Fluoride and Natural News

RabbitHabits

New Blood
R
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
19
I was unsure if this belonged in Conspiracy or Medical, so hopefully I chose the correct forum to place it in.

I always enjoy a good fluoride conspiracy theory, my brother is pretty much against any sort of chemical or spray or vaccine that seems "suspicious", so he recently linked me this article from Natural News.

(Sorry, I would have just linked the article, but I'm new and unable to do that yet.)

(NaturalNews) The next time somebody tries to tell you that there is no scientific evidence proving that fluoride chemicals are harmful to human health, simply point them to a new study review recently published in the Institute of Environmental Health Sciences journal Environmental Health Perspectives that shows, for something like the 25th time now, that fluoride damages brain development and leads to significantly lower IQ levels in humans.

Researchers from both Harvard University's School of Public health and China Medical University in Shenyang jointly studied the effects of fluoride on children by evaluating 27 different fluoride studies. Upon review, the team found "strong indications" that fluoride exposure, particularly among developing children, is highly problematic for proper cognitive development and brain formation.

Children living in areas where public water supplies are artificially fluoridated had far lower IQ levels overall, based on the figures, compared to children living in non-fluoridated areas. And after accounting for other outside factors that may have influenced cognitive health and development, the team essentially determined that there is no denying a link between fluoride exposure and damaged IQ.

"[O]ur results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children's neurodevelopment," wrote Anna Choi, a research scientist at Harvard, and her colleagues in their report. "Fluoride readily crosses the placenta. Fluoride exposure to the developing brain, which is much more susceptible to injury caused by toxicants than is the mature brain, may possibly lead to damage of a permanent nature."

Another study published in the same journal back in 2010 found a similar correlation between fluoride exposure and cognitive development. A comparison of children between the ages of eight and 13 living in two Chinese villages, one fluoridated and one not fluoridated, revealed a 350 percent higher IQ level overall in the non-fluoridated village compared to the fluoridated village.

And again in India, researchers observed that fluoride chemicals cross the blood-brain barrier in children and "alter the structure and function of neural tissue." Published in the Journal of Medical and Allied Sciences, that particular study laid bare how pervasive fluoride actually is, in that the chemical deposits itself throughout the body and builds up over time, including in the brain.

"It's senseless to keep subjecting our children to this ongoing fluoridation experiment to satisfy the political agenda of special interest groups," says Paul Beeber, an attorney and president of the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF). "Even if fluoridation reduced cavities, is tooth health more important than brain health? It's time to put politics aside and stop artificial fluoridation everywhere."
Click to expand...

Any thoughts?

ETA: I found the article by Anna Choi online.

http ://cof-cof.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ Choi-et-al-Developmental-Fluoride-Neurotoxicity-A-Systematic-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-Environmental-Health-Perspectives-20-Jul-2012. pdf
 
Last edited:
Welcome to the forum, RabbitHabits! :w2:

I couldn't get your link to work, even after deleting the spaces, however I found this link from Harvard which says the average loss was only half of one IQ point. http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi.html

Here's a working link to the study:
http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info:doi/10.1289/ehp.1104912

And a thorough dissection of the story by Steven Novella:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/antifluoridation-bad-science/

A snippet: "fluoridated water in the US has the same level of fluoride as the control or low fluoride groups in the China studies reviewed in the recent article, and the negative association with IQ was only found where fluoride levels were much higher – generally above EPA limits."
 
I read the first bit, then zoned out. Fluoride in large amounts affects IQ scores. This usually only occurs from natural sources of fluoride contamination. In some places, the fluoride contamination is so great that the natural fluoride has to be removed and the water re-fluoridated to appropriate levels.
http://www.fluorideresearch.org/332/files/FJ2000_v33_n2_p74-78.pdf
In view of reports of increased fluoride levels in many foods and water supplies, it is urgent that further studies be conducted to examine whether there is a link in animals and humans between fluoride and disturbances of the development and function of the central nervous system

High-fluoride levels may occur in artesian well water when the water passes through strata with a high fluoride content, food may become contaminated when stored in contact with the smoke from a poorly ventilated indoor fire burning high-fluoride coal, and fluoride may be added to water supplies with the practice of fluoridation.
Click to expand...

Even Mike Linacre, one of the greatest developers of statistical software in our time, links to Natural News on his software website, it is only for retards. Do not get caught associating with them.
 
Last edited:
There's an extra space in the link that stops it working I think - this works for me:

http://cof-cof.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Choi-et-al-Developmental-Fluoride-Neurotoxicity-A-Systematic-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-Environmental-Health-Perspectives-20-Jul-2012.pdf

I'm fascinated by the flouride debate mainly because of the rabidly extreme opinions it provokes in people who aren't otherwise conspiracy nutjobs. It's also interesting because it's one of the longest running public medication debates around - I can remember it being a subject of many newspaper letters when I was a post-graduate researcher in the early 90s (water quality and supply was a side issue of my PhD).

As far as this report goes, the first thing to look at is that it is a desk based study. While the authors have gone to some lengths to eliminate extremes and only use comparable studies in their analyses, they are by definition not in control of the variables affecting the outcomes. This is not to say they are incorrect in their conclusions.

There doesn't seem to be an indication as to whether the levels of fluoride in the studies is as a result of natural contribution to drinking water or from artificial dosing.

The data in the table at the end indicate a variety of other factors that may be implicated - iodine and aluminium levels are also mentioned and can't be discounted.

Not all of the fluoride is from drinking water.

Are the IQ tests comparable? IQ as a measure of intelligence is subject to social and cultural bias and we don't know if an IQ test taken in China would produce the same results elsewhere.

There is no indication as to whether education provision is equivalent in the different countries examined.

The author's conclusion is more cautious than anti-fluoride campaigners would like:

In conclusion, our results support the possibility of adverse effects of fluoride exposures on children’s neurodevelopment.
Click to expand...

I kind of sit on the fence in the fluoride debate - I'm not comfortable with mass medication, but neither am I happy in a dentist's chair. Most of western civilisation has had some form of artificial fluoride contribution to our development (even if it's only in toothpaste) yet we still somehow carry on to high levels of intellectual functioning.
 
Since I stopped consuming fluoridated water I found that I am 85% more likely to not deny women my essence.
 
It seems more likely that believing fluoride CTs damages brain development and leads to significantly lower IQ levels in humans.
 
revealed a 350 percent higher IQ level overall in the non-fluoridated village compared to the fluoridated village.
Click to expand...


Okay, that right there should have been a full-stop moment. The best we can hope for is that this is a typo, as there's no way anyone sane could believe that such a huge effect would only be apparent after detailed comparisons of multiple studies. If this were true, we'd all be complete idiots. Towns with fluoridated water would be like Idiocracy compared to non-fluoridated towns. The effects would be obvious.
 
You're a good offficer, Mandrake

Travis said:
Since I stopped consuming fluoridated water I found that I am 85% more likely to not deny women my essence.
Click to expand...

Do you realize they're even putting it ice cream? Kids' ice cream, Mandrake?
 
RabbitHabits said:
Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Yea, how did this dangerous chemical (TOXIC WASTE!!!1!) get into natural water supplies?;)

"It's senseless to keep subjecting our children to this ongoing fluoridation experiment to satisfy the political agenda of special interest groups," says Paul Beeber, an attorney and president of the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation (NYSCOF). "Even if fluoridation reduced cavities, is tooth health more important than brain health? It's time to put politics aside and stop artificial fluoridation everywhere."
Click to expand...

It's ironic they have to use studies of fluoride poisoning using mostly naturally occurring fluoride in order to argue against fluoridation.

The dose makes the poison.

It's kind of like having an industrial accident at a chlorine production faclility resulting in multiple deaths and using that to argue against table salt.
 
In high school chemistry my teacher recycled the same multiple-choice tests every year. One of the questions was "Fluoridation of water is an example of:". The correct answer had something to do with the formation of ions that I can't remember exactly. I suggested to the teacher that he change one of the spurious answers to "A Communist plot." He was not amused. :D
 
threadworm said:
Are the IQ tests comparable? IQ as a measure of intelligence is subject to social and cultural bias and we don't know if an IQ test taken in China would produce the same results elsewhere.

I kind of sit on the fence in the fluoride debate - I'm not comfortable with mass medication, but neither am I happy in a dentist's chair. Most of western civilisation has had some form of artificial fluoride contribution to our development (even if it's only in toothpaste) yet we still somehow carry on to high levels of intellectual functioning.
Click to expand...

I am finishing off a PhD in Educational Psychology with a focus on statistics and measurement theory. I have not carefully read any of the studies, including the one I linked to. I can comment on the general comparability of IQ tests.

Your link is a meta-analysis and states this regarding the use of IQ tests,
The CRT-RC was used to measure the children’s intelligence in 16 studies. Other intelligence measures included the Weschler Intelligence tests (3 studies), Binet IQ test (2 studies), Raven’s test (2 studies), Japan IQ test (2 studies), Chinese comparative intelligence test (1 study), and the mental work capacity index (1 study).
Click to expand...

This a wide range of measures of general intelligence. Tests such as the Weschler, the Binet and the Raven's have English equivalents. These tests are not direct translations. Many of the questions would not make sense in other languages or to testees from other cultural backgrounds. The tests are designed to produce the same average scores for average testees. This is no longer done with the kind of multi-variate statistics you may have studied in school. Modern tests are designed with Item Response Theory allowing a much more sensitive control over individual items in the test. This study also used locally-developed Chinese language IQ tests. You can find a summary of the tests they included in the analysis in Table 1.

The statistic they used calculate a standardized mean difference (SMD). I don't know if you are familiar with this. You can find a summary of the statistic here
http://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/cochra.../9_2_3_2_the_standardized_mean_difference.htm
I have never used this statistic in my own work. This would be a standard methodology and in no way unusual for a study like this.

The differences they found were very small, which the authors comment on on page 14. I have not read the study in detail, but it appears the differences they attribute to fluoride are so small, you would not be able to detect them talking with the person. You can find English translations of the papers cited in the meta-analysis at this link
http://www.fluoridealert.org/chinese/
I quickly went through some of them. The differences they attribute to fluoride are generally only a few points. This would not be a major difference.

The point of these studies is that fluoride in a great amount will interfere with intellectual functioning. The amounts used in fluoridated water do not reach these levels. Even for the studies in question, the IQ differences measured are not great. From the POV of a national policy, it should be addressed From the POV of a citizen, I would want the government addressing it. Should you be scared about the fluoride in your water causing mental retardation? That would be silly.
 
Last edited:
We Must Protect our Precious Bodily Fluids!

There,we now have our Obligatory in any thread involving Flouridation of Water Dr Strangelove reference over with....
 
SECRETS OF FLUORIDE PRODUCTION AND THE KILLINGS OF FLUORIDE* RESEARCH


The fluoride conspiracy possibly is hiding the largest pharmaceutical scandal in the history of mankind. Only recently some
European researches instead of the planned results about fluoride toxicity indeliberatel found the evidence for the existence of international conspiracies.
The findings unveiled some unexpected actors of the plot. Those are presented below. Actors are based on evidence (names of single persons remain disclosed).
The possible goals and intentions of the conspiracy however are pure speculation in the absence of the planned research project. That project was based on preliminary
research results, it was readily planned and approved when it suddenly and unexpectedly stalled. Researching the reasons for the crash, below it is what was found:

Backgrounds:
1. The one-year-mortality in adults correlates in a linear way to the depth of anesthesia, even if sophisticated statistic calculations attempt to eliminate
that factor as an artifact (1).
2. US American studies revealed that children in the USA even 10 years after anesthesia have lower IQs than comparable
children not having undergone anesthesia. That effect presently is investigated by the FDA in the so called SAFEKIDS Project (2).

The anesthetic agent being used preferrably in children is a gas named SEVOFLURANE. Sevoflurane is C4 H3 F7 O.
With its seven fluor atoms it has replaced the gases ENFLURANE and ISOFLURANE, both containing
2 fluor atoms per molecule. SEVOFLURANE presently in many countries is renamed into SEVORANE, which removes the fluoride from its
name but not from its molecule.

It can be assumed that there is a possible connection between water fluoridation, anesthesia and brain damage:
From perfluorocarbones, used as blood replacement, it is known that those fluoride containing molecules are stored in a compartment of the human organism,
the rethiculo endothelial system or RES, the substances not being metabolized. Those PFCs then are exhaled over a very long time.
This mechanism is a natural detoxification mechanism for substances which cannot be metabolized otherwise (5, 5a, 5b).
Those substances are buffered and cleared over a prolonged period to avoid toxic peak concentrations in vulnerable organs like the brain.
If during long time exposure with small amounts of fluoride like exposure to fluorinated water that buffer mechanism can be saturated or
“exhausted”, any further exposure with fluoride containing compounds or drugs will lead to non
mitigated toxic effects of fluoride. Fluoride is not only very common in anesthetic agents but also in hypnotic drugs
and sedatives as well as anti depressants; best known is Fluoxetin or Prozac®.

The research project was based on results from another study in which a linear correlation between the concentration of inhaled
anesthetic gases by which anesthic depth is adjusted and brain damage was found in animal studies. Those studies however involved the older
gases above. Therefore the actually standard, SEVOFLURANE was the topic of the new study.



Pharma producers are suspected to block research on the topic of brain damage by fluoride containing compounds. When the project in Europe unexpectedly
stalled the researchers did what they always do: They researched. The topic however had changed towards the reasons of the crash of the study.
It came out that the study was sabotaged by an undercover agent from a US company.Surprisingly however not the producers of pharmaceutical
products had hired the professional, but the producer of the raw material, the INNOPHOS company in Cranbury, NJ, USA.
The company presents itself in public as world's largest producer of phosphates as nutrition additives. It is disclosed almost completely that INNOPHOS is also
the largest manufacturer of fluorides, phosphates being the only natural source of fluoride. Natural phosphates contain up to 6% of fluoride. For use as
nutrition additives fluoride content has to be in the ppm range. The company does not reveal the use of the remaining fluoride. The annual production
of 35.8 Million metric tons of phosphate gives an estimated amount of recovery of its byproduct of 2.148 Million metric tons of fluoride per year.
That is not so negligible to be completely kept out of the companies annual reports (8,9).

Through phospahte mining in the occupied Western Sahara INNOPHOS has obtained an unruly image of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity
(Exploiting a military occupied territory are the war crimes of pillage and plundering) (6,7).

The undercover agent from INNOPHOS however had even one more secret: She was an ex employee of the US company SCOTT Specialty Gases,
known as producer of medical calibration gases.
Scott, which is now owned by another company, has a small subsidiary, Scott Homeland Security, which is able to provide on request every single agent
for chemical warfare which is known. All agents are restricted by international conventions and international laws of the conduct of warfare .
(The official purpose of the production of those gases is the calibration of measuring devices in case of a terrorist attack).

The connection between INNOPHOS and Scott Homeland Security in the opinion of research provided the saboteur,
who in both companies held an upper managment position, with classified information about toxicity of fluoride
containing gases which was the subject of the European fluoride toxicity study. Therefore the new employer and its customers were to be protected
from astronomical damage compensation claims based on possible scientific results.
That it is a better solution to protect Millions of US citizens from brain damage possibly plays no role in a company accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
If it is a good idea that someone with internal knowledge of chemical warfare agents becomes an employee of such an entity
will not be discussed in length.

One thing however is for sure: Conspiracies are only theories unless someone finds himself in the middle of such a conspiracy.



References




1. http://www.anesthesia- analgesia.org/content/100/1/4.abstract?ijkey=5e3f4487cd994b8c433622d9465352a964560159&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha
2. https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportu...0f3843eff03075ee36ecee2c3f1&tab=core&_cview=1
3. http://www.alspecialtygases.com/Ind_homeland_security.aspx
4. http://apps.shareholder.com/sec/viewerContent.aspx?companyid=IPHS&docid=5798802&pr int=yes
5. http://classes.kumc.edu/cahe/respcared/liquidventilation/wikeper.html

5a. http://www.pharmainfo.net/reviews/artificial-blood-current-review

5b. http://www.ec.gc.ca/toxiques-toxics/Default.asp?lang=En&n=98E80CC6-1&xml=AA329670- C3C7-4AD5-A7AB-5FD8A05439F1
6. http://arso.org/PlunderingoftheaharaSmith.pdf
7. http://www.wsrw.org/a105x1789
8. http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/phosphate_rock/phospmyb04.pdf
9. http://www.wsrw.org/files/dated/2011-01-01/innophos-report-10q-sec-04.11.2009.pdf
9. http://www.wsrw.org/files/dated/2011-01-01/innophos-report-10q-sec-04.11.2009.pdf

* Although fluoride, fluorine and fluorite are chemically defined compounds the terms are used inconsistently in non chemical publications.
The term fluoride is used here even when fluorine or fluorite would be the correct term.
 
Last edited:
MaxMurx said:
2. US American studies revealed that children in the USA even 10 years after anesthesia have lower IQs than comparable
children not having undergone anesthesia. That effect presently is investigated by the FDA in the so called SAFEKIDS Project (2).
Click to expand...

Ahem:

Orphia Nay said:
And a thorough dissection of the story by Steven Novella:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/antifluoridation-bad-science/

A snippet: "fluoridated water in the US has the same level of fluoride as the control or low fluoride groups in the China studies reviewed in the recent article, and the negative association with IQ was only found where fluoride levels were much higher – generally above EPA limits."
Click to expand...
 
I was given fluoride supplements as an infant as part of a study my mother was involved in at Bristol University.

I've never been contacted for follow up, but I guess they just use dental records to evaluate results. My IQ was measured aged 12 at 147. I'm now 37 and have never had a filling or any dental caries, even though my dental hygiene is erratic to say the least. My father made it past thirty without fillings too, so there's probably a genetic component; possibly the same one that gives the male line of my family oral cancers.

I often wonder if I'd rather be a 180+ genius with dreadful teeth...

This is an anecdote, with a sample size of one of course, but it's the reason I scoff loudly at 'fluoridation is evil' theories.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom