The Fluoride Debate

HOME

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

HISTORY/
ENVIRONMENT

CENSORSHIP

THE FLUORIDE
DEBATE

BENEFITS
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Question 4
Question 5
Question 6
Question 7
Question 8

ALTERNATIVES
Question 9
Question 10
Question 11
Question 12


SAFETY
Question 13
Question 14

OVERDOSE
Question 15
Question 16
Question 17

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

DISEASES

Question 21.
Is fluoride, as provided by community water fluoridation, a toxic substance?

ADA's Fluoridation Facts Short Answer
Fluoride, at the concentrations found optimally fluoridated water, is not toxic according to generally accepted scientific knowledge.

ADA's Fluoridation Facts Long Answer
Like many common substances essential to life and good health — salt, iron, vitamins A and D, chlorine, oxygen and even water itself — fluoride can be toxic in excessive quantities. Fluoride in the much lower concentrations (0.7 to 1.2 ppm) used in water fluoridation is not harmful or toxic.

Acute fluoride toxicity occurring from the ingestion of optimally fluoridated water is impossible.104 The amount of fluoride necessary to cause death for a human adult (155 pound man) has been estimated to be 5-10 grams of sodium fluoride, ingested at one time.140 This is more than 10,000-20,000 times as much fluoride as is consumed at one time in a single 8-ounce glass of optimally fluoridated water.

Chronic fluoride toxicity may develop after 10 or more years of exposure to very high levels of fluoride, levels not associated with fluoride intake in drinking optimally fluoridated water. The primary functional adverse effect associated with long term excess fluoride intake is skeletal fluorosis. The development of skeletal fluorosis and its severity is directly related to the level and duration of fluoride exposure. For example, the ingestion of water naturally fluoridated at approximately 5 ppm for 10 years or more is needed to produce clinical signs of osteosclerosis, a mild form of skeletal fluorosis, in the general population. In areas naturally fluoridated at 5 ppm, daily fluoride intake of 10 mg/day would not be uncommon.74 A survey of X-rays from 170,000 people in Texas and Oklahoma whose drinking water had naturally occurring fluoride levels of 4 to 8 ppm revealed only 23 cases of osteosclerosis and no cases of skeletal fluorosis.141 Evidence of advanced skeletal fluorosis, or crippling skeletal fluorosis, "was not seen in communities in the United States where water supplies contained up to 20 ppm (natural levels of fluoride)."74, 121 In these communities, daily fluoride intake of 20mg/day would not be uncommon.74 Crippling skeletal fluorosis is extremely rare in the United States and is not associated with optimally fluoridated water; only 5 cases have been confirmed during the last 35 years.74

Additional discussion on this topic may be found in Question 16 and Question 32.

The possibility of adverse health effects from continuous low level consumption of fluoride over long periods has been extensively studied. As with other nutrients, fluoride is safe and effective when used and consumed properly. No charge against the benefits and safety of fluoridation has ever been substantiated by generally accepted scientific knowledge. After 50 years of research and practical experience, the preponderance of scientific evidence indicates that fluoridation of community water supplies is both safe and effective.98

At one time, high concentrations of fluoride compounds were used in insecticides and rodenticides.27 Today fluoride compounds are rarely used in pesticides because more effective compounds have been developed.104 While large doses of fluoride may be toxic, it is important to recognize the difference in the effect of a massive dose of an extremely high level of fluoride versus the recommended amount of fluoride found in optimally fluoridated water. The implication that fluorides in large doses and in trace amounts have the same effect is completely unfounded. Many substances in widespread use are very beneficial in small amounts, but may be harmful in large doses - such as salt, chlorine and even water itself.

Repeat of Question 21.
Is fluoride, as provided by community water fluoridation, a toxic substance?

Opposition's Response

Yes. "It is now clear that fluoride is a potentially harmful substance when present in the water supply in any amount. Those who want their children to have fluoride can give it individually, in measured doses, and more safely, reliably and cheaply than when put in the water. We can see no justifiable reason why everyone in the city should be needlessly subjected to any degree of life-long risk such as is created when a known poison is added to the water. We can accept no compromise with the established principle that the city's water supply must be kept as safe as possible for everyone." (Dr. Simon Beisler, Chief of Urology, Roosevelt Hospital, New York City, Dr. Fred Squier Dunn, Head of Oral Surgery Department, Lenox Hill Hospital, NYC, Dr. John Garlock, Consulting Surgeon, Mount Sinai Hospital, NYC, Dr. Edgar A. Lawrence, Director of Medicine at Lenox Hill Hospital, NYC. and Dr. Girard F. Oberrender, Director of Otalaryngology at Lenox Hill Hospital, NYC.)

"It is well documented in the scientific literature that the substance sodium fluoride (used in fluoridation) has an effect on the metabolic cycle, from which we get the energy to maintain the life process and repairs to the body. The amount of the dosage has very little to do with the question because it is a 'cumulative material' — that is, it collects in the body — its effect would vary from person to person." (Professor J. Earle Galloway, Drake University, Bio-Chemist and Chairman, Dept. of Pharmacology, Des Moines, IA.)

Dr. L. O. Maynard, Cornell University, authority on the role of minerals in nutrition, states: "There is no proof that fluoride is a dietary essential."

"Fluorine has never been proved to be an indispensable chemical element for the maintenance of healthy body and healthy teeth. There is no disagreement about the fact that fluorine is a protoplasmic and enzymatic poison." (Dr. V. O. Hurme, former director of Clinical Research, Forsyth Dental Infirmary for Children, Boston, MA.)

"Sound teeth can be produced through dietary control and oral hygiene without the use of fluoride." (Dr. J. J. Rae, Professor of Chemistry, University of Toronto.)

"Good sound teeth have been and still are being developed without added dietary intake of fluorides." (Dr. Paul Phillips, University of Wisconsin, noted nutritionist and one of foremost U. S. experts on fluoride.)

Today the advice of most doctors is to drink lots of water; adults should drink at least 2 quarts a day. That is double the amount we were advised to drink when fluoridation first started, so why hasn't the recommended amount been lowered? Today, those who follow their doctor's orders would be overdosing on this drug. Studies show that many children, even in unfluoridated areas, are already getting far more than "the safe dose" in their food and beverages. (See Overdose section).

"The proponents of fluoridation stress the fact that not only fluorine, but many other materials introduced into the body, including salt, water and food, are potentially harmful when ingested in too large quantities. Such statements do not take into account the fact, however, that fluorine is actually a poison, which could be ingested without giving any warning to our senses. Our taste or smell would not warn us of the imminent danger. If added in too large a quantity, chlorine would warn our senses, irritating the mucous membranes of eyes, nose and throat. Furthermore, chlorine evaporates. Fluorine does not, and it is tasteless." (Dr. Ludwik Gross (M.D., F.R.C.P.), renowned Cancer Research Scientist.)

The ADA statement (above) states that fluoride is an important trace element in human nutrition, like zinc and iron, even though the FDA states that fluoride is a drug, not a mineral nutrient. It is not necessary to get a prescription from your doctor to obtain zinc or iron. Any chemist will verify that fluoride is extremely toxic, more so than lead and almost as toxic as arsenic. Now the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for lead is 0.015 ppm, and the MCL for arsenic was recently lowered to 10 ppb (parts per billion), with a goal of 0.0 ppm for both of them. Why wouldn't .07 to 1.2 ppm (parts per million ) of fluoride be harmful, and why would the ADA compare fluoride with "salt, iron, vitamins A and D, chlorine, oxygen and even water itself?"

Download
The Fluoride
Debate

as a .pdf

Jump to the Opposition's
Response

for this
question.

 

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