FOCUS by Valerie Cheers Brown

Ending fluoride medications regards individuals from the overall population who are consumers, leaving choices about youth dental care to dependable guardians and parents. 

– Valerie Cheers Brown 

Yes, water contamination across the US has been in the headlines again. Here’s the thing you have to understand, water contamination issues are ALWAYS happening around the US, but you only hear about them when the media is having a slow news day. Water contamination is their go-to issue for re-engaging people because 1) it scares people and 2) anytime they want to run with a water contamination story they can find one.

You remember the huge spotlight put on Flint, Michigan because of lead in the water? All of the attention put on Flint makes it sound like that was a rare issue, but it’s not at all, and the media knows it. This USA Today article shows that at the same time as the Flint, Michigan issue, at least 2,000 other water supplies in the USA were having the same issue (a school in Ithaca, New York had water that test 33 times higher than Flint!).
Remember the West Virginia chemical spill in the Elk River?  That also was a big media event. Towns were shut down and water tanker trucks were dispensing water to lines of local citizens who were affected. But a month later BusinessWeek published an article showing that this type of chemical spill happens in the USA AT LEAST TEN TIMES EACH DAY!
If you study the issue of water contamination, you realize that not only do we live in a toxic world, but we live in a world where illusions dominate. The government, among others, projects the illusion that we have “safe” drinking water, but the truth is that no one knows what is in your water.

Around 66% of the U.S. populace has fluoridated open water, as indicated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  Of those served by group water frameworks, the rate ascensions to 74.6 percent.

What is fluoridation?

Fluoride is an ionic compound gotten from  fluorine, which is the single most reactive element; it is normally found in many rocks. Around 95 percent of the fluoride added to open water supplies is delivered from phosphorite shake,  according to the CDC.

Fluoride is added to open water supplies at a normal centralization of around 1 section for each million (1 ppm) or 1 milligram for every liter, or marginally beneath. Normally happening fluoride focuses in surface waters rely on upon area however are by and large low and don’t usually do not exceed 0.3 ppm.  Groundwater can contain much more elevated amounts, notwithstanding.

In 2015, the U.S. Branch of Health and Human Services issued a suggestion for the ideal fluoride level that ought to be in drinking water to avoid tooth rot. This new proposal is for a solitary level of 0.7 milligrams of fluoride for every liter of water, contradicted to the 0.7 to 1.2 milligrams for every liter suggestion issued in 1962, which is presently the standard.

The change was suggested on the grounds that the vast majority in the United States have admittance to a greater number of wellsprings of fluoride than they did when the rules were first set up. “The change in sum is more illustrative of the present needs of the populace. Because of the expanded utilize and availability of other fluoride sources (toothpaste, mouth flush, and so forth.) and different upgrades in oral social insurance, these new proposals have been made,” said Alice Lee, a pediatric dental practitioner at Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx, New York.

If this article does not make one at least question fluoridation of water, then why not at least do more research?  50 REASONS TO OPPOSE FLUORIDATION

Opposition background

Despite the evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of fluoridation, anti-fluoride critics have extended their influence and challenged public health experts. They claim that fluoride in drinking water has led to rising levels of fluorosis and can increase the risk of cancer. Some communities even reject fluoridation. For example, voters in Portland, Oregon did so in 2013, the fourth time in almost 60 years — overruling the city’s commissioners, who had agreed to fluoridate the city’s water supply. In January 2016, city officials in Durango, Colorado were debating whether to stop adding fluoride to city drinking water. In early 2016, residents of Healdsburg, California and those in Collier County, Florida were pushing their leaders to do the same thing.

Anti-fluoride groups such as the Fluoride Action Network have effectively used social media to convey their message, and some have lobbied the EPA’s Office of Water to “determine a scientifically based (not politically influenced) MCLG (maximum contaminant level goal) for fluoride.” However, the EPA and the Department of Health and Human Services base their current fluoridation recommendations on their own rigorous scientific assessments and on those of the National Academy of Sciences, all of which take into account the balance of dose, risk and health benefits.

If your water is fluoridated, now what?

According to, “Two-thirds of US tap water is fluoridated in the name of dental health, but concerned consumers fear unintended side effects.”

Fluoride has made significantly a bigger number of features than your normal occasional table salt.

In 1945, Grand Rapids, Michigan turned into the primary US city to fluoridate the general population water supply. The thought rapidly got on, and the contention started before long: in developing numbers, a vocal minority has raised worries about fluoride’s part in an expansive scope of medical issues. Fluoridation fault finders propose fluoride presentation might be involved in physical side effects spreading over gastrointestinal issues, low fruitfulness, thyroid ailment, endocrine disturbance, joint pain, and malignancy. Government wellbeing consultants dissent, contending the advantages to creating teeth exceed any settled dangers. Unquestionable confirmation is difficult to find, because of the way of the level headed discussion: in all real general wellbeing research, such a variety of elements cover that it can be difficult to either demonstrate or negate a condition’s cause. What’s more, a controlled review (purposely overseeing high measurements of fluoride on chose people for a considerable length of time) would obviously be exploitative.

As of late, in any case, Harvard scientists could consider wellbeing information for groups in China where large amounts of fluoride are normally present in the groundwater. The results give reason for unease: “the youngsters living in high-fluoride regions had essentially bring  down IQ scores than the individuals who lived in low-fluoride territories.” The normal distinction was 7 focuses, and scientist Philippe Grandjean presumed that fluoride has a place among lead, mercury, and different toxic substances as a known neurotoxin and “compound cerebrum deplete.” Grandjean proposed the creating mind might be irreversibly harmed by fluoride introduction, and the correct “safe” limits, assuming any, are obscure.

More of us are prepared to quit fluoridation. In any case, how might we take out these infinitesimal, boring atoms included at the treatment plant? In case you’re not kidding about going sans fluoride, here are a couple of things to consider.

Taking Drinking Water for Granted

It’s getting increasingly hard to underestimate a cool drink of water. The nation over, fights keep on raging in groups expansive and little about whether adding fluoride to the general population water supply is a protected, judgment skills open administration, or an evil demonstration of government-supported wellbeing risk. In Portland, Oregon, the energetic level headed discussion based on issues of individual decision and duty: if the certainties are being referred to, who gets the chance to choose what’s in their water?

At last, Portlanders voted “no” to fluoride. It’s a choice every family must make in light of accessible data. In the event that your city water supply or private well contains undesirable fluoride, you have choices to practice your educated decision in your own particular home.  

Fluoride in water in the United States and public health misinformation: Research review

A 2014 audit paper in The Lancet Neurology recognized various potential advancement neurotoxins in kids, including manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, tetrachloroethylene, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers. One of these — fluoride — has kept on filling a talk since the article’s production, as the water supplies of roughly 74 percent of the U.S. populace have fluoridation. While the verbal confrontation hasn’t yet ascended to an indistinguishable level from those over antibodies or a dangerous atmospheric devation, some U.S. districts are reassessing the measure of fluoride in their water sources — or whether to fluoridate by any stretch of the imagination.

Writers and communicators of numerous types ought to audit the best research and the historical backdrop of deception on the theme, and to maintain a strategic distance from false adjust — “he said, she said” portrayals — where the science stays complete. Specifically, not inspecting the measurements being referred to — levels of fluoridation proposed or contemplated — can prompt to flawed reporting.

History and condition of the field

U.S. towns and urban areas began altering the measure of fluoride in their water around 70 years prior when research connected expanded fluoride levels to enhanced dental wellbeing. Supporters of fluoridation express that it prompts to more advantageous groups — and is conservative and simple. While perceiving the vital adjust of viability, dosage and security, the main logical and wellbeing gatherings are overwhelmingly genius fluoridation. In April 2015, the U.S. Branch of Health and Human Services prescribed diminishing the level of fluoride in drinking water to 0.7 milligrams of fluoride for every liter of water. Its past suggestion, laid out in its 1962 Drinking Water Standards, extended from 0.7–1.2 milligrams of fluoride for each liter of water.

Among the gatherings supporting fluoridation are the American Dental Association, the American Medical Association and the World Health Organization. The American Dental Association has called group water fluoridation “one of ten incredible general wellbeing accomplishments of the twentieth century.” In a video presented on YouTube in December 2015, U.S. Top health spokesperson Vivek Murthy acknowledged water fluoridation for diminishing the pervasiveness and seriousness of tooth rot.

The CDC outlines the sequence of the main research by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. The American Association of Dental Research held an uncommon session amid their 2014 yearly meeting titled “Water Fluoridation: Safety, Efficacy and Value in Oral Health Care.” Outcomes from this meeting incorporate general accord that no logical confirmation exists to bolster the asserted negative wellbeing impacts of fluoridation other than fluorosis — an adjustment in the presence of tooth veneer that can incorporate white spots, recoloring and setting. As per the CDC, dental fluorosis happens when youthful kids take in an excess of fluoride over a long stretch, when their teeth are shaping under their gums.

Is fluoride terrible for you?

It would depend on who you ask; fluoride is irrefutably dangerous at specific fixations. The most far-reaching report on fluoride was published in 2006 by the National Research Council, done at the command of the Environmental Protection Agency. That gathering found that as far as possible for fluoride, at 4 ppm, was too high to keep a specific rate of children from creating serious dental fluorosis and suggested the EPA bring down this point of confinement.

The CDC says that the level at which it is added to the water (1 ppm) is protected and compelling. Kerry Maguire, of the Forsyth Institute, an autonomous (not-revenue driven) look into organization in the United States practicing on oral wellbeing and its association with general health, concurs with the CDC.

“For the youngsters I treat, fluoridated drinking water converts into less pits requiring a trek to the dental specialist and additional time in school,” she said. “As a dental specialist and researcher – and a mother and grandma – I respect the CDC’s insistence of the wellbeing and adequacy of group water fluoridation.”

Water is fluoridated in 29 of the 30 biggest urban communities. The special case is Portland, Ore. For the fourth time since 1956, voters in Portland crushed an arrangement in 2012 to add fluoride to people in general water supply. For a considerable length of time, people have been contentiously debating fluoridation.

Where is the focus of this country? 

I saw a petition began by somebody asking for signatures requesting Donald Tumps taxes.

Have we gone mad in this country and why is this important?

Shouldn’t we petitioning and asking for signatures for un fluoridating all waters?

I have seen petitions and the ones I have seen have not been getting many signatures at all as the one asking to see Donald Trump’s taxes is outrageously high!

All I am saying is why is the focus so high on people’s personal lives and not on saving our own lives especially when it comes to the children?











Useful studies for background

The following are authoritative research studies and accounts of fluoride; they serve as useful citations for communicators reporting on related issues:

Additional resources







Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s