Minnie Posted July 14, 2004 Share Posted July 14, 2004 Dental fluorosis is a fact of fluoridation, Dr Emerson even confirms this, he however regards it as a cosmetic issue, unlike the York Report who stated "The review found water fluoridation to be significantly associated with high levels of dental fluorosis which was not characterised as 'just a cosmetic issue'." Levels of fluorosis to be expected with fluoridation are between 15-50% averaging at 30%. Fluorosis is the first 'visible' sign of fluoride poisoning, it is more expensive and more difficult to treat than dental caries - so where is the benefit? http://www.fluoridealert.org/health.htm[/url] <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dental fluroosis can occur in both fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. In most cases of fluorosis it just appears as white mottling on teeth and is normally only spotted by a dentist. It is mainly considered to be a cosmetic issue rather than a health issue like dental caries is, to rectify the mottling on the teeth requires veneers or crowns, hence it is more expensive to treat than caries. Fluorosis is mostly caused before the teeth erupt, when high levels of fluoride are taken in while the teeth are developing under the gums. The problem of dental caries should not be played down and made to be insignificant compared to fluorosis. Having worked in the school dental service I have seen horrendous cases of decay in very young children. It causes them ridicule at school, severe pain and the distressing visit to the dentist to have the decayed teeth removed. Most cases of dental fluorosis are very mild cases, no case of dental caries could be considered mild. Fluorosis is a mainly cosmetic issue, caries is a huge health issue. As long as parents take notice of advice when using fluoride toothpaste, tablets, drops, mouthwash etc fluorosis is very unlikely to occur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saveourwater Posted July 14, 2004 Share Posted July 14, 2004 I disagree, dental fluorosis is a proven and known consequence of water fluoridation, it may already occur over here as a slight cosmetic issue because the levels of naturally occuring fluoride are very low. If fluorides are added to the water over here and people are still using fluoride toothpaste as well as all the other sources of fluoride intake i.e. diet, atmosphere, absorption through the skin then the condition will worsen, dental fluorosis is very expensve to treat and can be just as damaging psychologically. We are not playing down dental caries, we are pointing out that in an effort to cure one problem another equally serious problem will definitely arise, and the case for safety and efficiency of fluoridation is not proven. The answer lies in education not fluoridation, let public health go out there and educate the people on proper dental hygiene and diet instead of trying brush the issue under the carpet by adding toxic waste to the Manx water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geo Posted July 14, 2004 Author Share Posted July 14, 2004 Human rights is a major part of our campaign, here is why:- Dr Emerson wants to add fluoride in the form of untested, unregistered toxic waste by-products to the Manx drinking water with the express intent of causing biological change in the Manx population i.e. to combat dental caries, this is in effect 'medication'. It is a basic human right that an individual can refuse medication or treatment. Fluoridation = human rights contravention. You still miss it, you have a choice, you do not have to drink the water from the tap, you can get your own water, either bottled, from a well or natural spring. There are many many coutries that you cannot drink the water from the tap. Therefore by adding flouride to the water you are not forcing medication on the populous as they have a choice. The water authority are charged with supplying clean, safe, water for drinking, fluorides do not contribute to the potability of water they are added solely to treat people. Flouradated potable water is still potable water, so by adding flouride to the water the water authority would still be providing potable water York Report who stated "The review found water fluoridation to be significantly associated with high levels of dental fluorosis which was not characterised as 'just a cosmetic issue'." This statement is not made within the York Report, you should read the report again to correct this. We are not playing down dental caries, we are pointing out that in an effort to cure one problem another equally serious problem will definitely arise, and the case for safety and efficiency of fluoridation is not proven. You would have thought that with such a high proportion of the Irish and the 10% of the UK having had flouradated water for such a long time, that there would be objective evidence available to support your statement. Geo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mission Posted July 14, 2004 Share Posted July 14, 2004 You still miss it, you have a choice, you do not have to drink the water from the tap, you can get your own water, either bottled, from a well or natural spring. There are many many coutries that you cannot drink the water from the tap. Therefore by adding flouride to the water you are not forcing medication on the populous as they have a choice. I see what you're saying here Geo but don't you think it unfair that people who don't want their water flouridated should have the extra expense of buying bottled water? Maybe the Manx government will be prepared to offer a reduction to those who have to buy bottled water, what do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 York Report who stated "The review found water fluoridation to be significantly associated with high levels of dental fluorosis which was not characterised as 'just a cosmetic issue'." This statement is not made within the York Report, you should read the report again to correct this. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Geo, I think this was a statement from a professor and it was his interpretation of what was stated in the York Report (???) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geo Posted July 15, 2004 Author Share Posted July 15, 2004 I see what you're saying here Geo but don't you think it unfair that people who don't want their water flouridated should have the extra expense of buying bottled water? Maybe the Manx government will be prepared to offer a reduction to those who have to buy bottled water, what do you think? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Definatley, a reduction in water rates would be preferable, but as drinking water only acounts for 5% of the water used in a home I don't know how they would quantify it. A point for further investigation that would be better as part of saveourwaters campaign. Geo, I think this was a statement from a professor and it was his interpretation of what was stated in the York Report (???) You are correct minnie, but savoeourwaters quote was referenced to the York report. Incorectly referanced misinformation, not the best way to make a case. Geo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Maybe the Manx government will be prepared to offer a reduction to those who have to buy bottled water, what do you think? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It would be pretty hard to determine who does and doesn't drink fluoridated tap water though, wouldn't it? That's neither logical nor fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saveourwater Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Here again is a link to Prof Sheldon's statement http://www.nofluoride.com/york_report_chairman.htm Under point 2:- 2) The review found water fluoridation to be significantly associated with high levels of dental fluorosis which was not characterised as "just a cosmetic issue". Professor Sheldon's words, if you want to argue about this point why not take it up with him directly I am sure he is ultimately more qualified than either of us as to the content of his own report. This statement was made in order to correct erroneous misinformation coming from health departments in the UK, just like the misinformation that is coming from our own PHD. Fluoridation does equal medication whatever way you look at it and would still contravene human rights. Fluoride can enter your body during bathing or showering and brushing your teeth, are you seriously suggesting that we all use bottled water for drinking, cooking, washing when we already pay for this service. I would not regard fluoridated water as potable and would certainly not drink it, if you want to ingest lead, arsenic, beryllium, vanadium, cadmium, mercury, radionuclides and silicon mixed up with fluorine then you can go ahead. I believe that the addition of fluoride to the Manx drinking water is not allowed for under current Manx law, this is what the chief executive of the Water Authority told me and I am currently awaiting clarification from the Attorney General on this point and will post any reply received. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saveourwater Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Copy of our response to letters that appeared in this weeks Examiner:- In response to letters from our public health consultant Dr Emerson and from Mr Quirk of Ramsey, both attempting to validate the proposal by DHSS to artificially fluoridate the Manx tap water supply. Our group was charged with misleading the public on the issue. Birmingham residents and the York Review were citied as evidence for safety / efficiency of fluoridation and Dr Emerson warned that “individuals do not have the right to fluoride free water” and that “individuals should not be allowed to prevent a Public Health benefit to be experienced by all our children”. We respond as follows:- Of the Fluorosilicates used in artificial fluoridation approximately 19% is Fluorine the rest is a toxic soup containing lead, arsenic, beryllium, vanadium, cadmium, mercury, radio nuclides and of course silicon, all highly toxic, cumulative and four of which are known carcinogens. Mr Quirk’s lesson on chemistry explained that the fluorine will interact with other elements forming compounds, imagine what compounds are formed in this delightful mix! These compounds have never been safety tested, remain unregistered, unlicensed and not classed as medicine. Dr Emerson advocates adding them to our water with the sole intention of creating biological change in our bodies, are these really harmless fluoride ions? Regarding safety of fluorosilicates: The York Review was unique in the history of fluoride research and was supposed to be an independent, exhaustive, systematic review of water fluoridation “once and for all… unchallengeable”, said the then Minister for Health, Frank Dobson. To quote Professor Sheldon of the review board:- “In my capacity of Chair of the advisory group for the systematic review on the effects of water fluoridation recently conducted by the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination the University of York and as its founding Director I am concerned that the results of the Review have been widely misrepresented. 1. Whilst there is evidence that water fluoridation is effective at reducing caries the quality of the studies was generally moderate and the size of the estimated benefit only of the order of 15% is far from ‘massive’. 2. The Review found water fluoridation to be significantly associated with high levels of dental fluorosis which was not characterised as ‘just a cosmetic issue’. 3. The Review did not show water fluoridation to be safe. The quality of the research was too poor to establish with confidence whether or not there are potentially important adverse effects in addition to the high levels of fluorosis. The Report recommended that more research was needed. 4. There was little evidence to show that water fluoridation has reduced social inequalities in dental health.” Professor Trevor Sheldon MSc, DSc, MFMed, Sci 10th December 2000. Artificial fluoridation is people treatment, not water treatment, it involves the use of extremely toxic substances. Finally, we cite the words of Dr MacLean the Director for Public Health, “good population health is not simply a matter for the Health Service but it is everyone’s business”. Isle of Man Campaign for Non-Fluoridated Tap Water saveourwater@manx.net 11 Parliament Street Ramsey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saveourwater Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Sunday Express July 18, 2004 Fluoride alert for children EXCLUSIVE By Lucy Johnston Health Editor 'The problems far outweigh the possible benefits to their teeth' TAP water could be lowering children's intelligence, leading experts have warned. Top doctors claim fluoride in drinking water can interfere with a child's brain function. They believe this can lower IQ levels and lead to behavioural problems. Last night Dr Vyvian Howard, an expert in chemicals and infant health at Liverpool University, told of his concern. He said: "Babies are on a wet diet for the first four months. If they drink infant formula they get fluoride through tap water, which is toxic and can affect brain development. "We know mothers screen out fluoride, preventing it from getting into breast milk. This is a natural evolutionary process to protect them. Fluoride is not safe for babies." Ten per cent of the country has fluoridated tap water to keep teeth healthy and the Government plans to extend coverage under a new act now passing through Parliament. Fluoride is also added to toothpaste and is found in tealeaves, fertilisers, pesticides and air pollution. Doctors think there are so many sources that children could also be overdosing. Dr Peter Mansfield, a GP and director of the Good Health Keeping service at Louth, Lincolnshire, studied more than 100 children with behavioural problems. He discovered those with high levels of fluoride in their bodies were more likely to have developmental and behavioural problems. Once the fluoride was taken out of their diet they got better. He said: "This is very worrying. Fluoride is toxic and could cause mental problems. It could be that thousands of children are underperforming as a result. We had children we thought were affected by fluoride. In some cases they were hyperactive, lacked concentration and were unhappy all the time. "We tested them and quite clearly demonstrated that fluoride was causing their problems. "The trouble fluoridated water is causing far outweighs the possible benefits to children's teeth. Nothing like enough work has been done on this and no one is checking - it's very worrying." His findings are borne out by a Unicef-backed study of 769 schoolchildren in China. It found those with mental retardation or low IQ levels had excess fluoride in their systems. The study concluded that the chemical makes mental health problems worse by interfering with the central nervous system. Another study carried out in America found that rats behave like hyperactive children when given a comparable amount of fluoride. Some experts including Dr Howard also fear fluoride is fuelling rising obesity levels. They think it interferes with the body's hormone balance, especially the thyroid gland, which controls weight gain. Medical author Dr Barry Durrant-Peatfield said: "Fluoride disrupts the hormones that control the thyroid gland. This causes an underactive thyroid which leads to obesity, tiredness and depression." And Dr Howard said: "Fluoride was once used as a medicine to treat thyroid overactivity." saveourwater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speckled Frost Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 So basically, flouride in water will turn us all into Americans - fat, stupid but with nice teeth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saveourwater Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Or maybe fat, stupid and teeth like this:- http://www.npwa.freeserve.co.uk/dental_fluorosis.html Oh, and don't forget the gradually increasing deposits of known carcinogens as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Severe cases of fluorosis are very, very rare and mild fluorosis is a cosmetic issue not a health issue. Children with very mild fluorosis have less cavities and fewer problems with dental caries. I was reading a website last week (unfortunately I can't remember what it was called, but I will keep searching for it) which had the most ridiculous claims about fluorosis, saying that children with fluorosis will grow up to be criminals and a nuisance to society basically. It seems they will also now be the overweight, hyperactive dunces of society if we listen to these recent claims. Imagine the great excuses people could use now..........I'm not overweight because I eat too much, it's because I have high levels of fluoride in my body...........I failed my exams not because I didn't study but because I drink fluoridated tap water............I didn't mean to mug the old lady, I overdosed on fluoride as a child. If we listened to all the scaremongering about things that are bad for us we'd all be dead because we wouldn't eat or drink anything! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saveourwater Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Severe cases of fluorosis are very, very rare and mild fluorosis is a cosmetic issue not a health issue. Children with very mild fluorosis have less cavities and fewer problems with dental caries. Very, very rare where, on the Isle of Man? Maybe that is because there are very low levels of naturally occuring fluoride in the water over here? Fluorosis is the first 'visible' sign of fluoride overdose, a sign that it is changing your body, a warning sign. I would not describe any form of fluorosis as merely 'cosmetic', especially as fluoride accumulates over time, if you have visible signs of 'mild' fluorosis in your teens imagine what you will have by the time you are fifty if you do not monitor your intakes of fluoride? Again it is up to the individual to decide on what they do or do not consume, artificial fluoridation however would seriously jeopardise this choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnie Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Very, very rare where, on the Isle of Man? Maybe that is because there are very low levels of naturally occuring fluoride in the water over here? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, I'm not just talking about fluorosis in the Isle of Man. Very mild to mild forms of fluorosis are the most frequent around the world. Long term ingestion of acutely high amounts of fluoride lead to skeletal fluorosis. Many experts say that ingestion of fluoride after the age of six will not cause dental fluorosis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.