The Flouride Debate | Welcome to the Discussion

HOME

DISEASES
Question 18
Question 19
Question 20
Question 21
Question 22
Question 23
Question 24
Question 25
Question 26
Question 27
Question 28
Question 29
Question 30
Question 31
Question 32
Question 33

PUBLIC
POLICY
Question 34
Question 35
Question 36
Question 37
Question 38
Question 39
Question 40

COST
EFFECTIVENESS
Question 41
Question 42
Question 43

CONCLUSION

In this website, The Fluoride Debate, we have juxtaposed the arguments presented by the American Dental Association (ADA) with comments from many of the independent scientists who have examined the issue with an open mind. We believe that if people take the time to read and study both sides of the fluoridation debate — especially the science that has emerged over the last ten years — they will be appalled by the practice of putting this known toxic substance into the public drinking water. The benefits have been wildly exaggerated and the risks have been downplayed.

Behind the scenes many dentists acknowledge this situation but the ADA maintains such a stranglehold on the profession that it is dangerous for them to become openly critical of the practice of fluoridation. Even though the ADA is an association, not a governmental agency, it has a great deal of influence on dental matters through its lobbyists in Washington, DC and the almost universal and dominant presence of its members on State Dental Boards. These Boards have the power to remove a license from a practicing dentist in the state, and thus can keep dentists in line on controversial issues like fluoridation.

We hope that this website will encourage more dentists to break ranks with the ADA and rescue this profession from its shortsighted promotion of this dangerous, unethical and unnecessary practice.

THIS WEBSITE CONTAINS EVIDENCE THAT ...

Fluoridation is not about "children's teeth". Rather, it is about industry ridding itself of crude hazardous waste products, silicofluorides, for a profit. Silicofluorides are 85 times more toxic than naturally-occurring calcium fluoride.

Fluoride is more toxic than lead and like lead in minute doses, accumulates in and can be damaging to brain/mind development of children, producing abnormal behavior in animals and reducing IQ in humans, especially in conjunction with deficiencies of key nutrients such as calcium, iodine and vitamins. It can also contribute to many disease processes. Because it is almost as toxic as arsenic, fluoride's ability to play havoc in the human body should surprise no one.

There is as much, or more, dental decay in fluoridated communities as there is in the non-fluoridated areas; however, the dental costs are higher in fluoridated communities due to dental fluorosis. Drinking fluoridated water may delay decay, but it does not prevent it.

Dental fluorosis is not simply a "cosmetic effect". Dental fluorosis is the first visible sign of fluoride poisoning. Today there is an increased prevalence of dental fluorosis, ranging from about 15% to 65% in fluoridated areas and 5% to 40% in non-fluoridated areas in North America.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists, after studying all the evidence, concluded that the public water supply should not be used "as a vehicle for disseminating this toxic and prophylactically useless ... substance."

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states that fluoride is not a mineral nutrient; it is a prescription drug. Every prescription drug has side-effects, including fluoride. Fluoride has never received FDA approval and does not meet the legal requirements of safety and effectiveness necessary for such approval. Once this drug is put in the water there is no control over individual dosage.

The American Dental Association supplement schedule shows that fluoride prescription drugs should not be given to infants under 6 months of age. One cup of water per day for children age 6 months to 3 years matches the supplement controlled dose. Therefore, in fluoridated areas, most children under 3 are getting an overdose of this drug via their drinking water, yet the ADA continues to recommend fluoridation.

The widespread and uncontrolled use of fluoride in our water, dental products, and foods and beverages (grown and processed in fluoridated communities), is causing pervasive over-exposure to fluoride in the U.S. population. Most developed countries have rejected, stopped, or banned fluoridation because there is no margin of safety.

Fluoride is not just "one of forty chemicals used to treat water". It is the only chemical added to public drinking water to treat individuals, rather than the water. It is mass medication. This website explains why a good number of leading scientists, doctors, and some dentists are avidly opposed to putting fluoride in our water supply. It also shows that this controversy has existed in the scientific field from the onset.

Download
The Fluoride
Debate
as a .pdf

What is a .pdf?
It is an electronic file that is an e-book version of this website. Please be sure to have Adobe Acrobat's Plug-in installed for your internet browser so that you may view it.

NOTICE

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.

This site and accompanying book is published by
Health Way House | 403 Marcos St | San Marcos, CA 92069

First Edition
February 2001

This information provided on this site was compiled by
Anita Shattuck | Tel: 760-752-1621 | bakeranita@cox.net

This site and accompanying book was edited by
Edward Bennett

Site Builder: Michelle@Jabbocat Consulting