 commercially available plates and cups) into acidic foods, under exaggerated conditions (that is, the food was held in the tableware at 160 oF for two hours).  When adjusted for actual-use conditions (cold orange juice held in the tableware for about 15 minutes), the migration would be less than 10 parts of melamine per billion parts of juice. 
This is 250 times lower than the level of melamine (alone or even in combination with related compounds – analogues – known to increase its toxicity) that FDA has concluded is acceptable in foods other than infant formula (2,500 parts per billion); in other words, well below the risk level.  In addition, such highly acidic foods make up only about 10% of the total diet, so the dietary level of melamine in these scenarios would be less than one part per billion.
However, when highly acidic foods are heated to extreme temperatures (e.g.,160 ° F or higher), the amount of melamine that migrates out of the plastic can increase. Foods and drinks should not be heated on melamine-based dinnerware in microwave ovens.  Only ceramic or other cookware which specifies that the cookware is microwave-safe should be used. The food may then be served on melamine-based tableware.
Should I stop using plastic tableware?
Foods and drinks may be served on plastic tableware.  Plastic tableware that does not specify that it’s microwave-safe should not be used to heat foods and drinks. 
How did FDA decide what level of melamine in food doesn’t pose a risk to health? 
A safety and risk assessment estimates the risk that specific substances have on human health, based on the best scientific data available at the time.  FDA has done this type of assessment to identify the risk posed by melamine and its analogues in foods (Interim Safety and Risk Assessment of Melamine and Its Analogues in Food for Humans). 
The risk assessment was conducted by scientists from FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine, and included a review of the scientific literature on melamine toxicity.  Animal studies also provided valuable information for this work. The assessment underwent peer review by a group of experts identified by an independent contractor.
What problems can melamine cause if people eat or drink food contaminated with it?
Products with melamine contamination above the levels noted in FDA’s risk assessment may put people at risk of conditions such as kidney stones and kidney failure, and of death. Signs of melamine poisoning may include irritability, blood in urine, little or no urine, signs of kidney infection, and / or high blood pressure.

Fluoride has made its way into our daily lives via public water providers.  The truth about how a poison, once part of Vietnam's Agent Orange crisis, came to being part of the public water supply is still somewhat mysterious.  We know the original claims were in regard to reducing dental cavities, but these claims remain in dispute. Often agencies within the same governments that provide fluoridated water, challenge the practice.  Even your bottled water is at risk of containing fluoride without your knowledge.

According to the Center for Disease Control, 2012 report on Community Water Fluoridation the percentage of the US population receiving community water with fluoridation was 67%.  Of the 52,734 community water providers in the US then, only 18,502 agencies were providing fluoridated water.  That means that these providers were serving large populations.  The states providing the largest populations with fluoridated water are California, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas even though the question of efficacy and danger continue.

If we reduce the arguments for and against fluoridation of public water to the basic facts, there seems to be no reason for this practice to continue.  No matter which side of the fence is yours, the practice appears to be unfair and illegal.   Note the facts and decide if your health rights are being managed by the government without your consent.

Fluoride Facts:

1.  Fluoride is added to water not for the purpose of improving water quality, but for the purpose of preventing tooth decay and/or disease.  The FDA qualifies the use of fluoride for this purpose as a drug.  We are therefore, drugging unsuspecting users without informed consent, which we know is not legal.  Many are exposed against their will.  

2.  The use of fluoride is not universally accepted.  Most of Western Europe has refused fluoride because of the controversy surrounding it and the concept of mass drugging.

3.  If in fact fluoridation was a positive influence, water is not the correct method for dosing.  People consume water based on need of water itself and without regard to the amount of the drug being consumed.  It is easy to see that the amount of fluoride taken into a body cannot be regulated via the municipal water supply.  In that equation we must also calculate the amount of fluoride that is absorbed into the body via the skin during bathing or swimming, which almost no consumer can know.  We must also consider a bottle fed infant that ingests levels of fluoridation meant for an adult for which there is no research on outcome.

4.  According to fluoridealert.org fluoride is not an essential nutrients and no disease or tooth decay is caused by a lack of fluoride.  They also state that fluoride interferes with many enzymes and biological processes in the body. They quote many studies that prove fluoride interferes with the body’s biochemistry in fundamental ways.

5.  In more than 60 years of forced fluoridation there are still no studies to prove efficacy or safety and still the FDA classifies it as an “unapproved new drug.”  This makes the addition of fluoride without consent a criminal act. 

6.  The CDC in 2001 concluded that the benefits of fluoride were topical and not systemic.  With this in mind, why are we risking what could be a horrific outcome?

7.  Even the National Institute of Health has studied fluoride and determined that there is no significant relationship between tooth decay and fluoride among children.

8.  Research shows that tooth decay does not increase when fluoridation is  discontinued.

9.  Many sources agree that the studies that brought us fluoridation were flawed.  There is consistent evidence of potential harm and many sources, including the National Research Council, believe it may damage the brain.

10. Thirty-three independent studies from countries other than the USA report that exposure to fluoride will lower IQ.  Other studies focus on damage to the pineal gland, thyroid function, arthritis, bone density loss, kidney damage, bone cancer, and infertility with fluoride contamination.

It is time the practice of fluoridating public water be challenged, if for no other reason than we are mass drugging populations without consent.  It is unfair that those who cannot afford to filter their drinking and bathing water be subjected to fluoridation.