USA - Fluoride issue will benefit from studies
Like so many issues, fluoridation is controversial. People on both sides feel they are helping children. Over 150 studies indicate that fluoride, a classified developmental neurotoxin, can negatively affect children’s IQ.
Are these studies the absolute last word? Probably not. Are they troubling? Absolutely. All studies since the 2006 National Research Council report, triggered by extremely high levels of dental fluorosis in children, recommend the need for more extensive studies to determine if fluoride is hurting children and adults.
The problem is, who pays for these studies? Not industry. They make money from this industrial byproduct, as do many the health professionals who defend it.
Not the American Dental Association, which funds efforts to combat communities like ours who try to eliminate fluoridation.
Not the pharmaceutical industry or the American Medical Association, as fluoride is the powerful ingredient in many drugs. Not independent laboratories, as it is not profitable, and certainly not the Environmental Protection Agency, which has been a pawn for industry since fluoridation was introduced.
Fortunately, there is a pending lawsuit against the EPA that allows fluoridation to be evaluated by an independent scientific body and not an arm of industry. This has never happened before. This lawsuit will allow us to know more about the negative effects of fluoridation and may end fluoridation nationwide.
Yes, we need more studies. But rather than dismiss any negative study as fiction, we could take them as a warning, as many scientists agree, that something is not right about fluoridation.
James Forleo
Durango
Are these studies the absolute last word? Probably not. Are they troubling? Absolutely. All studies since the 2006 National Research Council report, triggered by extremely high levels of dental fluorosis in children, recommend the need for more extensive studies to determine if fluoride is hurting children and adults.
The problem is, who pays for these studies? Not industry. They make money from this industrial byproduct, as do many the health professionals who defend it.
Not the American Dental Association, which funds efforts to combat communities like ours who try to eliminate fluoridation.
Not the pharmaceutical industry or the American Medical Association, as fluoride is the powerful ingredient in many drugs. Not independent laboratories, as it is not profitable, and certainly not the Environmental Protection Agency, which has been a pawn for industry since fluoridation was introduced.
Fortunately, there is a pending lawsuit against the EPA that allows fluoridation to be evaluated by an independent scientific body and not an arm of industry. This has never happened before. This lawsuit will allow us to know more about the negative effects of fluoridation and may end fluoridation nationwide.
Yes, we need more studies. But rather than dismiss any negative study as fiction, we could take them as a warning, as many scientists agree, that something is not right about fluoridation.
James Forleo
Durango
posted by Bill at
9:57 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home