Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
Yes trust the good dentist, trust the good doctors, trust your government to make all your decisions for you. Don't do any research on your own. Do not study, the good doctor has done all that for you. You can rest assured he will take good care of you.
Sep 11, 2012
From the post below. Dr Tom says "Everyone is entitled to fight against things that are done for their own well-being. It is odd to say this is forced on them when a simple water filter would remove the fluoride from your water. Let's face it, everyone that has posted against fluoride is drinking bottled water or reverse osmosis water from their home. You can avoid the fluoride if you so choose. Stop making decisions for the people that need it the most.
Whenever there is a debate, I think it is wise to look at 'what's in it for each side'. On one hand you have a dentist that could profit from an increase in tooth decay, begging for the addition of fluoride to the water. On the other side is a guy who currently speaks to the evils of fluoride, claims he does not profit from his book on the topic and yet he makes a very good living lecturing on this topic. Not very credible in my opinion."
First of all how do you know how much Dr. Connett makes on his lecture circuit? And why deny a man financial rewards for supremely excellent service to society? Secondly many doctors and dentists write books about what they know. And last I checked they were not unrewarded financially for it.
If dentists actually cared about poor people they who have limited or no access to quality dentistry, they would do far more free dentistry for them than they do now - which is practically none. They would focus especially in cosmetic dentistry, much of which is required by 41% of children who get dental fluorosis from....wait for it...FLUORIDE. But profit and money get in the way as dental practices enjoy a comfortable business model supported by insurance companies and a paradigm that does not service those who can not pay market rates for dental work.
FURTHERMORE, if poor people, who dentists deem to be sad and alone in a terrifying world of decay and cruelty, then why do dentists not offer the poor heavy duty education, nutritional counseling and free Xylitol snd REAL tooth decay programs as they do in countries like Sweeden where socialized medicine levels the greed factor and pushes forward real solutions to real problems without such encumbrances. Why do they support the add toxic chemicals to water that nobody should be drinking unfiltered from the tap with or without fluroide in the first place. The carcinogenic attributes of water without fluroide are well documented. Everyone should be filtering their water anyway. This just makes the problem worse and smacks of a larger conspiracy of control over society in general.
The problem with many dentists and medically trained professnal is they have been indoctrinated into a tunnel vision mentality. They are obsessed with teeth and have no training in general physiology as do general practitioner medical doctors. It astounds me that their science is accepted when they do not have and MD degree. The level of voluntary ignorance in the dental community is all too convenient to maintain credibility. I believe it all goes back to a basic survival instinct. Anything that threatens the survival of an individual polarizes any opinion he or she might form in favor of the best outcome for the individual. In this case anything that threatens the status quo paradigm is terrifying especially when so much ego is attached to credibility for having supported fluoridation for so long. How do you go back? You can't. So you side with the devil, metaphorically speaking. You side with industry and a government that supports bad science, and those would subdue the public good. We know this because they ignore new science but mire importantly they need to protect their reputations at all cost. They know the science they have been reporting to be safe and effective so long is bad science and they spend millions to protect this lie. To retract this position would bring on an avalanche of law suits that could ostensibly go on for decades if not longer.
If, as non medical professional, I know these things in toxic detail. Why is it these dentists do not? Consider what they, the CDC, FDA and ADA have to lose? This is the smoking gun. Sep 11, 2012
Dr. Richard Sauerheber is a Ph.D from the University of California San Marcos who wrote the groundbreaking paper "On The Toxicity of Fluoridated Water" and works tielessly in the pursuit of truth behind fluoridation, of water rights, and water safety in the interest of national health. Here is Dr. Sauerhebers commentary on the debate sent to the steering committee of San Diegans for Safe Drinking Water. The following piece was also accepted for publication in a major Phoenix newspaper:
"Farran is incorrect in most statements. Fluorosilicic acid is a distinct chemical species that can be observed spectroscopically in solution, but it cannot be isolated free of aqueous solvent because this causes the complex to re-dissociate back to HF and SiF4. The original correlation by Trendley Dean that fluoride might affect teeth caries has been disproven in vast studies (Teotia; Hileman; see Thiessen reports to EPA and HHS, 2012, among others), even when the Dean data are included, which was found to be scatter among the complete population of cities in detailed analyses by Ziegelbecker (see Connett, 2011 textbook for brief description of that work). Calcium builds strong teeth, not fluoride, which is not a mineral nutrient of any kind (NRC, 2006; FDA), and the water in Hereford, Texas where the false correlation was introduced contained over 300 ppm calcium and magnesium.
Calcium minimizes fluoride assimilation from ingestion and any fluoride found naturally in some fresh waters is always accompanied with much caicium from which it ionizes. Maximum solubility for calicum fluoride is only 8ppm fluoride and if calcium fluoride had been used as a fluoridating agent then we would not have had the Hooper Bay, AK fluoridated water poisoning disaster with 302 life-flighted victims of an overfeed and one fatality (Gessner, New Eng. J. Med. 330, 1994). Calcium fluoride is not a listed toxic on poisons registries, but all industrial fluorides lack calcium and are listed toxic calcium chelators with a low LD50 of 125 mg/kg single oral dose in test mammals. For Farran's information the lethal level of fluoride in the bloodstream which causes blockage of heart contraction due to reduction in calcium activity is a mere 5 ppm. Blood levels of consumers in 1 ppm fluoridated cities averages 0.2 ppm but varies widely because waters in the U.S. vary widely in calcium content (7 ppm in the Pacific Northwest, 50 ppm U.S. average, 500 ppm in areas in Texas).
It is calcium which determines the toxicity of ingested fluoride. For example, the Columbia River salmon collapse in the 1970s was caused by only 0.3 ppm industrial fluoride from a smelter, where fluoride narcotizes salmon brain and prevents navigation. Fluoride in sea water does not bother salmon in the slightest because of the massive levels of calcium in the water preventing assimilation. The salmon returned after the discharges were halted. South Sacramento began fluoridating in 2007 and in 2008 there was a salmon collapse, the first since the 19th century. The rest of the city became fluoridated later and salmon runs still do not exist anymore here. This seems to not matter to dentists who are intent on protecting teeth at any cost, who traditionally have overlooked facts that bone is weakened when fluoride accumulates to 3,000 mg/kg (NRC, 2006) during lifetime consumpton of 1 ppm fluoride water average in humans, and brain degeneration is slow and progressive in animal studies at similar low levels (Varner, Brain Research, 1986, Reddy, 2011, etc.) and tooth fluorosis is abnormal enamel hypoplasia due to systemic fluoride blockage of protein removal during enamelization that is now endemic in the U.S. with 41% of teens having this ugly condition as of 2004 (CDC).
The FDA ruled from 1963-1993 correctly that fluoride is not a mineral nutrient, does not strengthen bone (as promoters had hoped it would) and addition into water is an ucontrolled use of an unapproved drug. Hopefully the industrial fluoride-in-water ban petition or the petition to ensure that any proposal to take fluoride internally require a prescription, as required for Luride, will be honored by the FDA soon.
If the IQ deficits that occurred in the higher fluoride water Chinese village were due to waste emissions from another region, as suggested by Farran, then why did only the fluoride village become the one most affected?
Drinking water does not affect teeth caries by bathing teeth with fluoride. Toothpaste contains 75,000 times more concentrated fluoride (1,500 ppm) than the fluoride in saliva (0.02 ppm) from drinking 1 ppm treated water, that continuously bathes teeth topically. CDC dental officials were asked how it is justified to spend 300 million dollars annually in the U.S. to achieve only 0.02 ppm, 75,000 times less concentrated than in toothpaste, a level perceived to affect caries topically. The CDC responded that they would send the question to someone else to try to find an answer.
Farran never answered the public question on why we fluoridate water when pineal gland calcification is so high in the U.S. and fluoride causes calcification of the pineal gland. He implies that fluoride that accumulates in bone and brain is low enough to never affect anyone’s health, but the NRC reported that fluoride accumulates lifetime permanently into bone to 3-4,000 mg/kg and there is no doubt that pineal gland fluoride is very high at the same time bone fluoride is."Sep 11, 2012
Dr. Farran completely ignores one immutable fact: Hydrofluorosilicic acid is a waste product of the phosphate fertilizer industry and is not refined before it is added to our water. It is heavily contaminated with toxins and heavy metals (including the cancerous arsenic, lead and cadmium) and radioactive materials. This substance is the waste residue from the superphosphate fertilizer industry, and about 70 to 75 percent of this stuff comes from the Cargill fertilizer manufacturing company or is imported from Mexico or China or it is purchased from Brentag Chemical...all of whom have federal protection from damages caused by their chemicals.
I was at the debate. While Dr. Farran was clearly indoctrinated into the ADA / Delta Dental / CDC / FDA sponsored fluoridation culture of pro fluoride politics he ignores the citizen / customer's / consumers right to refuse forced medication. The right to choose is completely ignored in his arguments. He ignores any new science from anyone but official government organizations who all back fluoridation one hundred percent. He also ignores alternative means of using fluoride if citizens wish to do so. This was very suspicious indeed. Unbiased independent science states there are more problems with unrefined, non-pharmaceutical grade industrial waste product hydrofluorosilicic acid (the actual product added to our water) than with pharmaceutical sodium fluoride because hydrofluorosilicic acid contains many a broad spectrum of toxic chemicals that are not removed from the compound. It contains these chemicals because it is cheaper to buy, and more profitable to the sellers, in this crude form. Dr. Farran ignores this fact completely in the debate which makes the rest of his argument COMPLETELY void and irrelevant. He appeared to be a nice, and a sincere man, but sadly he is sincerely wrong. You can not compare apples with oranges. Until Dr. Farran acknowledges the product that is added to our water is not sodium fluoride but rather a toxic slurry of unrefined chemicals that also contains some fluoride his argument is irrelevant. His argument was evasive, digressive, immaterial to the actual reality of the compound put directly in our water. When he said "fluoride isn't going anywhere" he revealed a suspicious arrogance. His argument, while calculated and compelling for the fully indoctrinated lacked any credibility for those who know anything about the actual content of hydrofluorosilicic acid. In the final analysis his logic was consistent but utterly inapplicable to the discussion and far beneath the dignity of Dr. Connett or any serious discussion of fluoridation for that matter. When asked if they want chemicals like this in their water people ALWAYS SAY NO.
The good doctor Farran also ignored healthful alternatives to fluoride's ill effects. Much of Europe protects their teeth with gum and tooth paste containing Xylitol. It is truly safe and effective along with many other oral methods for keeping your families teeth white and disease free. What Dr. Farran omits from the discussion is indeed more relevant TO the discussion that his droning on about a the old boy network status quo, politically driven doctrine of death cloaked in images of helping the poor, loving his family and being a "good citizen." Dr. Farran in my opinion is nothing more than another blow-hard talking head for a billion dollar industry. Nice as he might be, he is a sadly mis-inforemed guy with blinders the size of notebooks hanging from his face. I have no doubt that Dr Farran cares about his family, loves children and humanity but his agenda was steeped in politics and towing the line for the age old fluoride deception, a culture of death and disease whether he knows it or not. Anybody who would defend dental amalgam (which he did briefly in the debate) sets himself apart from a more informed and educated public. He has much to loose if he flip flops and tells the truth about fluoride and mercury fillings. He is part of a large group of people who are culpable for systemic liability if they capitulate to the truth. They stand to lose credibility and their own dignity for having supported this lie for so long... IF AND WHEN they ever decide that health is more important than ego. Hence, Dr Farran must MUST MUST perpetuate the great lie and support fluoridation AT ALL COST! The hydrofluorosilicic acid industrial waste disposal solution is dilution into our water supply. It has nothing to do with health, cavity prevention in the poor or bone health. Quite the contrary. It is harming our citizens and adding to the burden of toxins every citizen is exposed to in this modern heavily polluted world. The best Dr. Farran can hope for is society reacting to this affront with a trust for government and a healthy mass illusion of denial. Those who simply can not psychologically handle the truth about this issue are what they want. He, as all fluoride proponents do, hope society would rather believe the great lie rather than face the truth and deal with it. America will never heal until we begin to face the great lies like this and hold accountable those who have perpetrated them. This is why the fluoride debate is so very important. I thank Dr. Farran and Dr. Connett for taking the time to address the issue and to raise consciousness concerning fluoride. Sep 10, 2012