Subject: Re: Biological Effects of Fluorides? Fact or Fiction?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 1995 18:21:36 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Jay Mann)
wrote:

> The main point is HOW MUCH FLUORIDE is needed for these deleterious effects
> compared to the amount of fluoride supplied in naturally and/or manmade
> fluoridated drinking water.  ...
> What are the fluoride concentrations in the body tissues of people who drink
> such water, compared to the fluoride concentrations that cause harm?

Check these URLs for a wealth of information, including studies... Have
just scanned them and printed them out for reading: 
         http://www.santarosa.edu/~dmontgom/fluoride.htm
         http://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/health.htm

-- 
<[email-masked]>

---

From: Craig Thompson <[email-masked]>
Date: 9 Aug 1995 05:06:44 GMT

Many of the suggestions here strike me as far too simplistic.  Fluoride clearly prevents 
cavities, and the evidence of harm from the amounts provided in water systems isn't strong 
enough to make the public health community in general worried.  I'm not saying there are no 
risks.  In addition, though my family often drinks distilled water, there are dangers with it 
too.  A lot of the minerals that are important to health are contained in non-distilled water, 
so it's not as though distilled water is an unmixed blessing.  There are stories, for example, 
on the lack of magnesium in many diets because of water that is abnormally low in that 
chemical.  Supposedly there is at least epidemiologic evidence suggesting that a lack of 
magnesium is associated with premature death from heart problems.  BTW, toothpastes say not to 
eat them for reasons other than fluoride over-exposure, though that may also be a 
concern.

**********************************************************************************************
Craig C. Thompson, Davis Community Network, Davis, California
[email-masked]

---

From: Craig Thompson <[email-masked]>
Date: 9 Aug 1995 05:27:29 GMT

I decided to go look at the magazine, Perceptions, that started this discussion.  It contains 
a number of rather unusual articles, such as one about UFOs and how the truth about them is 
being kept from us. It also had an article on the flag that contained the following statement: 

"The U.S. government hasn't flown the civil flag since the Civil War, as that war is still 
going on. Peace has never been declared, nor have hostilities against the people ended. The
government is still operating under quasi-military rule."

It also says that before WWII the national flag was never flown anywhere other than in federal 
settings, but now it's flown in state buildings and other non-federal settings apparently 
because the federal government forces people to do it.  

I suppose the article about fluoride could be grounded in acknowledged scientific fact, but my 
own kids are going to keep using it for the moment . . . .
 
*************************************************************
Craig C. Thompson, Davis Community Network, Davis, California
[email-masked]

---

From: [email-masked] (Steven B. Harris )
Date: 9 Aug 1995 07:35:24 GMT

In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (DanWillett) 
writes: 

>
>:So if fluoride is so dangerous, what do we use to help children's 
teeth?
>
>Use a natural toothpaste, limit the amout of sugar intake, etc.  BTW, 
have
>you ever read the warning on the label of floride toothpaste?  
>
>P.S. There are natural toothpastes available that aren't made of
>chemicals, and don't have floride in them.
>[email-masked]
>

Dan, everything is made of chemicals, including you.  <sigh> I suppose 
this is what happens when high schools neglect their curriculums.

The reason fluoride is added to water supplies is that some decades ago 
it was noticed that children in towns where there was more fluoride 
naturally present in the ground water, had much better teeth.  
Eventually the effect was replicated in lab animals, and finally in 
studies on individuals, then entire communities.  If nobody fluoridated, 
and fluoride was sold in health food stores without prescription, like 
germanium and chromium, naturopaths and alternative practitioners would 
be falling all over themselves trying to get you to take it.  And they'd 
be charging a conspiracy of dentists, who just want to put in mercury 
fillings instead of practicing truly preventive medicine by the use of 
this natural mineral supplement.  But history didn't go that way, and 
now fluoride is the Devil.  You know why?  Because you can't get 
fluoride pills or drops, without a prescription.  And guess who writes 
prescriptions?  Yep.

                                     Steve Harris, M.D.

                                Steve Harris, M.D.

---

From: [email-masked] (Meow Mew)
Date: 8 Aug 1995 21:43:38 -0400

Yes, flouride in large quantites is toxic, and after a certain age
children are no longer given it for their teeth. If i were you i would not
only be concerned about the flouride, but also the hundreds of other
contaminants in the public water system, and i would do yourself a favor
and switch to distilled water for consumption.

---

From: [email-masked] (DanWillett)
Date: 9 Aug 1995 00:19:05 -0400

:So if fluoride is so dangerous, what do we use to help children's teeth?

Use a natural toothpaste, limit the amout of sugar intake, etc.  BTW, have
you ever read the warning on the label of floride toothpaste?

---

From: jonm@news (Jon Matte)
Date: 9 Aug 1995 19:01:35 GMT

[email-masked] wrote:
: I saw this on another newsgroup. Would appreciate any serious feedback on
: its content.

Well, I suppose it's worth mentioning that I grew up with flouride,
and have terrible problems as a result.  I'm healthy, full-grown,
with normal bones, tendons, muscles, skin, cartilage, lungs, kidneys
and trachea.  Hmmm...on second thought, maybe I'm not that bad off...

My wife also grew up with it, and she has *exactly* the same problems
I do.  Despite our normal condition (caused by fluorides), we are
also giving it to our son in his vitamins (it's never been in a water
supply where we've lived), and he, too, seems to have this problem
with normal development.  :-)  <- see?  I put another one in!

To me, this goes into the list of things to worry about once I've
taken care of lead in the water, lead in the house paint, asbestos
on the heating pipes, car exhaust in the air, and nitrites in the
hot dogs my kid keeps eating (much to my wife's chagrin, who hates
them).  Fluoridated water is (to me) sufficiently ubiquitous that
if it posed a significant, immediate threat, I'd be seeing kids
and adults falling over from it all around the country.  But! 
YMMV, and if you're worried about it, then there are easy,
inexpensive remedies so you're not exposed to it.

Good luck,

--
Jon Matte
Computer, Duuude
ADP Dealer Services
[email-masked]
"This message in no way reflects the position of my employer."
                                          - Me
"What, you think I *like* the porcupine?"
                                          - Roger Boardmartin

---

From: "Cissy . Thorpe" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 08:11:56 -0500

I don't know that I would switch to distilled water.  I remember reading 
somewhere long, long ago that distilled water could actually cause the 
body to loose minerals...iron, mangnezium, zinc...other trace metals, 
etc.  Bottle spring water, drinking water or even purified...but not 
distilled.

Cissy

---

From: [email-masked] (Christopher Biow)
Date: 9 Aug 1995 10:41:46 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>,

>you ever read the warning on the label of floride toothpaste?  

Actually, a good point--flouride toothpastes are toxic in large
doses. Until a toddler is old enough to be trusted not to snarf
the entire contents, it should be kept out of reach like other
toxic materials. Of course, this has nothing to do with the 
advisability of normal use of flouride toothpaste, which is far
below the toxic level.

>chemicals, and don't have floride in them.

Not made of chemicals! What on earth are the ingredients, then? 
Ethereal goodness and clean thoughts? Frozen vacuum? What a racket.

The natural toothpaste that my wife uses lists Calcium Carbonate
as its main ingredient--a chemical if ever there was one. Generally
we mix our toothpastes with the most powerful chemical solvent known,
typically drinking as much as five percent of a lethal dose of
that solvent after brushing. Alert the media! Begin panic!

Yes, Virginia, chalk and water are chemicals.

---

From: [email-masked] (John Hammell)
Date: 9 Aug 1995 18:47:46 GMT

In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Jay Mann)
writes: 
>: Thomas Bergen
>: ============================================================
>: 
>:               THE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FLUORIDES
>[whole list of fluoride dangers snipped]
> 
>fluoridated drinking water.  How much fluoride is absorbed from the water? 
>If you don't insist on getting quantitative answers, then you are a natural
>born fool.  I can prove that water is a death-causing compound, if you don't
>ask me for quantitation.
>
>Jay D Mann  <[email-masked]>
>Christchurch, New Zealand

Fluoridation may be traced back to Colorado Springs and the year 1916. There a
dentist named Frederick S. McCay noticed mottled teeth, but few cavities in his
patients. The cities water supply was analyzed and found to contain 2ppm of fluoride
as soluble salts. (Optimal for good tooth structure is 1 ppm.) Subsequent surveys
throughout the world revealed a definite inverse relationship between incidence of
dental caries and fluoride concentration in drinking waters. Excessive fluoridation
intake, however, was found to cause mottled teeth. This condition is characterized
by chalky white splotches over the surface of the teeth combined with inermittent
yellow-brown staining. In severe cases, there is pitting of the enamel which causes
the teeth to appear to be corroded.
    The incidence of dental caries and the incidence of mottling as functions of
chlorine concentration were carefully plotted on a logarithmic scale. The two lines
crossed at 1 ppm, which became the standard value for "euflorisis." This condition
occurs when there is  optimum protection against dental caries with a minimum of
mottling. Now hundreds of municipalities have fluoridated their water supplies to
maintain fluoride levels of 0.8- 1.2 ppm. For areas of higher mean temperature (more
sweating, and therefor more drinking) less fluoride is needed. Fluoridation has
produced average reductions of 40-70% in the incidence of dental caries in children
born after the treatment started.
    Still, hundreds of communities refrain from adding fluoride to their water.
Opponents of fluoridation maintain that we already receive enough fluoride from
other sources, such as tea, which is rich in fluorine, and many industries emit
fluorine fumes in processing chemicals. Opponents cite cases where cows have grazed
on fluoride rich pasture and have become exceedingly crippled. They also cite cases
where tooth mottling occurs. Tooth decay, they maintain, is a disease of
civilization caused by our excessive intake of sweets and carbohydrates, and
fluoridation is only a ploy to keep soft drink and candy industries in
business and to get rid of the toxic waste fluorine that results from
refining aluminum.
    On the other hand, statistics show that fluorosis (fluoride
poisoning) mottling, and other ill effects have been minimal as long as
fluoride levels are monitored, supervised, and maintained in the
neighborhood of 1 ppm. Fish, cheese, meat and tea all are food sources
of fluoride.
    So problems result when fluoride levels are not maintained at 1
ppm, and when you have an aluminum industry that is as powerful as they
are in California, and they have a lot of fluoride to get rid of as a
waste product, where is the guarantee that levels would be kept at or
below 1 ppm?
    In addition, a growing number of people in our heavily chemicalized
society are developing chemical sensitivities, and many such people
react to even trace amounts of toxins in food and water. Should they be
forced by the town they live in to drink fluoridated water if they
don't want to?
    These are all valid questions. Much of the information above was
gleaned from "Mental and Elemental Nutrients" by Carl Pfeiffer, MD, PhD
Keats Publishing Inc, New Canaan Connecticut ISBN:0-87983-114-6 
p.298-300.
-- 
 John Hammell, Political Coordinator, The Life Extension Foundation
            800-333-2553, 305-929-2905, 305-929-0507 FAX
[email-masked]  http://www.webcom.com/~lef/index.html
**For Complimentary Copy Life Extension Magazine-Send Street Address**

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 1995 21:30:53 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]

> Keats Publishing Inc, New Canaan Connecticut ISBN:0-87983-114-6 

If you haven¹t yet done so, check out the articles at
<http://www.santarosa.edu/~dmontgom/>. Following is an excerpt from one
entitled ³Time Bomb:²

³To date, in the United States, several individual dental fluorosis suits
have been filed against pediatricians and dentists on behalf of the
plaintiff''s children. Dental fluorosis suits have also been initiated in
England, Canada and Australia.

   * In Newport News, Virginia, in 1983 a dental fluorosis lawsuit against
     the water supplier was settled out of court.

   * $750,000 was awarded a family in New York for the fluoride-related
     death of a three year old child. The child was receiving a fluoride
     treatment at a city clinic and accidentally swallowed some of the
     fluoride gel. It seems that neither the dental professionals at the
     clinic nor the attending physicians at the hospital knew the antidotes
     for fluoride poisoning-- lime water or milk would have changed the
     fatal dose of fluoride into the nontoxic form, calcium fluoride.

Added to the fact that fluoride treatments increase the chances of a child
developing dental fluorosis, the child is also risking death with each
treatment.

Doctor Herschel S. Horowitz, dental researcher and proponent of fluoride,
stated in the Journal of Dental Research 69, Spec. Iss.: Feb. 1990, "The
public and health care practitioners are ill-informed or misinformed on the
value and appropriate use of fluoride....The risks associated with
preventing dental caries may affect the future uses of systemic fluorides
more than will the recommendations of scientists."

Before writing this article, twenty dentists were contacted and the question
posed: "Can the resident dentist diagnose dental fluorosis?" These people
were either office personnel or the dentist. Not one person could give a
definitive answer as to diagnosing dental fluorosis and most had no concept
of what we were talking about.

To further illustrate the ignorance regarding fluoride of many pediatric Ads
and dentists: In the "Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride", it is clearly
stated, "In areas where the water is optimally fluoridated (1 ppm), it is
inappropriate to prescribe the use of fluoride supplements." However, many
pediatric health care providers still prescribe and recommend the use of
fluoride supplements in fluoridated areas.

Dental fluorosis is the direct manifestation of chronic fluoride poisoning.
Not only does the over-ingestion of fluoride adversely affect the teeth, but
it also causes the bones to become brittle, as well as skeletal fluorosis.
Fluoride is a tooth and bone seeker; it can replace the calcium in the bone,
creating brittle bone mass. The severity of skeletal fluorosis can only be
determined after death by analyzing samples of bone for fluoride content.

Even with the prospect of costly litigation looming in the shadows, doctors,
health care professionals, politicians, etc. either, knowingly or
unwittingly continue recommending the use of fluoride in water supplies.

In my discussions with attorneys specializing in product liability law, it
was concluded that, for a small law firm, it would not be economically
feasible to file suits on the behalf of people suffering with
fluoride-related maladies. However, there are large firms specializing in
cases of this nature. Those law firms have the financial and human resources
to: (1) review and extrapolate information from the volumes of fluoride
research data (2) interview and screen prospective clients (3) acquire a
stable of expert witnesses (4) establish a network of doctors qualified to
diagnose dental fluorosis and (5) advertise for clients affected with dental
fluorosis.

As far back as 1984, the Legal Research Journal, Volume 7, Issue 5,
published a short article regarding potential fluoride litigation, "Toxic
Research - Sources of Harmful Fluoride Intake." The article states, "Despite
its salutary effect in teeth protection and bone treatment, it is
increasingly suspected that chronic fluoride intake, even at low levels can
cause health problems. This will undoubtedly result in clients showing up in
law offices who have been diagnosed with some ailment due to fluoride
intoxication. Toxic tort researchers should be aware of this and develop
interview tools for their firms which will help pinpoint the source of the
causative fluoride...." This was all well and good, but the adverse health
effects of fluoride are the most well-kept secrets of this century.

The most blatant and visible effect from chronic fluoride poisoning is
dental fluorosis: It is also the key to opening the Pandora's Box of
fluoride-related maladies because it is the most easily diagnosed and the
most visible. All the jury has to do is see the person's teeth and hear the
facts.

The list of suspect maladies related to the long term ingestion of fluoride
range from dental fluorosis to Down's Syndrome, calcification of tendons,
cataracts, osteosarcoma and many others.

All the ingredients for a precedent-setting class action product liability
suit are at hand for an enterprising law firm to pursue.

   *  The Pasteur Institute and the Nobel institute have caused fluoride to
     be banned in their countries, France and Sweden, respectively. (and
     don't forget that Sweden led the way in enforcing standards for
     emanations from computer screens now adopted by all major computer
     manufacturers in the U.S.-ed.)

   *  A pediatric dentist based in Brandon, Florida stated on a WTOG 44 news
     segment that about 40% of the children who visit his office have
     developed dental fluorosis.

   *  In 1991, the National Federation of Federal Employees representing the
     scientists lawyers and engineers at EPA Headquarters charged the EPA
     and Surgeon General's office with falsifying information relating to
     the risks of fluoride and unequivocally renounced the use of fluoride
     as a safe practice.

   *  An Aug., 1992, JAMA (Journal of American Medical Association) press
     release and published report stated that there was a link between hip
     fractures in the elderly and water fluoridated at 1 ppm.

   *  No warnings are offered on the labels by the manu- facturers of
     ingestible products containing significant amounts of fluoride.

   *  Most dentists and pediatricians prescribe fluoride supplements without
     apprising the parents of young patients about the possible adverse
     effects.

   *  Most dentists who offer fluoride treatments do not routinely inform
     patients and the parents of young patients that the treatment could be
     lethal or cause adverse health effects.

   * In material published by the ADA EPA and NRC (National Research
     Council), Dental fluorosis is acknowledged as a growing problem in the
     United States.

   * In 1984, the Legal Research Journal foresaw a future wave of fluoride
     related litigation.

   *  A February, 1990 research paper published in the Journal of Dental
     Research , Vol. 69, Dr. Gary Whitford states that dental health care
     professionals are at risk of potential litigation because of the rising
     instances of dental fluorosis.

   *  In another paper in the Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 69, Dr.
     Herschel S. Horowitz said that most people and health care
     professionals are ill-informed or misinformed about fluoride.

   *  In the U.S., depending on the region, anywhere from 22% to 84% of the
     children suffer from dental fluorosis.

   *  The ADA, FDA, CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) and the
     PHS (Public Health Service) have known for over fifty years that
     fluoride causes skeletal and dental fluorosis. They were also aware
     that with fluoridating municipal water supplies at 0.7 ppm, up to ten
     percent of the populations would experience dental fluorosis. They all
     felt that there was no reason to warn the people of the risk factor. "A
     classic public health trade-off," was the rationale for the decision,
     stated in the "Health Effects of ingested Fluoride, 1993."

   *  The manufacturers of dental hygiene products were aware of dental
     fluorosis through published research data at the onset of fluoridating
     toothpastes and mouthwashes.

   *  There is no reason for any pediatrician, dentist or pediatric dentist
     to be ignorant of children s risk of developing dental fluorosis from
     the over-ingestion of fluoride if they took the time to read trade
     publications.

   *  As for lawsuits, there is no shortage of qualified doctors and
     scientists, credible research material, statistics, plaintiffs and
     defendants with fat pocketbooks.

The only reason that a class action suit has not come to light is that
almost everyone has been brainwashed and any negative research data
regarding fluoride has been ignored or suppressed.

Go back to Fluoride Issues

REFERENCES

"$750,000 Given in Child's Death in Fluoride case," The New York Times, 20
Jan. 1979, Robert D. McFadden.

"Cash award settles JCC teeth suit," Daily Press, Newport News, Virginia, 30
Dec. 1983, David Allen.

"Toothpaste makers must support claims," Pittsburgh Post Gazette, 19 Sept.
1990.

"Dentists claim over fluoride," The Independent Australia, 18 May 1993.

"Toothpaste firms face mass fluoride claim," The Times, London, England, 16
July 1994.

"Toxic Research Sources of Harmful Fluoride Intake, A List," Legal Research
Journal, 30 Oct/84, Pasadena, CA.

National Federation of Federal Employees News Letter, Local 2050, 1 Nov.1991
Dr. Robert J. Carton, Ph.D. (then Vice President of the union).

"Link Between Hip Fractures and Fluoridated Water Seen," American Medical
Association/Jama News Release, 11 Aug. 1992.

"Fluoride levels and fluoride contamination of fruit juices," Journal of
Clinical Pediatric Dentistry, Vol. 16, Nov. 1, 1991.

Clarence Wilbur Taber, Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary, (F.A. Davis
CO., Philadelphia, PA, 1994).

"Proceedings of a Joint IADR/ORCA International Symposium on Fluorides:
Mechanisms of Action and Recommendations for Use," Journal of Dental
Research Agency, Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride, (National Academy
Press, Washington, DC, 1993).

CORRESPONDENCE:

19 Sept. 1994, letter from Paul Balen, partner in law firm
of Freeth, Cartwright, Hunt and, Dickins, Nottingham,
England, to George Glasser.²

-- 
<[email-masked]>

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 18:03:05 GMT

> eat them for reasons other than fluoride over-exposure, though that may also be a 

What studies?  And when were they done?  Fluoride MAY be helpful in its
natural form (Calcium Fluoride), as it hardens bones and teeth, PROVIDED
the delicate calcium/fluoride balance is maintained.  Excess fluoride
leads to growth deformities.

What are they feeding us?  Not Calcium Fluoride, but rather, Hydrofluorosilicic
Acid and Sodium Fluoride, which are a HIGHLY REACTIVE form of fluoride.
Furthermore, due to the fact that these forms are industrial by-products,
there are numerous contaminants present, including lead, cadmium, arsenic,
etc.  Add the fact that the fluorides will react with just about everything
else in the water supply to this Cauldron of Death.

What is most disgusting about this whole proposal is that people will be
forced to take these toxic forms of fluoride AGAINST THEIR WILL.  If anyone
is that crazy about fluoride, there are other (more pure) forms of it that
they can take v-o-l-u-n-t-a-r-i-l-y, instead of being a Health Dept.
guinea pig.

-- Arno Nording ([email-masked])

---

From: [email-masked] (Fransfrech)
Date: 12 Aug 1995 15:48:32 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>, jonm@news (Jon Matte)

>inexpensive remedies so you're not exposed to it.

            If you knew that the fluoride in your son's vitamins truly is
the SAME substance the U.S.Public Health Service describes as "a
rodenticide, an insecticide, and a fungicide," would you give it to him?
Do you REALLY believe that it could be GOOD to give him a little bit of
rat poison, a little bit of cockroach powder?

            Furthermore, the USPHS! reports say that sodium fluoride forms
hydrofluoric acid--yep, the same one that etches glass!--in the stomach.
isn't that just what you want for your precious child?

            Because we have strong evidence that sodium fluoride given
routinely to little babies is the cause of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome,
we have tried desperately to get the FDA to ban it. But that agency
apparently sees us all as guinea pigs, and really doesn't care all that
much how many die--even when the deaths are PROVABLY related to an
approved drug. They approved it, and by damn, they're not going to admit a
mistake.

            No one has ever said that fluoride (except in lethal amounts)
causes people to drop like flies. it's the long-term build-up that
produces ill health and sometimes death. You may not know that fluoride
has harmed you unless (or until) you develop a condition (such as
Alzheimer's or Crohn's) or hip fractures in old age or kidney failure or
some sort of cancer (bone, kidney, or esophygeal) that has been linked to
it. Your wife may not know until she's postmenopausal and may have
weakened bone structure. (The AMA has ADMITTED fluoride's role in hip
fractures. And a medical book widely used by doctors, Conn’s Current
Therapy, in its 1985 edition, says that aluminum and fluoride are the
leading Demineralizers of bone. (You get BOTH from fluoridated water.)

            Since you are giving sodium fluoride to your son (I get cold
chills just thinking about it) would you care to see my fully documented
paper, DEATH I]N SMALL DOSES? The American Academy of Pediatrics and the
ADA are now saying fluoride supplements should not be given before the age
of six months. (The peak age for SIDS, by the way, is six months, so if
doctors follow the new recommendations, the rate ought to drop.) In
Canada, where we were permitted to present written testimony to a
government-sponsored SIDS conference, doctors and dentists are now
advising NOT giving fluoride supplements before the age of three. So we
feel we've made progress--although it will never be admitted that we're
right!

            One more point: How many times have you heard someone say
"I've been smoking all my life and I don't have lung cancer"? Does that
prove smokin

---

From: [email-masked] (James H. Haynes)
Date: 12 Aug 1995 01:17:22 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
Steve Silverman <[email-masked]> wrote:
>In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.950808092804.8692D-100000@curly>, Gwendolyn Alden Dean <[email-masked]> says:
>>
>>So if fluoride is so dangerous, what do we use to help children's teeth?  
>>Gwendolyn  
>
>Avoid sugars, eat whole grains and brush teeth at night and 
>after breakfast, preferably without using toothpaste since the 
>toothpaste has been poisoned.  

Eat nothing but sugar cane.  That's what some gorillas do, and you've
hardly ever seen a gorilla in a dentist's office.

---

From: [email-masked] (John Hammell)
Date: 13 Aug 1995 04:58:44 GMT

>England, to George Glasser.²

This is a really excellent post! Thanks! I'm on the road right now and
don't have access to a fax machine. Could you, or someone who reads
this please print it out and fax it to two people who are very active
in the California anti Fluoridation battle? They are Clint Miller,
lobbyist for The National Council of Improved Health FAX 703-754-4324,
Phone 703-754-0228, also Patrick Von Mauck, lobbyist for the National
Health Federation FAX 818-303-0642, Phone 818-357-2181. If you get it
to these two people, I guarantee they will use this information to good
advantage if they don't already have it.
                                              John Hammell
-- 
 John Hammell, Political Coordinator, The Life Extension Foundation
            800-333-2553, 305-929-2905, 305-929-0507 FAX
[email-masked]  http://www.webcom.com/~lef/index.html
**For Complimentary Copy Life Extension Magazine-Send Street Address**

---

From: [email-masked] (Fransfrech)
Date: 12 Aug 1995 12:06:06 -0400

>born fool.  I can prove that water is a death-causing compound, if

            It is a difficult thing to give SPECIFIC figures for CHRONIC
ill health from fluoride, but f can tell you what they are for ACUTE
fluoride poisoning: 6 grams for an adult weighing 150 lbs, 1.25 grams for
a 50-lb. child. The amounts would be slightly different for other weights,
but these are close enough to indicate how much it would take to be fatal
to anyone.

            Impossible to say how much is being consumed from the water,
for everyone's intake would be different. In addition it's being taken in
by way of foods and beverages prepared with And it's ACCUMULATIVE--some is
excreted, but much remains in the tissues.

            When the idea of fluoridation first took root, 1 mg/L--one
part per million--was said to be a safe level. Yet nearly everyone
consumes more than that,. not only as water but in reconstituted juices,
pop, coffee, tea, etc., and from foods. I've read, for example, that one
ordinary-sized can of chicken soup made with fluoridated water and diluted
with it, as well, contains ELEVEN milligrams of fluoride. You get far more
than 1 ppm of fluoride per day because it's in food and beverages, and
it's there because it's in the water.

Frances Frech

---

From: [email-masked] (Norman L. Rust)
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 09:20:00 -0700

> fluoride pills or drops, without a prescription.  And guess who writes 

 It depends on the amount even in natural supplies, in one area I lived in
the people had brown mottled teeth and many cavities, from excessive
fluoride naturally in the water. Other things to be cautious about is that
if you drink bottled juices that contain fluoridated water and you are
supplimenting or live in a fluoride rich area you could be getting an
excess of fluoride. 
 Fluoride replaces some of the calcium in your bones, now if you have too
much of it yor body will not be able to access its buffering supplies, in
the same way it prevents teeth from being demineralized. Sharon

 PS some forms of fluorides are used as anti-hilmenics(sp).

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 10:14:16 -0400

> toothpaste has been poisoned.  

There are toothpastes that don¹t contain fluoride. Tom¹s of Maine makes
some ‹ but be sure to read the label, as we just checked Krogers, and they
carried only the Tom¹s that contained fluoride. We went to a health food
store, and found 3-4 Tom¹s versions without fluoride. Also, there is
another line called Nature¹s Gate, which is excellent, that contains no
fluroide. These toothpastes are more expensive ($4-5), but it¹s that or
sea salt/baking soda, and I don¹t think our kids would tolerate that very
well.

Again, if you haven¹t done so, check out the articles at these WWW sites: 

The volume of very-well researched, and referenced material is more than
enough to convince a skeptic. I know, Œcause I am one... or was, in this
case.

Thomas

-- 
<[email-masked]>

---

From: [email-masked] (Callie)
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 95 22:31:16 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
   [email-masked] (John Hammell) wrote:

John - 
I want to point out how totally ridiculous it is to cite an entire post, only 
to say "great info".  When the quotes portion excceds your own contribution by 
 about 1000/1 it's time to reconsider.

Callie 

>Path: 
nnrp1.primenet.com!news.primenet.com!news.texas.net!news.kei.com!bloom-beacon.
mit.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix
netcom.com!netnews
>From: [email-masked] (John Hammell)
>Newsgroups: misc.kids,alt.folklore.herbs,misc.health.alternative
>Subject: Re: Biological Effects of Fluorides? Fact or Fiction?
>Date: 13 Aug 1995 04:58:44 GMT
>Organization: Netcom
>Lines: 301
>Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
>References: <[email-masked]> <[email-masked]> 
<[email-masked]> <[email-masked]>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-sf17-03.ix.netcom.com
>Xref: nnrp1.primenet.com misc.kids:208129 alt.folklore.herbs:17606 
misc.health.alternative:41589
>Status: N

---

From: Elke Babiuk <[email-masked]>
Date: 14 Aug 1995 19:35:13 GMT

[email-masked] (Fransfrech) wrote:
[snip]
>but these are close enough to indicate how much it would take to be fatal
[snip]

I have to correct you on the figures for acute fluoride 
poisoning, Frances. They are much less than the amount you quoted. It is 
presently estimated that the Potential Toxic Dose (PTD) of fluoride is 
approximately **5 milligrams per kilogram** of body weight! That means 
that the PTD for a 2-year-old child weighing 11.3 kg (average body 
weight) is as low as 57 milligrams (G.M. Whitford, "The Physiological and 
Toxicological Characteristics of Fluoride," J. Dental Research, spec 
issue: February, 1990). This is the same quanitity of fluoride found in a 
57 g tube of 1000 part per million fluoridated toothpaste. 

As Whitford suggested in the article, the 5 mg F/kg "...does not imply 
that this dose must result in death nor that a somewhat smaller dose 
would be innocuous. It does mean that even if it is only suspected that 5 
mg F/kg has been ingested, it should be assumed that an emergency exists 
and that immediate treatment and hospitilization are required."

Regards, Elke

************************************************************************
 "Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of the century."
       (Robert Carton, Ph.D., former U.S. EPA Scientist)
       http://www.santarosa.edu/~dmontgom/fluoride.htm
        http://emporium.turnpike.net/P/PDHA/health.htm
************************************************************************

---

From: [email-masked] (Cindy Kandolf)
Date: 14 Aug 1995 19:02:02 GMT

> rat poison, a little bit of cockroach powder?

I consider it good for my son to have a little bit of iron, a little
bit of vitamin A, and a little bit of vitamin D.  Not to mention trace
minerals like gold and arsenic.  All of which can kill in sufficient
doses.

> isn't that just what you want for your precious child?

The acids in the stomach, which include hydrochloric acid, are quite
strong, and yet we seem to live with them just fine.  Hydrofluoric acid
has a much worse effect on silicates (such as glass) than on organic
tissue.

> routinely to little babies is the cause of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome,

Inconsistency alert!  If NaF is _the_ cause of SIDS, or even a major
cause, then SIDS should be considerably rarer in countries where the
water is not fluoridated - which you and others have claimed in other
posts means anywhere except the US.  (Fluoride drops and tablets are
only given after the baby begins to get teeth; most cases of SIDS
occur before that age.)  So, does the US have the world's highest rate
of SIDS?  Not at all.

> approved drug. They approved it, and by damn, they're not going to admit a

Or maybe they don't buy your "evidence" - for such simple reasons as i
stated above.

> causes people to drop like flies.

Well, you just said it was THE cause of SIDS.  Since most SIDS cases
occur in the first six months, i'd say that's a pretty sudden death.
So which is it?

> it's the long-term build-up that
> Alzheimer's

Is this from the same source i've already seen quoted that insists
aluminum causes Alzheimer's?  The researchers who did that study have
publicly admitted their mistake.  The aluminum was a residue from the
process of preparing the brains for study.  

> or Crohn's) or hip fractures in old age or kidney failure or
> it. 

Linked to it by whom?  The same group that says it is THE cause of
SIDS?

> chills just thinking about it)

Do you let your children ride in a car?  I get cold chills just
thinking about it.  Let them take a bath and run the risk of drowning?
I get cold chills etc. etc.  

> would you care to see my fully documented
> paper, DEATH I]N SMALL DOSES?

"Fully documented", meaning you refer to publications by like-minded
individuals?

> The American Academy of Pediatrics and the

"It will never be admitted that we're right" - if that phrase isn't
the hallmark of the conspiracy theorist, i don't know what is.  You
forgot to mention _why_ these varius medical associations are
recommending starting fluoride supplimenting later.  I don't suppose
you were hoping to imply that it's because you were right about the
SIDS business, when in fact their reason is totally different.  That
would be dishonest.

> "I've been smoking all my life and I don't have lung cancer"? Does that

(I didn't cut it off, it just stopped there.)

That's an old, old, old argument.  The counter-argument is nearly as
old.  It can be proven that just about everyone who died in Norway in
the last six months ate potatoes and bread at least several times a
week in their childhoods.  Stay away from bread and potatoes!

-Cindy Kandolf               mamma to Kenneth, the gold medal boy
 [email-masked]           (born 12 February 1994)
 Trondheim, Norway           Photoalbum page 82
Denmark, n. - Collective name for the islands surrounding Legoland.

From [email-masked](Kevin Jones) Tue Aug 15 01:29:14 EDT 1995
Article: 16162 of alt.folklore.herbs
Path: bigblue.oit.unc.edu!concert!news-server.ncren.net!news.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!simtel!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!news.compuserve.com!newsmaster
From: <[email-masked](Kevin Jones)>
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.herbs
Subject: Needed: A source of supply for Boletus
Date: 13 Aug 1995 16:00:33 GMT
Organization: CompuServe Incorporated
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ad21-014.compuserve.com
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-length: 306
X-Newsreader: AIR Mosaic (16-bit) version 1.00.198.07

Got a problem here. I need to find a supply of the Boletus fungus, preferably 
commercial, though if anyone grows any I'd like to know. Unfortunately I
live on chalk and the woodland here is broadleaf stuff like oak. Boletus 
prefers pine and there ain't none for maybe 100-200 miles! Can anyone 
help?