On Friday, The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced plans to lower the recommended level of fluoride in drinking water for the first time in nearly 50 years. This is based on evidence that excess fluoride is causing a condition known as fluorisis in teeth - making them spotty at first, then brittle and subject to cracking merely from biting into a hard nut.
Not even mentioned in the AP press announcement, is that fluorisis can extend as well to the bones, make them also brittle and subject to fracture.
But this is part of the general PR which has always accompanied the promotion and use of fluoride, particularly after the atomic bomb tests of the 1940s. While most uninformed people (who are also generally uninformed about politics and economics) came to view the anti-fluoridation segment as "cranks" or worse, those who actually did the spade work weren't so quick on the draw.
Most people who pride themselves on being 'in the know' in the deep politics arena, were themselves taken for suckers for many years over fluoride. I myself didn't wise up until encountering an expose article 'Fluoride, Teeth and the Atomic Bomb' which appeared in The Project Censored Yearbook, 1999.
Using declassified documents, the authors (Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson) noted that the original safety arguments for fluoride were developed in the 1940s by scientists working with The Manhattan Project. These arguments were cynically crafted as a way to counter possible litigation for atomic workers - since fluoride came off as a byproduct. The particular positive claim invented was that fluoride "re-minerals tooth enamel" and hence prevents decay. However, as the authors of the Project Censored piece point out, mounting evidence showed the serious side effects of fluoride (especially as uncovered in Europe) often overwhelmed the positive effects.
These studies are taken in seriously in Europe, where 98% of communities have refused the addition of fluoride to water.
The fluoridated water standard since 1962 has been a range of 0.7 parts per million for warmer climates where people used to drink more water to 1.2 parts per million in cooler regions. The new proposal from Health and Human Services would set the recommended level at 0.7. European evidence and data, however, indicate this is probably still way too high - given how many other sources of fluoride (e.g. in toothpastes and even bottled water) one encounters, and given the fact that natural fluoridation occurs in nearly a quarter of U.S. water systems, especially in the west.
The attention to excess fluoride and fluorosis is good, but is only a quarter or less of the whole picture. Consider too these effects, documented from European studies:
- Distortion of the filtering packet in the kidneys called glomeruli, making it more difficult to remove toxins. Not mentioned also, is that hyper-fluoridation may be responsible for at least ten percent or more of the mounting cases of kidney failure in the country.
- Alteration of brain cells in terms of their receptive capacity, as well as deterioration of blood volume and flow leading to Alzheimer-like symptoms.
Meanwhile, the EPA said it is reviewing whether to lower the maximum allowable level of fluoride in drinking water from the current 4 parts per million. This amount is plausibly more than 50 times in excess of what any one ought to be ingesting, given the above conditions.
The fact at the end of the day is the U.S. shouldn't be using a mammoth, involuntary policy issued from distant, unelected agencies to ensure dental health - or rather, invoking the claim for such to justify their mass-medication of the populace. Even moreso when a good percentage of the fluoride being used may well be an industrial waste in the form of hydrofluorosilic acid. (A point also conveyed in the Project Censored article).
It should no more be the case that the costs of waste product removal are reduced by incorporating them into public water systems, than that excess fructose (from corn harvesting- processing) is incorporated into so many foods, or that the U.S. Agriculture department's excess cheese, and fatty meats are conveyed to schools to serve school lunch programs. (Exacerbating the obesity problem).
There is a limit to "efficiency" or profit-making, and it shouldn't come at the expense of people's health, especially in a nation that still can't provide the bulk of people with affordable health care!
But at least the reduction of fluoride in drinking water will mitigate our national health problems somewhat. Whether it will mitigate any person espousing non-fluoridation as a "crackpot" is another matter.
Not even mentioned in the AP press announcement, is that fluorisis can extend as well to the bones, make them also brittle and subject to fracture.
But this is part of the general PR which has always accompanied the promotion and use of fluoride, particularly after the atomic bomb tests of the 1940s. While most uninformed people (who are also generally uninformed about politics and economics) came to view the anti-fluoridation segment as "cranks" or worse, those who actually did the spade work weren't so quick on the draw.
Most people who pride themselves on being 'in the know' in the deep politics arena, were themselves taken for suckers for many years over fluoride. I myself didn't wise up until encountering an expose article 'Fluoride, Teeth and the Atomic Bomb' which appeared in The Project Censored Yearbook, 1999.
Using declassified documents, the authors (Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson) noted that the original safety arguments for fluoride were developed in the 1940s by scientists working with The Manhattan Project. These arguments were cynically crafted as a way to counter possible litigation for atomic workers - since fluoride came off as a byproduct. The particular positive claim invented was that fluoride "re-minerals tooth enamel" and hence prevents decay. However, as the authors of the Project Censored piece point out, mounting evidence showed the serious side effects of fluoride (especially as uncovered in Europe) often overwhelmed the positive effects.
These studies are taken in seriously in Europe, where 98% of communities have refused the addition of fluoride to water.
The fluoridated water standard since 1962 has been a range of 0.7 parts per million for warmer climates where people used to drink more water to 1.2 parts per million in cooler regions. The new proposal from Health and Human Services would set the recommended level at 0.7. European evidence and data, however, indicate this is probably still way too high - given how many other sources of fluoride (e.g. in toothpastes and even bottled water) one encounters, and given the fact that natural fluoridation occurs in nearly a quarter of U.S. water systems, especially in the west.
The attention to excess fluoride and fluorosis is good, but is only a quarter or less of the whole picture. Consider too these effects, documented from European studies:
- Distortion of the filtering packet in the kidneys called glomeruli, making it more difficult to remove toxins. Not mentioned also, is that hyper-fluoridation may be responsible for at least ten percent or more of the mounting cases of kidney failure in the country.
- Alteration of brain cells in terms of their receptive capacity, as well as deterioration of blood volume and flow leading to Alzheimer-like symptoms.
Meanwhile, the EPA said it is reviewing whether to lower the maximum allowable level of fluoride in drinking water from the current 4 parts per million. This amount is plausibly more than 50 times in excess of what any one ought to be ingesting, given the above conditions.
The fact at the end of the day is the U.S. shouldn't be using a mammoth, involuntary policy issued from distant, unelected agencies to ensure dental health - or rather, invoking the claim for such to justify their mass-medication of the populace. Even moreso when a good percentage of the fluoride being used may well be an industrial waste in the form of hydrofluorosilic acid. (A point also conveyed in the Project Censored article).
It should no more be the case that the costs of waste product removal are reduced by incorporating them into public water systems, than that excess fructose (from corn harvesting- processing) is incorporated into so many foods, or that the U.S. Agriculture department's excess cheese, and fatty meats are conveyed to schools to serve school lunch programs. (Exacerbating the obesity problem).
There is a limit to "efficiency" or profit-making, and it shouldn't come at the expense of people's health, especially in a nation that still can't provide the bulk of people with affordable health care!
But at least the reduction of fluoride in drinking water will mitigate our national health problems somewhat. Whether it will mitigate any person espousing non-fluoridation as a "crackpot" is another matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment