Tag Archives: #Sweden

I see quite often the sub­ject of water flu­o­ri­da­tion con­sid­ered a con­spir­acy the­ory. Yet every time I search for this sub­ject I get some very cred­i­ble links and info that I find very hard to dis­miss. One of the more impor­tant facts that jumps out to me is that most of the devel­oped world doesn’t flu­o­ri­date their water and has no dif­fer­ence in tooth decay com­pared to coun­tries that do.

The ques­tion that I will ask here is if flu­o­ride has no effect on tooth decay when taken inter­nally through water, why are we being forced to ingest a poison?

And yes it is a poi­son called “dis­odium hexa-fluorosilicate S7”, in fact a by-product of alu­minum pro­duc­tion that the indus­try can’t seem to get rid of except to sell it to put into our water. A not so well known fact is that if you swal­low more than a pea sized bit of tooth­paste, the warn­ing on the tube states that you should imme­di­ately seek med­ical atten­tion, yet a glass of water has about the same amount of flu­o­ride in it.

We MUST STOP the addi­tion of dis­odium hexa­flu­o­rosil­i­cate going into our city water sup­plies. It is a poi­son. PLEASE STOP CALLING THIS STUFF FLUORIDE – IT IS DISODIUM Hexa­flu­o­rosil­i­cate S7 poi­son used as rat poi­son, pes­ti­cides, insec­ti­cide, wee­vil and ter­mite bait, used in wood preser­v­a­tive, a moth repel­lent!, and most shock­ingly PROZAC is 95% made of this de facto drug.

Prozac is a flu­o­ri­nated drug called “fluoxetine”.

Paxil is a flu­o­ri­nated drug called “parox­e­tine” (also called Seroxat, Aropax). These drugs are designed to inhibit the reup­take of sero­tonin (sero­tonin reup­take inhibitors — SSRIs) and hence inter­fere with the bio­log­i­cal actions of sero­tonin, a neu­ro­trans­mit­ter. Both drugs con­tain flu­o­rine and chlo­ride. Flu­o­ride is present as a ‘4–flu­o­rophenyl’ com­pound, part of the ‘active’ ingredient.

Flu­o­rophenyl com­pounds have shown to dis­turb thy­roid hor­mone activ­ity in sev­eral ways, specif­i­cally in the liver and at the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid (HPT) axis.

Sero­tonin Defi­ciency In humans, defec­tive sig­nalling of sero­tonin in the brain may be the root cause of sud­den infant death syn­drome (SIDS). Sci­en­tists from the Euro­pean Mol­e­c­u­lar Biol­ogy Lab­o­ra­tory in Mon­tero­tondo, Italy­ge­net­i­cally mod­i­fied lab mice to pro­duce low lev­els of the neu­ro­trans­mit­ter sero­tonin. The results showed the mice suf­fered drops in heart rate and other symp­toms of SIDS, and many of the ani­mals died at an early age. Researchers now believe low lev­els of sero­tonin in the ani­mals’ brain­stems, which con­trol heart­beat and breath­ing, may have caused sud­den death, they said in the July 4, 2008 issue of Sci­ence. If neu­rons that make sero­tonin — sero­ton­er­gic neu­rons — are abnor­mal in infants, there is a risk of sud­den infant death syn­drome (SIDS).

Low lev­els of sero­tonin may also be asso­ci­ated with intense spir­i­tual expe­ri­ences.

Recent research con­ducted at Rock­e­feller Uni­ver­sity shows, in both patients who suf­fer from depres­sion and mice that model the dis­or­der, lev­els of the p11 pro­tein are decreased. This pro­tein is related to sero­tonin trans­mis­sion within the brain

Sero­tonin in mam­mals is made by two dif­fer­ent tryp­to­phan hydrox­y­lases: TPH1 pro­duces sero­tonin in the pineal gland and the ente­rochro­maf­fin cells, while TPH2 pro­duces it in the raphe nuclei and in the myen­teric plexus. Genet­i­cally altered mice lack­ing TPH1 develop pro­gres­sive loss of heart strength early on. They have pale skin and breath­ing dif­fi­cul­ties, are eas­ily tired, and even­tu­ally die of heart failure.Genetically altered mice that lack TPH2 are nor­mal when they are born. How­ever, after three days they appear to be smaller and weaker, and have softer skin than their sib­lings. In a pure­bred strain, 50% of the mutants died dur­ing the first four weeks, but in a mixed strain, 90% sur­vived. Nor­mally, the mother weans the lit­ter after three weeks, but the mutant ani­mals needed five weeks. After that, they caught up in growth and had nor­mal mor­tal­ity rates. Sub­tle changes in the auto­nomic ner­vous sys­tem are present, but the most obvi­ous dif­fer­ence from nor­mal mice is the increased aggres­sive­ness and impair­ment in mater­nal care of young.  Despite the blood-brain bar­rier, the loss of sero­tonin pro­duc­tion in the brain is par­tially com­pen­sated by intesti­nal sero­tonin. The behav­ioural changes become greatly enhanced if one crosses TPH1– with TPH2-lacking mice and gets ani­mals that lack TPH entirely

The fac­tual cause of the social decline that marks our age is to be found in the two-hundred-year his­tory of psy­chi­a­try and psycho-therapy at its most eva­sive and mild applications.

Since its ear­li­est days, when trusted psy­chi­a­trists chained, flogged, starved or tor­tured their patients into total sub­mis­sion, lit­tle has changed.

Then, as now, the goal was the sub­ju­ga­tion of the indi­vid­ual, not to cure madness.

The bru­tal treat­ments psy­chi­a­try evolved and still uses to this day—electroshock ther­apy, psy­chosurgery and debil­i­tat­ing drugs—stand as tes­ta­ment to that fact.

Once psy­chi­a­try moved beyond its asy­lum walls and into soci­ety came the truly dis­as­trous results.

In today’s psy­chi­a­try, moti­vated by its mis­sion to “fol­low the money”—to quote a con­tem­po­rary pres­i­dent of the Amer­i­can Psy­chi­atric Association—we are wit­ness­ing a profit-driven, cor­rupt indus­try that leaves death and destruc­tion in its wake.

Despite tril­lions of dol­lars invested in it, psy­chi­a­try does not cure or alle­vi­ate. On the con­trary, psy­chi­a­trists ruin lives and under­mine our social insti­tu­tions at huge cost. Some­thing can and must be done about this dan­ger­ous profession.

Strong words, per­haps, but based on cold, hard facts. Facts every­one should know.

And the first step to effec­tive action in elim­i­nat­ing this scourge is know­ing the truth of how psy­chi­a­try goes about its work.

What does this have to do with [Y]our City?

It begins many years ago with the nazi-chemical weapons pro­grams, how­ever through inter­na­tional con­ven­tions and pro­gres­sive part­ner­ships with the old world per­son­nel of the nazi-era. We have been sys­tem­at­i­cally forced to accept med­ica­tion through addi­tives in the water sup­ply, the addi­tives are sanc­tioned by your local health board, head of the Brant County Health Unit an accred­ited agency that pro­vides advi­sory rec­om­men­da­tions to the City of Brant­ford of the need to med­icate the Peo­ple that use the water supply.

The peo­ple of Brant­ford are told that the Addi­tives are sim­ple and do not cause any harm, it is included into the water sys­tem to pre­vent den­tal com­pli­ca­tion, how­ever by mak­ing such a state­ment, they are admit­ting to the fore­knowl­edge of the med­i­c­i­nal effects and pre­sumed benefits.

The city and the health unit are attempt­ing to chem­i­cally lobot­o­mize its clients [cit­i­zens] so that they are docile and do not have the mind to fight for their well being and way of life.

Here are some facts to think about…

Flu­o­ride com­pounds which are put in water (flu­o­ri­da­tion), were never tested for safety before approval. Recent inde­pen­dent research by sci­en­tists not asso­ci­ated with den­tal trade orga­ni­za­tions has shown the following:

Neu­ro­toxin and Low­ers IQ
Dr. Phyl­lis Mul­lenix pub­lished research show­ing that flu­o­ride built up in the brains of ani­mals when exposed to mod­er­ate lev­els. Dam­age to the brain occurred and the behav­iour pat­terns of the ani­mals was adversely effected. The toxic effects of flu­o­ride on the cen­tral ner­vous sys­tem was sub­se­quently con­firmed by previously-classified gov­ern­ment research. Two new epi­demi­o­log­i­cal stud­ies which tend to con­firm fluoride’s neu­ro­toxic effects on the brain have shown that chil­dren exposed to higher lev­els of flu­o­ride had lower IQs.

[Dr. Phyl­lis Mul­lenix; While hold­ing a dual appoint­ment to Har­vard and the Forsyth Den­tal Research Insti­tute, Dr. Mul­lenix estab­lished the Depart­ment of Tox­i­col­ogy at Forsyth for the pur­pose of inves­ti­gat­ing the envi­ron­men­tal impact of sub­stances that were used in den­tistry. Dur­ing that under­tak­ing she was also directed by the institute’s head to inves­ti­gate flu­o­ride toxicity.]

A study pub­lished in Brain Research shows that rats drink­ing only 1 part per mil­lion flu­o­ride (NaF) in water had his­to­logic lesions in their brain sim­i­lar to Alzheimer’s dis­ease and dementia.

Causes Can­cer
The Depart­ment of Health in New Jer­sey found that bone can­cer in male chil­dren was between two and seven times greater in areas where water was flu­o­ri­dated. A new study has shown that flu­o­ri­da­tion of water is linked to uter­ine can­cer deaths.

Changes Bone Struc­ture and Strength
Flu­o­ride grad­u­ally builds up in the bones and causes adverse changes to the bone struc­ture. Quite a few stud­ies have shown that flu­o­ri­da­tion leads to increases in hip fractures.

Causes Birth Defects and Pre­na­tal Deaths
Pre­na­tal deaths in a flu­o­ri­dated area was 15% higher than in neigh­bour­ing non-fluoridated areas. Chile banned flu­o­ri­da­tion because of research by the world-renowned researcher, Dr Albert Schatz, which showed a link to infant deaths due to fluoridation.

Proven Inef­fec­tive
Flu­o­ride com­pounds in water and in sup­ple­ments do not pro­vide any sig­nif­i­cant cavity-protecting effects. All of the recent large-scale stud­ies of water flu­o­ri­da­tion have shown that there are no pos­i­tive effects. That is why coun­tries with­out flu­o­ri­da­tion have shown an equal improve­ment in den­tal health as those with fluoridation.

Impairs Immune Sys­tem
Inde­pen­dent research has shown that flu­o­ride impairs the func­tion­ing of the immune sys­tem. In the United States, where toxic flu­o­ride com­pounds are reg­u­larly added to water and given to chil­dren since the 1960s and 1970s, we are begin­ning to see an over­whelm­ing num­ber of peo­ple of that gen­er­a­tion who are devel­op­ing chronic immune sys­tem disorders.

Causes Ini­tial Stages of Skele­tal Flu­o­ro­sis
Flu­o­ride can cause severe skele­tal flu­o­ro­sis at high lev­els. Chronic, long-term expo­sure to lev­els of flu­o­ride com­monly found in water and food in the U.S. can cause the begin­ning stages of skele­tal fluorosis.

Flu­o­ride Causes Osteoarthri­tis
In a study pub­lished in Rheuma­tol­ogy Inter­na­tional in 2001, researchers found a link between flu­o­ride expo­sure and the devel­op­ment of osteoarthri­tis. The level of expo­sure that caused osteoarthri­tis is com­mon in the United States.

Causes Per­ma­nent Dis­fig­ure­ment of the Teeth in Many Chil­dren
A very large and increas­ing num­ber of chil­dren are expe­ri­enc­ing den­tal flu­o­ro­sis which is a per­ma­nent adverse struc­tural change to the teeth.

Inhibits Key Enzymes
As flu­o­ride builds up in dif­fer­ent parts of the body over decades it can dis­rupt the actions of many key enzymes. This fact has been known for a long time.

Sup­presses Thy­roid Func­tion
Flu­o­ride was given at low lev­els dur­ing the early to mid 20^th cen­tury as an effec­tive way of sup­press­ing thy­roid func­tion and treat­ing hyper­thy­roidism. Arti­cles and research can be found on the Thy­roid web page.

Causes Large Num­bers of Acute Poi­son­ings
Flu­o­ride is an extremely poi­so­nous sub­stances at excep­tion­ally low doses and has caused a large num­ber of acute poi­son­ings. This is why a poi­son warn­ing is now required on flu­o­ri­dated tooth­pastes sold in the U.S.
Uneth­i­cal
Flu­o­ri­da­tion amounts to forced med­ica­tion of the water sup­ply. Such prac­tices demon­strate a com­plete lack of ethics on the part of its pro­mot­ers. Stud­ies as early the 1930s showed extreme haz­ards to man and the envi­ron­ment due to flu­o­ride dump­ing and expo­sure. Com­pa­nies and orga­ni­za­tions involved used the pro­mo­tion of “flu­o­ri­da­tion” as a way to avoid law­suits due to dump­ing toxic wastes and later for eco­nomic gain.

The fol­low­ing 12 points require no exper­tise in flu­o­ride tox­i­c­ity, just com­mon sense.

1. Only par­ents or indi­vid­u­als have the right to decide if they or their chil­dren take drugs. This point should end the debate on com­pul­sory flu­o­ri­da­tion. (The U.S. Food and Drug Admin­is­tra­tion show flu­o­ride isn’t a food, nutri­ent or dietary sup­ple­ment: “Sodium flu­o­ride used for ther­a­peu­tic effect *[e.g. water flu­o­ri­da­tion] would be a drug, not a min­eral nutri­ent.” F.D.A. 1963).

2. Claim­ing flu­o­ride is nat­ural, as it is found in the Earth’s crust or water, is mis­lead­ing. So is arsenic, mer­cury and other poi­sons. The flu­o­ride chem­i­cal used for flu­o­ri­da­tion in Aus­tralia is untreated toxic waste cap­tured inside fer­tiliser fac­tory smokestacks.

3. Doc­tors have legal and med­ical restric­tions in pre­scrib­ing drugs. A patient’s med­ical his­tory, age, weight, sex, aller­gic reac­tions, other drugs taken and ill­nesses must be deter­mined. After an ade­quate med­ical exam­i­na­tion, scripts must be for a spe­cific per­son, drug, dura­tion and dose — never ‘take some when­ever you’re thirsty’. Harm­ful side-effects must be explained. You have the right to refuse! These 14 safety require­ments are vital. All are ignored with fluoridation.

4. The World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Inter­na­tional Agency for Research on Can­cer, reports sodium sil­i­co­flu­o­ride [as used for flu­o­ri­da­tion in Aus­tralia] as, “… an insec­ti­cide, fungi­cide, bac­te­ri­cide and roden­ti­cide [rat poi­son] … [and] a flu­o­ri­dat­ing agent for munic­i­pal drinking-water. … The Com­mis­sion of the Euro­pean Com­mu­ni­ties (1978) requires that sodium sil­i­co­flu­o­ride be labelled as toxic by inhala­tion, in con­tact with the skin or if swal­lowed.” I.A.R.C. Mono­graph on the Eval­u­a­tion of the Car­cino­genic Risk of Chem­i­cals to Humans, 27−4−82, p 250.

5. Flu­o­ride deaths. In a 5 month court case of world experts in Pitts­burgh 1978, sci­en­tists, led by Dr Burk, a US National Can­cer Insti­tute founder and its Chief Chemist for 35 years, proved fluoridation

**kills 10,000 yearly (can­cer), admit­ted by oppo­nents under cross-examination. In Bris­bane, 2 year old

**Jason Bur­ton died after tak­ing 6 flu­o­ride pills. His death cer­tifi­cate states, ‘Flu­o­ride poi­son­ing’. In New York, 3 year old **William Ken­nerly died from a ‘flu­o­ride rinse’ at a den­tist. The Court awarded US$750,000.

6. Flu­o­ri­da­tion is unde­mo­c­ra­tic. We’ve rejected flu­o­ri­da­tion in over 90% of ref­er­en­dums with votes as high as 98% against. Now, ref­er­en­dums are denied us.

7. Flu­o­ri­da­tion does not reduce decay. Few (4%) coun­tries are flu­o­ri­dated yet nearly all have decades of falling decay rates, includ­ing all 10 (unflu­o­ri­dated) in west con­ti­nen­tal Europe. WHO (www.whocollab.od.mah.se)1. Also, decay was reduc­ing decades before flu­o­ri­da­tion, e.g. NZ school records since 1930 show steep decay reduc­tions for 25–35 years before fluoridation.

8. Flu­o­ride is so toxic it causes flu­o­ro­sis, a dis­ease of con­stant ‘whole body’ flu­o­ride poi­son­ing. Its first sign is chalky white mot­tling of teeth called den­tal flu­o­ro­sis. Teeth can also frac­ture, pit or become dark brown. This irre­versible, dis­fig­ur­ing tooth decay is the cel­lu­lar break down of teeth. Australia’s three major gov­ern­ment flu­o­ri­da­tion inquiries (Tas 1968, Vic 1979, ACT 89–91) all reported that up to 10% of chil­dren will get mot­tled teeth if water is flu­o­ri­dated. In prac­tice, mot­tling is as high as 48% (UK Govt. York Report, 2000). Den­tists make $600-$1,200 per tooth to hide (cover) fluorosis.

9. Flu­o­ri­da­tion aside, most other decay is due to a poor diet of lots of processed car­bo­hy­drates, e.g. we aver­age 22 tea­spoons of sugar a day. The only rea­son teeth get badly decayed is they weren’t filled early enough as par­ents often can’t pay the high costs charged by den­tists (earn­ing up to $500,000 a year).

10. Aus­tralian author­i­ties often make mis­takes. Flu­o­ri­da­tion is claimed to be safe, but so was Arsenic, DDT, Thalido­mide, Dioxin, Asbestos, Agent Orange, the Dalkon Shield, Deildrin, Mer­cury, Lead and more recently, Vioxx, all shown later to harm or kill peo­ple. But at least they weren’t com­pul­sory. Flu­o­ri­da­tion is!

11. If some­one tried to force us to take a pill every time we drank a glass of water, we’d sug­gest they go where it’s eter­nally hot. The only real dif­fer­ence with flu­o­ri­da­tion is that the pill is dis­solved in the water before they make us take it.

12. Among experts, the con­tro­versy rages over flu­o­ri­da­tion. Regard­less of who’s right, if the safety of any drug is so hugely con­tro­ver­sial, doesn’t com­mon sense demand it not be used at all? Cer­tainly not forced on mil­lions of peo­ple for their whole life!

Flu­o­ride Banned in Many Coun­tries
Flu­o­ri­da­tion is not legal or not used in the over­whelm­ing num­ber of coun­tries includ­ing indus­tri­al­ized countries.

Coun­tries That Do Not Flu­o­ri­date Water

Many coun­tries oppose water flu­o­ri­da­tion. In 2000, gov­ern­ment author­i­ties from var­i­ous coun­tries were asked if they flu­o­ri­dated their water and if not, why. Sev­eral coun­tries (Por­tu­gal, Roma­nia, Den­mark, Aus­tria, and China) sim­ply stated that their water was not flu­o­ri­dated with­out giv­ing any rea­sons.

Other coun­tries that did not flu­o­ri­date pro­vided the fol­low­ing reasons:

The Nether­lands: opposed to putting med­ical addi­tives into the water.

Bel­gium: opposed to putting med­ical addi­tives into the water.

Hun­gary: ran into tech­ni­cal prob­lems that made flu­o­ri­da­tion seem unreasonable.

Switzer­land: uses flu­o­ri­dated salt instead but pre­serve choice since peo­ple can buy non-fluoridated salt.

[Note: The cost of flu­o­ri­dat­ing salt is borne by the man­u­fac­turer rather than by municipalities.]

Lux­em­bourg: “drink­ing water isn’t the suit­able way for med­i­c­i­nal treat­ment… peo­ple need­ing an addi­tion of flu­o­ride can decide by their own to use the most appro­pri­ate way, like the intake of flu­o­ride tablets”

Swe­den: “Drink­ing water flu­o­ri­da­tion is not allowed in Swe­den due to repeal in 1971 of the Drink­ing Water Flu­o­ri­da­tion Act issued in 1962.… New sci­en­tific doc­u­men­ta­tion or changes in the den­tal health sit­u­a­tion that could alter the con­clu­sions of the com­mis­sion have not been shown.”

Nor­way: “we had a rather intense dis­cus­sion on this sub­ject some 20 years ago, and the con­clu­sion was that drink­ing water should not be flu­o­ri­dated. It was there­fore up to each indi­vid­ual to decide whether to use flu­o­ride tablets, tooth­paste or mouthwash.”

Fin­land: has no flu­o­ri­da­tion because “there are bet­ter ways of pro­vid­ing the flu­o­ride our teeth need.” The Finnish Den­tists’ Asso­ci­a­tion rec­om­mends the use of flu­o­ride pills.

Japan: “there is no need to sup­ply flu­o­ri­dated water to ALL users because:
(1) the impacts of flu­o­ri­dated water on human health depends on each human being so that inap­pro­pri­ate appli­ca­tion may cause health prob­lems of vul­ner­a­ble peo­ple, and,
(2) there is [sic] other ways for the pur­pose of den­tal health care, such as direct F-coating on teeth and using flu­o­ri­dated den­tal paste and these ways should be applied at one’s free will.”

France: “Flu­o­ride chem­i­cals are not included in the list [of ‘chem­i­cals for drink­ing water treat­ment’]. This is due to eth­i­cal as well as med­ical con­sid­er­a­tions.” (Louis Sanchez, Directeur de la Pro­tec­tion de l’Environment, August25, 2000). France does have flu­o­ri­dated salt as a choice.

Czech Repub­lic: Stopped flu­o­ri­da­tion in 1989 because it was
(1) uneco­nom­i­cal since “only 0.54% of water suit­able for drink­ing water is used as such,”
(2) “une­co­log­i­cal,”
(3) “uneth­i­cal (forced med­ica­tion),”
(4)  it “dis­re­gards actual indi­vid­ual intake and require­ments”.

India: Rather than putting flu­o­ride into the water, Indiais remov­ing “the flu­o­ride that pol­lutes the water nat­u­rally…we know that flu­o­ride is inju­ri­ous to health.” Fur­ther­more, it is man­dated that tooth­paste car­tons indi­cate the flu­o­ride con­tent and state that “chil­dren below 4 years of age should not use flu­o­ri­dated tooth­paste as flu­o­ride is inju­ri­ous to health.” India has a prob­lem with flu­o­ro­sis in 17 of the 32 states lead­ing the gov­ern­ment to rec­om­mend that indi­vid­u­als not use flu­o­ri­dated toothpaste.

Ger­many: stopped all flu­o­ri­da­tion and pro­vided the most exten­sive rea­sons for that action via a posi­tion state­ment issued by the DVGW (Ger­man Tech­ni­cal and Sci­en­tific Asso­ci­a­tion for Gas and Water). As the let­ter indi­cated, “The infor­ma­tion is dated 1992, but we still fully agree with this state­ment.” The DVGW sets tech­ni­cal stan­dards that are used in the oper­a­tion of water sys­tems in Ger­many and the Euro­pean Union. The fol­low­ing are quotes from the DVGW posi­tion statement.

(1) “It is not the task of water sup­ply com­pa­nies to add sub­stances to drink­ing water intended as pro­phy­lac­tics against ill­ness not caused by drink­ing water.”
(2) “Caries is not the man­i­fes­ta­tion of flu­o­ride defi­ciency, but is the result of a gen­er­ally false nutri­tion and inef­fi­cient den­tal May 1, 2008 hygiene. Unwhole­some habits result­ing in caries are not elim­i­nated by the flu­o­ri­da­tion of drink­ing water; on the con­trary, they are pro­moted.”
(3) “The sug­gested opti­mal flu­o­ride con­cen­tra­tion of 1 mg per litre is very close to the dose with which long term detri­men­tal effects in peo­ple can­not be excluded… the limit value in drink­ing water can­not be jus­ti­fied in view of dif­fer­ent habits and there­fore dif­fer­ing con­sump­tion of drink­ing water and the uncon­trolled intake of flu­o­rides from other sources. The safety of a life­long accu­mu­la­tion of flu­o­ride in the human body as a result of increased intake is dis­puted in med­ical sci­ence through­out the world.”
(4) “More than 99 per cent [of flu­o­ride con­tained in drink­ing water] would be dis­charged with waste water directly into the envi­ron­ment. This addi­tional flu­o­ride emis­sion into waters is unac­cept­able for eco­log­i­cal rea­sons.”
(5) “The con­sumer can­not avoid flu­o­ri­dated drink­ing water made avail­able by pub­lic water sup­ply. This manda­tory intake of flu­o­ride vio­lates the basic right to bod­ily free­dom from injury … pro­vided by the Basic Law of the Fed­eral Repub­lic of Ger­many.”
(6) “Flu­o­ride intake for the pre­ven­tion of caries is more effec­tive with spe­cific mea­sures taken by the indi­vid­ual than by flu­o­ri­da­tion of drink­ing water.”
(7) “An assess­ment of risks vs. ben­e­fits involv­ing both the health aspects and eco­log­i­cal con­se­quences jus­ti­fies DVGW’s rejec­tion of the flu­o­ri­da­tion of drink­ing water.”

Most of these coun­tries with­out water flu­o­ri­da­tion rank well above the United States and Canada in terms of low infant mor­tal­ity rates and long life expectancies—commonly used bench­marks for the over­all health of a country’s citizens.

The esti­mated 2008 data from the CIA World Fact­book ranks the USA in 47th place on life expectancy (well behind Japan, France, Swe­den, Switzer­land, Italy, Nor­way, Aus­tria, Nether­lands, Lux­em­bourg, Ger­many, Bel­gium, and Fin­land), and in 43rd place on infant mor­tal­ity rate (behind Por­tu­gal, Bel­gium, Aus­tria, Den­mark, Spain, Switzer­land, Ger­many, Nor­way, Fin­land, France, Japan, and Swe­den).

The Fact­book ranks Canada sur­pris­ingly at 12^th for life expectancy although its hard to know how many ill­nesses or death are onset by the defacto-drug , Canada still has room to improve. With the preva­lence of com­mon sense we could in the near future be num­ber one for life expectancy.

Hence, it is dif­fi­cult to argue that these coun­tries are unin­formed on health mat­ters. It is also dif­fi­cult to argue that the decline in tooth decay is the result of flu­o­ri­da­tion since tooth decay rates are drop­ping in all coun­tries, whether flu­o­ri­dated or not.

Den­tal care and health prac­tices have improved in all coun­tries. The pre­ced­ing infor­ma­tion indi­cates that Brant­ford could pre­serve choice and still not com­pro­mise tooth decay rates by stop­ping the flu­o­ri­da­tion of water.

Improved den­tal hygiene edu­ca­tion together with alter­na­tive mea­sures such as pro­vid­ing xyl­i­tol gum, flu­o­ride tablets, flu­o­ri­dated tooth­paste, and mon­e­tary assis­tance to low income fam­i­lies would achieve the goals of both pro­po­nents and oppo­nents of water flu­o­ri­da­tion and at far less cost.

ref: [http://www.scribd.com/doc/32660701/Flouride-Letters]
Clas­si­fi­ca­tion of Haz­ardous Mate­r­ial
Toxic liq­uids and solids, Divi­sion 6.1, are mate­ri­als liable to harm human health, or cause injury or death, if swal­lowed, absorbed via skin, or inhaled.  Exam­ples include pes­ti­cides, cyanides, and arse­n­ates.  Gases with a toxic haz­ard are assigned to Divi­sion 2.3 rather than Divi­sion 6.1.

Toxic liq­uids and solids are divided into three pack­ing groups based on very severe, seri­ous or rel­a­tively low toxic risk.  Clas­si­fi­ca­tion is based on human expe­ri­ence and/or ani­mal exper­i­men­ta­tion where LD50 and LC50 rep­re­sent the lethal dosage and con­cen­tra­tion, respec­tively, which are most likely to cause death in 50% of the ani­mals tested.

Struc­ture of Sodium flu­o­rosil­i­cate (CAS NO.16893–85-9):
IUPAC Name: dis­odium hexafluorosilicon(2-)
Empir­i­cal For­mula: F6Na2Si
Mol­e­c­u­lar Weight: 188.06
WGK Ger­many:2
RTECS:VV8410000
Haz­ard Note: Irri­tant
TSCA: Yes
Haz­ard­Class: 6.1
Pack­ing­Group: III
Poi­son by inges­tion and sub­cu­ta­neous routes. A skin and severe eye irri­tant. An insec­ti­cide. When heated to decom­po­si­tion it emits very toxic fumes of F? and Na2O.

ref: [http://www.ehs.cornell.edu/lab/dot/PoisonTips.cfm]
“The real rea­son behind water flu­o­ri­da­tion is not to ben­e­fit children’s teeth. If this were the real rea­son there are many ways in which it could be done that are much eas­ier, cheaper, and far more effec­tive. The real pur­pose behind water flu­o­ri­da­tion is to reduce the resis­tance of the masses to dom­i­na­tion and con­trol and loss of liberty.

“When the Nazis under Hitler decided to go into Poland, both the Ger­man Gen­eral Staff and the Russ­ian Gen­eral Staff exchanged sci­en­tific and mil­i­tary ideas, plans, and per­son­nel, and the scheme of mass con­trol through water med­ica­tion was seized upon by the Russ­ian Com­mu­nists because it fit­ted ide­ally into their plan to com­mu­nize the world. …

“I was told of this entire scheme by a Ger­man chemist who was an offi­cial of the great IG Far­ben chem­i­cal indus­tries and was also promi­nent in the Nazi move­ment at the time. I say this with all the earnest­ness and sin­cer­ity of a sci­en­tist who has spent nearly 20 years’ research into the chem­istry, bio­chem­istry, phys­i­ol­ogy and pathol­ogy of fluorine–any per­son who drinks arti­fi­cially flu­o­ri­nated water for a period of one year or more will never again be the same per­son men­tally or phys­i­cally.” – CHARLES E. PERKINS, Chemist, 2 Octo­ber 1954

ref: [http://www.preferrednetwork.com/FLUORIDE_STUPIDITY.htm]