LEAD POISONING AT MOUNT ISA

AND FLUORIDATION

A new study has suggested one child develops lead poisoning

every nine days in the northwest Queensland mining

city of Mount Isa.

“…There are about 400 children born every year in Mount Isa and about 11 per cent of those children, according to the last blood lead study, have a blood lead level in excess of the current acceptable guideline value…”

The Environmental Protection Agency states on their website that exposure to lead in water that is being consumed above the action level, or 15 parts per Billion, can result in delays in physical and mental development in children, anemia, and muscle problems. In adults, it can cause increases in blood pressure and, eventually with heavy exposure, the development of kidney problems or nerve disorders.

For every 17 micrograms of lead in your body, your IQ is reduced by 10 points!

More: http://www.naturalnews.com/033122_garden_hoses_lead.html#ixzz1TusKP1ey

Read on …  

Read the rest of this entry »

WESTENDORF’S RESEARCH ON

INCOMPLETE DISSOCIATION OF

SILICOFLUORIDES UNDER

PHYSIOLOGICAL

CONDITIONS

The Kinetics of Acetylcholinesterase Inhibition and the

Influence of Fluoride and Fluoride Complexes on the Permeability of

Erythrocyte Membranes

 

Dissertation to receive Ph.D. in Chemistry from the University of Hamburg

by Johannes Westendorf

Hamburg, Germany – 1975

Reviewer: Prof  Dr. A. Knappwost

Co-Reviewers: Prof, Dr, Malomy Prof,  DR, Strehlow Prof,

Dr. Hilz Prof  Dr. Gercken

The oral defense took place on 2/18/1975

A Foreword intended to place the Westendorf research in current context indicating why it is relevant to a wide range of contemporary health and behavioral problems has been prepared by Myron J. Coplan and Roger D. Masters whose credentials are also attached.

Mikecoplan@aol.com Roger.D.Masters@Dartmouth.edu

Foreword by

M J Coplan and R D Masters, April 2001

Westendorf’s 30-year PhD research work is important for reasons beyond its specific scientific findings. First his work was motivated by the assumption that ingested fluoride was beneficial. Knappwost, his thesis supervisor, believed that fluoride in saliva afforded protection against tooth decay and was seeking a means of enhancing the output of fluoride-bearing saliva for that purpose. Therefore, it can hardly be said that Westendorf’s work was biased against water fluoridation.

Second, Westendorf’s research was based on knowledge that fluoride ion is an enzyme inhibitor. Indeed, that feature of ingested fluoride seemed to offer multiple benefits. Knappwost believed that ingested fluoride, by inhibiting cholinesterase, could achieve both greater expression of total saliva and an increase in its fluoride content. The research of his student quite logically examined different forms of ingestible fluoride for their effect on several variants of cholinesterase, Westendorf’s results showed that fluoride in the form of the silicofluoride complex (SiF), as well as several other complexes, was a substantially more powerful inhibitor of cholinesterases than the simple fluoride ion released by sodium fluoride (NaF). This was simply an objective finding.

Third, to account for the more powerful inhibition effect of SiF, Westendorf studied the course of its fluoride release in fine detail. He found that under physiological conditions, dissociation was no more than 66% in the concentration range considered “optimum” for fluoridated water by United States health authorities. If the released fluoride came uniformly from all of the initially injected SiF, the molar concentration of the residual non-dissociated species would be the same as that of the injected SiF. It would follow that dilution of fluosilicic acid to a nominal 1 part per million of free fluoride in water at pH 7.4 induces each [SiF6]2- to release 4 fluorides to be replaced by hydroxyls. The partially dissociated residue would be the ion [SiF2(OH)4]2- which would then be present in the water at the same concentration as the originally introduced SiF. The biological consequences of ingesting such a species are probably not innocuous, with enzyme inhibition being only one of several possibilities.

Westendorf’s visualized course of SiF dissociation, based on actual experimental evidence, is materially at odds with the dissociation route assumed by US EPA and CDC, based on theory. In judging the reliability of the theoretical approach and claims of health safety presented by these government agencies, one should be aware that both the nature of the complicated mixture called “fluosilicic acid” and the course of its dissociation upon dilution remain unresolved despite nearly a century of research. Two recent documents demonstrate this. In the first, an expert in the recovery of fluoride in phosphate rock processing, addressing a group of his peers at a 1999 International Fertilizer Association (a) meeting held in the former USSR, said:

“The chemical formula of fluosilicic acid is H2SiF6. However, things are not as simple as that due to the fact that rarely is fluosilicic acid present as pure H2SiF6. . . There are well reported references to the existence of H2SiF6 SiF4. . . Hereon in this presentation, FSA [fluosilicic acid] means a mixture of HF, H2SiF6 and H2SiF6 SiF4.”

This is a highly significant statement coming from someone who ought to know the subject under discussion. It means that a key intermediate dissociation product postulated by CDC and EPA theories to be transient species only fleetingly after SiF is introduced into the water at the water plant, may be present in concentrated fluosilicic acid before dissociation begins. Such a starting condition would cast serious doubt on the postulated theoretical equations predicting “virtually 100%” dissociation that supposedly “guarantee” no adverse health effects from undissociated SiF residues in drinking water treated with these compounds.

Equally important is a letter (b) dated March 15, 2001, written by the Director of the EPA Water Supply and Water Resources Division, which concludes with the statement:

“In January, representatives from the [EPA] Office of Research and Development (ORD) and the Office of Science and Technology and Ground Water and Drinking Water met to discuss a number of water related issues including Fluoridation. Several fluoride chemistry related research needs were identified including; (1) accurate and precise values for the stability constants of mixed fluorohydroxo complexes with aluminum (III), iron (III) and other metal cations likely to be found under drinking water conditions and (2) a kinetic model for the dissociation and hydrolysis of fluosilicates and stepwise equilibrium constants for the partial hydrolysis products.”

In plain English, senior EPA research staff now believe their staff needs to go back to the lab for at least another year or two to find out if the EPA’s longstanding confidence in the “virtually total” dissociation of SiFs may have been misplaced. Whatever the outcome may be of their new study of SiF dissociation, it is clear the EPA does not intend to perform animal tests to ascertain health effects of chronic ingestion of SiF treated water under controlled conditions.

Animal experiments according to accepted toxicology testing protocols would be the logical way to examine health effects of enzyme inhibition by SiF that Westendorf observed at the cellular level. Three published reports bearing directly on this matter should be noted. In the early 1930s, the Ohio agriculture department wanted to develop a replacement for bone meal as a source of calcium and phosphorus in the feed ration of farm animals. Natural “rock phosphate,” comprising largely calcium phosphate, was a candidate, but it was known to carry about 2 to 5% of fluoride bound in some chemical form. Thus it was necessary to study possible adverse health effects due to ingestion of fluoride from several sources.

A report (c) issued in 1935 compared health effects primarily from calcium fluoride, sodium fluoride, and rock phosphate. Highly significant for present purposes was one small experiment that included sodium fluosilicate. With equal dosage and equal amounts of fluoride retained, rats fed sodium fluosilicate excreted three times as much non-retained fluoride in urine as rats fed sodium fluoride, who eliminated more fluoride in feces. Apparently about three times as much fluoride had crossed the gut/blood membrane into the bloodstream from SiF than from NaF. A second report, this one by the US PHS, (d) was published about ten years after water fluoridation had begun. The study compared the time, starting from the date of fluoridation either with sodium fluosilicate or sodium fluoride, for urinary fluoride level to reach equilibrium with ingested fluoride from fluoridated water. The study populations were boys and men. There were two noteworthy results. First, for either fluoridating agent, urine fluoride levels in older males reached equilibrium with ingested fluoride levels sooner than in younger males. The longer time for young males can be accounted for by the fact that the weight of the older males was essentially constant, while the younger males were adding bone mass over the several years of the experiment. The bodies of younger males were therefore providing a time-related increase in storage compartment capacity for ingested fluoride.

A more important finding was that for the younger males it took longer for their urine level of fluoride to reach equilibrium with ingested water fluoride from SiF than from NaF. Apparently in growing boys SiF fluoride must have been metabolizing differently from NaF fluoride.

A third relevant study (e), conducted around the same time as Westendorf’s research, involved feeding water treated with the same fluosilicic acid used to fluoridate the local water supply to squirrel monkeys for up to 14 months. Morphological and cytochemical effects were reported for the liver, kidney, and nervous system due to ingestion of 1-5 ppm of fluoride in water. Although the study did not compare results from exposure to NaF, the report emphasizes the fact that the kidneys of monkeys ingesting SiF treated drinking water “Éshowed significant cytochemical changes, especially in the animals on 5 PPM fluoride intake in their drinking water.”

The report later observes that work by others in the 1940s and 1950s “Éshowed that fluoride has an inhibitive effect on the activity of succinate dehydrogenase. These studies indicate that under the effect of fluoride intake, a serious metabolic distress may develop in the kidneys.” In concluding, the report notes that “Earlier, some workers had also indicated that inorganic fluorides have a strongly adverse effect on the activity of some enzymes and of these, mitochondrial enzymes, acid and alkaline phosphatases and ATP-utilizing enzymes and aldolase may be the most affected (Batenburg & Van den Bergh, 1972; Katz & Tenenhouse, 1973).”

This study of squirrel monkeys is a rare (possibly singular) American experiment with SiF. If the research team had known that Westendorf was finding greater effects of silicofluoride than sodium fluoride on enzyme activity at virtually the same moment, the U.S. study might have taken a different turn. In any case, two of these three American experiments compared effects from NaF and SiF, and both found that SiF and NaF do not produce the same effect. Moreover, all three studies found the strongest adverse clinical effect of silicofluoride in the kidney. But damage to the kidney is hardly the only possible health effect of ingested SiF.

“Life” involves an incalculable number of chemically active molecules initiating, continuing and terminating a bewildering variety of chemical events. Throughout this panoply of events and in every organ where they occur, various enzymes play crucial roles. A particularly important example is the quenching by enzymes of muscle stimulation induced by the neurotransmitter acetylcholine (ACh), an ester comprising the acetyl moiety bound by an oxygen bridge to the choline molecule. The principal “quenching” enzyme, acetylycholinesterase (AChE), comes in several variations and the ACh/Ache dyads operate in numerous ways in many organs. Related enzymes called pseudocholinesterases are found in serum and include the butyrylcholinesterases.

At latest count over 7,000 enzymes have been detected and catalogued, (f) and there is no reason to suppose that the effect of SiF is limited only to a sub-class. In any event, one would be hard put to identify a more important enzyme subclass than “esterases,” which cleave molecules called “esters” at the right time and place in the healthy organism. While a great deal is known about many of the ways these enzymes function, there are still large knowledge gaps to be filled. To do just that, an extensive survey of contemporary knowledge about cholinesterases has recently been published (g) by an employee of the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances in EPA’s Health Effects Division. The published article carries this disclaimer:

“Although this article was written as part of the author’s official duties as an EPA scientist, the opinions and conclusions expressed in it are his alone, and do not reflect the position of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

Dementi’s review deserves a great deal of attention, so one wonders why it was not published as official work of the EPA. The EPA has acknowledged (h) that it has no data on health effects of the SiFs, shown by Westendorf to be a significant cholinesterase inhibitor and being added to the diets of 140 million people at the rate of 200,000 tons a year. The many different biochemical responses this dosage can be expected to elicit may well support a recently published (l) hypothesis proposing an explanation for Fibromyalgia, Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. It is not at all unlikely that chronic ingestion of SiF treated water also bears on ADD/ADHD, teen violence, and even some of the ambiguities associated with Gulf War Syndrome.

Common sense suggests that wide-spread, albeit clinically vague, adverse health effects should be expected when a strong enzyme inhibitor is added to the daily diets of over half of US residents, as would be the case given the results of the research work described herein. With millions of people suffering from one or another poorly understood condition with likely roots in environmental toxins, it is time to re-examine entrenched governmental doctrines in the light of Westendorf’s research which, while 30 years old, has received little or no attention heretofore.

(Read Westendorf’s thesis)

Notes and Credits

NOTE 1. The following English language text, translated from the German in which it was written by Dr. Johannes Westendorf, (Toxicology Department, Eppendorf-Hamburg University Hospital) was submitted to him in March 2001 for his comments with a series of questions. This was his response.

“With respect to my thesis I finished this kind of work in 1976, when I changed to the Medical faculty, where I still am. After my thesis I continued the work on fluoride for another year and we especially worked on the stability of hexafluoro complexes of silicon and iron. We used radioactive isotopes, such as F-18 and Si-31 . . . when we analyzed the electrophoretic mobility. In the presence of silicon and iron, fluoride ions showed a different mobility compared to fluoride [ion] itself. Unfortunately I have no access to these old experiments and we did not publish it.

. . . During hydrolysis we got a continuous shifting of the mobility, indicating that the different forms of hydrolysis with 2-6 fluorine at the Si are present at the same time, ending up at the more stable form of Si(OH)4F2. If we increased the pH to 9 and higher, a total hydrolysis occurs.

…In answering your final paragraph I can say:

1) The English translation of my thesis is excellent.

2) I have no evidence from others that contradict to my old findings.

3) Your idea of the enzyme inhibition by the complex could be right, however slight changes in the pH, caused by the hydrolysis of hexafluorosilicate, would also result in an increased inhibition of acetylcholinesterase. Nevertheless, I agree with you that the toxicology of hexafluorosilicate should be investigated because it may be different from simple fluoride.

Please let me know if I can be of further assistance to you. Johannes Westendorf” Westendorf@uke.uni-hamburg.de

NOTE II. Although the main body of the Westendorf thesis was not published in a circulating journal as such, three short articles based on this work were. Copies of the two most relevant ones appear at the end of the English text of the full thesis.

CREDITS: The thesis was called to our attention and photocopied from the document on file in the archives at the University of Hamburg by Peter Meiers (Weissenburgerstr. 28, D-66113 Saarbrucken; the translation was prepared by Jakob von Moltke (Dartmouth College); final proof editing was done by Myron Coplan with the aid of Norman Mancuso.

References:

a) Smith, PA. “History of Fluorine Recovery Processes”: Paper delivered at the IFA Technical Sub-Committee and Committee Meeting in Novgorord, Russia; Sept 15-17, 1999 (http://www.fertilizer.org/ifa/publicat/techpprs/tech0999.asp)

b) Gutierrez, SB. (signed by Thurnau RC); Letter from the Director of the US EPA National Risk Management Laboratory to Roger D. Masters, dated March 15, 2001.

c) Kick CH, et al. “Fluorine in Animal Nutrition”; Bulletin 558, Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station; Wooster, Ohio; November 1935; pp 1-77.

d) Zipkin, I et al. “Urinary Fluoride Levels Associated with Use of Fluoridated Water”; Pub Hlth Rpts 71 PP 767-772; 1956.

e) Manocha SL, et al. “Cytochemical response of kidney, liver and nervous system to fluoride ions in drinking water”; Histochemical Journal, 7 (1975); 343-355.

f) On February 7, 2001, the Brookhaven Registry of Enzymes listed 7,164 enzymes on their web-site, http://www.biochem.ucl.ac.uk/bsm/enzymes/

g) Dementi, B. “Cholinesterase Literature Review and Comment”; Pesticides, People and Nature; 1 (2); 59-126; 1999.

h) Letter to the Honorable Ken Calvert, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment, US House Committee on Science, from EPA Assistant Administrator J. Charles Fox, June 23, 1999.

i) Laylander, J. “A Nutrient/Toxin Interaction Theory of the Etiology and Pathogenesis of Chronic Pain-Fatigue Syndromes: Parts I & II,” Journal of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome; 5(1), 67-126, 1999.

Synopsis of Foreward Authors’ Relevant Professional History

Roger D. Masters, Ph.D., is President of the Foundation for Neuroscience and Society and Nelson A. Rockefeller Professor of Government Emeritus at Dartmouth College. For the last 30 years, he has studied the implications of modern biological science in understanding human behavior. He serves as editor of the “Biology and Social Life” section of Social Science Information (an international journal published at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme in Paris) and member of the Council of the Association for Politics and the Life Sciences. He is a published expert in the history of Renaissance politics, especially the contribution of Niccolo Machiavelli.

After undergraduate studies at Harvard (where his instructors included Henry Kissinger), he served in the US Army before graduate studies at the University of Chicago. Despite his work in other areas, he retained a strong professional interest in military and international affairs. In addition to writing The Nation is Burdened: American Foreign Policy in a Changing World (Knopf, 1967), he served as US Cultural Attache to France. Among his many other books are The Political Philosophy of Rousseau (Princeton, 1968), The Nature of Politics (Yale, 1989), Machiavelli, Leonardo, and the Science of Power (Notre Dame Press, 1996) and Fortune is a River: Leonardo da Vinci and Niccolo Machiavelli’s Magnificent Dream to Change the Course of Florentine History (Free Press, 1998). Before turning to issues of environmental pollution, health and behavior, he also published widely on the effectiveness of leaders’ nonverbal behavior on television (working with colleagues on experiments in France and Germany as well as in the US).

Among many other publications on biological factors in human behavior, he was co-editor (with Michael T McGuire) of The Neurotransmitter Revolution, Serotonin, Social Behavior and the Law (Southern Illinois University Press, 1994); senior author (with Brian Hone and Anil Doshi) of “Environmental Pollution, Neurotoxicity, and Criminal Violence,” in J. Rose, ed., Aspects of Environmental Toxicity (London: Gordon & Breach, 1998), pp. 13-45; and co-author (with MJ Coplan) of “Water Treatment with Silicofluorides and Lead Toxicity,” International Journal of Environmental Studies, 56: 435-449 (July-August 1999) as well as of other publications.

In addition to an earlier teaching position in political science at Yale, he served as US Cultural Attache to France, Fellow of the Hastings Center, Chair of the Executive Committee of the Gruter Institute for Law and Behavioral Research (a foundation specialized in linking biology to the study and practice of law), a visiting professor at Yale Law School and Vermont Law School, and a consultant to Upjohn Corp, to the Commissioner of Corrections of Vermont, and to several agencies of the Federal Government. As a result of these varied professional activities, Dr. Masters has had extensive experience applying new scientific research in biology of human behavior to the establishment of successful government policies.

Myron J. Coplan, PE is a consultant in chemical engineering and chemical sciences, doing business at “Intellequity” after retirement in 1987 as Vice President and General Manager of the Albany International Co. Membrane Development Venture. The fruits of this latter activity include a product line of membranes now used by a major multi-national company to supply a market for industrial gases measured in the $ billions.

Coplan’s working career started during WWII first as a civilian employee of the US War Department and then as a production chemist for a firm supplying the military with two crucial commodities: DDT, without which the S. Pacific campaign might not have been successful, and a wire insulating chemical, without which the US Navy’s capacity to deal with disastrous convoy damage by Nazi mines might not have been achieved. He was one of the few civilians deferred throughout WWII for his critical occupation status.

Post WWII, while pursuing his own advanced degree studies, Coplan headed an academic chemical engineering department, supervising doctoral research of others. This was followed by a 37-year relationship with an independent consulting and r/d firm specializing in material sciences (chemistry, polymer systems, statistical analysis, physics, fluid dynamics, statistical mechanics, etc.) which eventually became the central research laboratory of a large multinational corporation.

Coplan is recognized in American Men of Science, holds 32 patents, is a member of several professional organizations and has published many technical papers. He authored a series of bench-mark articles on mathematical probability statistics and wrote a manual on statistical quality control for internal corporate use. He also personally carried out a wide range of laboratory research and engineering tasks and supervised the work of as many as 35 other professionals of many disciplines. He has been consulted by research staffs and corporate executives from some of the world’s largest corporations. To mention only one example, over about ten years he had 28 assignments from GE.

His services were also engaged by NASA, USDA, EPA, Interior Dept, Post Office Dept and several other government agencies, including virtually every branch of the DOD. In these assignments, Coplan was cleared on a “need-to-know” high level security basis several times for consulting and research work in such diverse fields as “decoy” chaff used to frustrate radar-tracked anti-aircraft fire to protective measures for ground-troops at risk of exposure to chemical, biological and nuclear attack.

In due course, Coplan’s activities became more focused on the interests of the large company which in 1972 had acquired the firm he had joined in 1951. After 1972, he took on the corporate mission of identifying and exploiting science-based new business opportunities, including direct management of scientific entrepreneurial r/d for new products and technologies. He became Senior Corporate Scientist and then Vice President and General Manager of a membrane development venture that eventually licensed his patented inventions to other large corporations. Membrane treatment of phosphate waste pond waters was among the applications studied. Coplan, therefore, has first-hand knowledge of the processes from which the principal water fluoridating agents (the silicofluorides) are derived.

www.fluoridealert.org/westendorf-foreword.htm

Water Treatment With Silicofluorides And Lead Toxicity

Authors: Roger D. Masters and Myron J. Coplan

www.dartmouth.edu/~rmasters

(Roger D. Masters – Research Professor -Nelson A. Rockefeller Professor of Government, Emeritus Dartmouth College)

Abstract:

Toxic metals like lead, manganese, copper and cadmium damage neurons

and deregulateneurotransmitters like serotonin and dopamine

which are essential to normal impulse control and learning.

Earlier studies show that — controlling for socio-economic and demographic factors — environmental pollution with lead is a highly significant risk factor in predicting higher rates of crime, attention deficit disorder or hyperactivity, and learning disabilities. Exposure and uptake of lead has been associated with industrial pollution, leaded paint and plumbing systems in old housing, lead residues in soil, dietary habits (such as shortages of calcium and iron), and demographic factors (such as poverty, stress, and minority ethnicity). We report here on an additional “risk co-factor” making lead and other toxic metals in the environment more dangerous to local residents: the use of silicofluorides as agents in water treatment. The two chemicals in question — fluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride — are toxins that, despite claims to the contrary, do not dissociate completely and change water chemistry when used under normal water treatment practices. As a result, water treatment with siliconfluorides apparently functions to increase the cellular uptake of lead. Data from lead screening of over 280,000 children in Massachusetts indicates that silicofluoride usage is associated with significant increases in average lead in children’s blood as well as percentage of children with blood lead in excess of 10μg/dL. Consistent with the hypothesized role of silicofluorides as enhancing uptake of lead whatever the source of exposure, children are especially at risk for higher blood lead in those communities with more old housing or lead in excess of 15 ppb in first draw water samples where silicofluorides are also in use. Preliminary findings from county-level data in Georgia confirm that silicofluoride usage is associated with higher levels of lead in children’s blood. In both Massachusetts and Georgia, moreover, behaviors associated with lead nurotoxicity are more frequent in communities using silicofluorides than in comparable localities that do not use these chemicals. Because there has been insufficient animal or human testing of silicofluoride treated water, further study of the effect of silicofluorides is needed to clarify the extent to which these chemicals are risk co-factors for lead uptake and the hazardous effects it produces.

Keywords: Lead; toxicity; pollution; children’s health; public water supplies

see also: http://www.waterloowatch.com/hydrofluorosilicic%20acid.html

Click button below ↓ to record you vote.

” FLUORIDES, THE DEADLY TOXIN WITHIN ”

By Professor Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

National Poison Centre

Universitiy Sains Malaysia -
2 September 2001

The ability of fluoride to reduce thyroid hormone levels

has been know for over 100 years (Maumene 1855) —

Following the recent withdrawal of the cholesterol-lowering drug Lipobay, there is now a new perspective to the issue, the drug being a fluoride-containing compound. The drug, also known by its generic name, cerivastatin, is one of the many such compounds pulled off the shelves in the last few years.

Cerivastatin was taken off because of at least 40 deaths worldwide, 31 in the US alone. According to a recently released commentary by a Canadian group, Parents of Fluoride Poisoned Children, a series of fluoride containing drugs or so-called fluorinated drugs have been withdrawn from the market in the last 10 years due to their toxic effects on human beings. One notable example is the combination “Fen-Phen” (a generic combination of fenfluramine and phentermine, the former being a fluorinated drug type) which was said to have weight-reducing effects. Others are dexfenfluramine (Redux) and fenfluramine (Pondimin).

There are at least eight other examples of fluorinated drugs withdrawn so far, because serious side effects on the heart, and for suspected adverse influence on thyroid hormone activity.

They include, last year, cisapride (Propulsid) because of its severe side-effects on the heart. In 1999, two drugs were withdrawn.

These were an anti-allergy drug, astemizole (Hismanal); and grepafloxacin (an antibiotic, Raxar) because they too were associated with similar adverse events.

In 1998, patients with congestive heart failure using the drug mibedrafil (Posicor) showed a trend to higher mortality, causing it to be withdrawn.

Alredase (Tolrestat, an anti-diabetic) was withdrawn in 1997 after the appearance of severe liver toxicity and deaths among several patients. In the same year too fenfluramine (part of Fen-Phen) and dexfenfluramine were withdrawn.

In 1993, flosequinan (Manoplax, a heart drug) was withdrawn when it was shown that the beneficial effects on the symptoms of heart failure did not last beyond the first three months of therapy. After that, patients had a higher rate of hospitalization than patients taking a placebo.

Of the many fluorinated drugs that remain in the market some carry warnings of serious cardiac toxicity, for instance halofantrine, a schizonticidal drug. More specifically, other fluorinated drugs, although they have not yet been withdrawn, are known to cause muscle wasting or rhabdomyolysis; like cerivastatin.

For instance, the PFPC commentary noted that the fluorinated antibiotic fluoroquinolone, used to treat infections, is reported to cause tendonitis and rhabdomyolysis. In fact product information for such antibiotics (enoxacin, fleroxacin, norfloxacin, sparfloxacin, and tosufloxacin) was amended in Japan in October 1994, to state that rhabdomyolysis may occur. Reportedly, the tragic story involving fluorinated drugs (the fluorophenyls in particular, initially limited to industrial use involving dyes and pesticides) can be traced way back to the 1930s when they were used to treat hyperthyroidism.

The use followed a discovery by IG Farben (Bayer) and Knoll’s scientists that all fluoride compounds can interfere with thyroid hormone activity.

In the liver especially, organic fluoride compounds undergo extensive transformation, mainly via oxidative demethylation, involving the thyroid hormone (T3) mediated P-450 enzyme system. And the resulting metabolites may have higher activity and/or greater toxicity than the original compound.

The activity of organic fluoride compounds on the P-450 enzyme system is critical as it relates to the elimination of many other drugs. Inhibition of these enzymes can cause other drugs to accumulate to dangerous levels in the body, leading to hazardous drug interactions. In many cases fluorinated drugs are being implicated as documented in hundreds of well-established studies.

Moreover, adds PFPC, the metabolites produced by organic fluoride compounds in the liver can be transferred to the fetus through various pathways, including circulatory via placental passage, gastrointestinal via fetal swallowing, and respiratory secondary to fetal lung absorption. This may lead to congenital abnormalities as in the case of fluconsazole (Diflucan).

In short, going by the above evidence, fluorinated drugs seem to pose a number of risks associated with the fluorine or fluoride contained in them. It raises even more concern when fluoride itself is present in many industries and products, including food and drinks, without any rigorous evaluation or monitoring.

Of late, we have managed to label all toothpastes containing fluoride in this country. But this is clearly a minuscule effort in the attempt to regulate the use of fluoride as an inherent poison. We need to do more now.

For more information, contact the National Poison Centre at Universiti Sains Malaysia,

tel: 04-657 0099, fax: 04-656 8417,

Source: New Sunday Times (Focus) 2 September 2001

.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.

Our Letter #2 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh see: LETTERS QUEENSLAND GOV.

Copies sent to electoral office and home address

— Premier of Queensland —

Our Letter #2 to Premier Anna Bligh

cc- our web, opposition, minister for health

04/07/2008

Dear Ms. Bligh,

While you were in China and India recently, did you enquire as to the state of the natural contamination of Fluoride (CaF2) in the water in those two countries?  See our previous state of the nations report.

Ottawa, Canada removed Fluoride from its water last month.

Previous communications from your Department of Health have not addresses our questions.  By not answering them are they deceiving us?

Promotion by endorsement is not science and this is all we have received. History has shown this; doctors used to promote cigarettes! The FDA has just withdrawn its support for mercury in dental fillings.  See below.

The law you have passed on fluoridation does not permit you to add the heavy metals that are also in this industrial waste Hydrofluorosilicic acid, which contains up to 30 components including heavy metals. (See analysis below).  It is the acid spray waste from the chimney pollution scrubbers, mainly from the fertiliser industry. Fluoride is usually 20% – 38% of the total compound.

This industrial waste is not safe for human consumption.

TYPICAL ANALYSIS:

Note: acceptable safe levels for many heavy metals is zero

Nickel                              1742  ppm

Aluminium                        2.1  ppm

Cadmium                           4   ppb

Arsenic                       4826   ppb

Mercury                             5   ppb

Chromium                3763   ppb

Lead                                 15   ppb

Fluoride is toxic and corrosive. It rates ‘four’ on a one to five scale – more toxic than lead, slightly less toxic than arsenic.

While the uranium and radium in fluorosilicic acid are known carcinogens, two other products of uranium, even more carcinogenic are radon-222 and polonium-210, these are also present.

It is illegal to release fluoride into waterways or the ocean.

It seems to us, that someone needs to do some homework.

You have been ill advised on this mater, your advisors seem to know very little about poisons, human health, and eco-systems.

The laws of nature cannot be reversed to suit pleasure, profit or politics.

It matters little how many millions of dollars are spent promoting this absurdity, it will not change the facts.

Citizens have an expectation that their government will supply them with clean drinking water. We certainly do not expect it to be deliberately contaminated or medicated.

People living in units cannot install tanks. Reverses osmosis filters are expensive, and waste a lot of water. The city water supply system must not be used as a medicine bottle and certainly not used for pollution dispersal.

If you and your family drink fluoridated water, given the information we have provided to you, then you will be unwise. However, if you do not drink the fluoridated city water then you will be guilty of double-standards.

No one goes through life without making mistakes, and often the mistake cannot be remedied.  Fluoridation is a mistake and you can correct it.

The American Kidney Foundation has recently withdrawn its support from sodium fluoride in the water and is urging other medical bodies to do likewise. The health of 4,000,000 Queenslanders is at stake. This was bad science and a bad policy from the beginning, we urge you change positions, and act quickly to stop fluoridation.

We look forward to hearing from you very soon.

Yours truly,

Chairperson – Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association

As you can see below fluoride, lead, and mercury have always been a problem to human health:

Fluoridation Increases Lead Absorption In Children

The chemical most commonly used to fluoridate America’s drinking water is associated with an increase in children’s blood lead levels. Most studies that purport fluoridation’s safety and effectiveness in preventing cavities use the chemical sodium fluoride. However, most communities inject cheaper silicofluorides (fluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride) into their drinking water based on the theory that each chemical comes apart totally, so that freed fluoride can incorporate into tooth enamel.

However, the silicofluorides (SiF) do not separate completely, as sodium fluoride does, As a result, water treatment with silicofluorides apparently functions to increase the cellular uptake of lead.

In research published in the International Journal of Environmental Studies (September 1999), Masters and Coplan studied lead screening data from 280,000 Massachusetts children. They found that average blood lead levels are significantly higher in children living in communities whose water is treated with silicofluorides. Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Evaluation Survey (NHANES III) and a survey of over 120,000 children in New York towns (population 15,000 to 75,000) corroborate this effect.

Masters and Coplan reported that some minorities are especially at risk in high SiF exposure areas, where Black and Mexican American children have significantly higher blood lead levels than they do in unfluoridated communities.

Children with higher blood lead levels also have more tooth decay

Lead poisoning can cause learning disabilities, behavioral problems, and at high levels, seizures, coma and even death, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Lead is a highly significant risk factor in predicting higher rates of crime, attention deficit disorder or hyperactivity and learning disabilities.

Fluoridation

…Future lawsuits on behalf of kidney patients…

“AWWA looks to the medical and dental communities, the U.S. EPA, the Centers for Disease Control, and other … organizations for their information and research on medical and dental health,” the statement said.

…Stockin said the association has ignored obvious conflicts between the research and glowing reports on the safety of fluorides and will likely face lawsuits on behalf of kidney patients and other groups. He suggests other organizations immediately rescind support of fluoride.

“This was bad science and bad policy from the beginning, and I would suggest cities and organizations that lend their name to supporting fluoridation very quickly and emphatically change positions,” he said. ‘Attorney Reeves’ letter should be a wake up call – to act quickly to stop fluoridation.”

Dental Mercury: FDA 6 June 2008

After years of asserting that mercury in fillings was safe, the Food and Drug Administration now says it may be harmful to pregnant women, children, fetuses, and people who are especially sensitive to mercury exposure.

“Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses,” the FDA now says on its Web site.

The agency posted the revised assessment online Tuesday as part of a settlement with consumer advocates. The FDA also committed to issuing special controls on mercury fillings in July 2009.

Those controls could range from giving patients information to adding warnings prohibiting use of the fillings in some people.

While bans are unlikely, the FDA may conclude that the cavity-repair treatment, called dental amalgam, should not be used in certain patients such as pregnant women, FDA spokeswoman…

Our Letter #1 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh see: LETTERS QUEENSLAND GOV.

Copies sent to electoral office and home address

- Premier of Queensland -

14/12/2007

Dear Ms. Bligh,

Re your proposal to fluoridate Queensland’s Water Supply:

We are ‘The Smart State’ for not having artificially fluoridated water.

Queensland is at the moment in step with most of the world. See attachment ‘A’ ‘State of the Nations’ + ‘Tooth Decay Trends’

The majority of countries, either, avoided it, have banned it, or have ceased to fluoridate. In parts of India and China where it occurs naturally, it is removed from the water used for drinking.

Are you aware of the political history of fluoridation in our state?

The Gold Coast City Council stopped fluoridating its water supply in 1979 due to public pressure. See attachment ‘B’

Lord Mayor Atkinson reversed her original decision to fluoridate Brisbane. See attachment ‘C’

Dr. Lew Edwards lost his safe seat due to public pressure because of his commitment to fluoridate the State of Queensland.

In 1952 The Queensland Government funded research into the health of Qld. sheep drinking naturally fluoridated bore water. See attachment ‘D’ ‘Chronic Endemic Fluorosis of Merino Sheep in Queensland by J.M. Harvey’

Does your government know what the levels of hydrogen fluoride from pollution are in the air we breathe?

Page 2 of 2

Does the Queensland Government monitor fluoride air pollution?

Do you know which industries pollute with fluoride?

Do you know how much natural fluoride is in our drinking water at the moment?

Are you aware that natural fluoride CaF2 is different from the chemicals used to artificially fluoridate water? See attachments ‘E’ and ‘F’

What are your proposals for recycled water? Are you going to

re-fluoridate it?

If you put recycled water through Reverse Osmosis equipment, which removes fluoride, what are you going to do with the redeemed toxic fluoride sludge?

If you store fluoridated water in the dams you risk fish kills. Fresh water fish, bees, turkeys, some plants and animals are very sensitive to fluoride pollution.

One part per million, is not a medical dose; it is a guide to industrial polluters.

Dentists have been lobbied with endorsements, not scientific research. Long-term health problems have been ignored.

See attachments ‘G, H, I,’ and ‘J’.

Fluoridation is deliberate pollution. See attachment ‘K’

What safe guards are you going to put into place to protect people who are super sensitive to fluorides?

See attachment ‘L’ Death Certificate Brisbane Mater Hospital for Jason Burton – death by Fluoride poisoning + statement by mother and newspaper cutting.

You have a duty of care, a responsibility to every person in the state.

See attachment ‘M’ Informed Consent – Nuremberg Code

On the matter of water fluoridation we are directing you to do nothing. The people of Queensland want clean water not contaminated water.

Keep Queensland ‘The Smart State’ by not having artificially fluoridated water.

We look forward to hearing from you very soon.

Yours truly,

Chairman Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association

Our Letter #3 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh

Copies sent to electoral office and home address

— Premier of Queensland —

Our Letter #3 to Premier Anna Bligh

14/09/2008

Dear Ms. Bligh,

Many of your electors will forgive you and “your”

government for problems you have inherited from

previous governments. But as you are solely

responsible for the project for state-wide water

fluoridation, on this matter it will not be so.

We have attempted in the past to alert you to

this error, which you seem to so far have chosen to ignore.

A little sole searching and goggling should have rung alarm bells for you. Fluoridation is at

best, a nineteenth century dream, at worse, an oppressive dangerous hoax. Considering

your University background we are surprised that you would condone such injustice –

As we stated previously, ‘Citizens have an expectation that their government will supply

them with clean drinking water. We certainly do not expect it to be deliberately

contaminated or medicated.’

It now seems that we will not have a “Smart State” or a “Fair State”

or one lead by an elected female premier.

Our organization will now actively work against your political future as we did for

Dr. Lew Edwards who attempted to fluoridate the State of Queensland (1975), and several

other politicians who originally put fluoride into the Gold Coast water supply many years

ago (ceased July 1979).

Even if you do install fluoride plants in various water systems throughout the state, they

will be removed in the future.

Yours truly,

Chairperson

Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association

Our Letter #4 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh see: LETTERS QUEENSLAND GOV.

Copies sent to electoral office and home address

Premier of Queensland

LETTER #4 to Anna Bligh — Premier of Queensland

LETTER #4 to Anna Bligh — Premier of Queensland

LETTER #4 to Anna Bligh — Premier of Queensland

01/06/2009

We,

The Brisbane Anti-fluoridation Association

wish to draw your attention to two urgent problems:

1.

We are concerned that you may not have tested the eighteen bores used to augment Toowoomba’s water supply for calcium fluoride – CaF2.F. levels.

We are asking for the F. levels from each of these bores please.

The attached maps, charts and photos (9 Pages total), from research carried out by the Queensland Government: (J.M. Harvey Chronic Endemic Fluorosis of Merino Sheep in Queensland. Q J Ag Sci 1952;9:1-88.) – These charts illustrate, calcium fluoride is present in Queensland’s underground water, and some of the illustrations associated its problems.

2.

Some of Queenslands aboriginal settlements also use underground water and it needs testing for levels of calcium fluoride before you undertake artificially fluoridation programs of their water supplies.

We request these figures too please.

We wish to further remind you that indigenous people have smaller kidneys – a reduced number of nephrons and decreased renal reserve – (Singh G, White A, Spencer J, Wang Z, Hoy W [1999]).

Kidney health problems are more common for indigenous people than for non-indigenous peopleand they are therefore more at risk from fluorosis and other diseases associated with fluorides.

(The National Kidney Foundation (USA) no longer endorses Water Fluoridation.)

See two enclosures

We look forward to hearing from you within 30 days with proof of your action on these two issues.

Yours truly,

Chairperson

Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association

(Several thousand petition signatures were faxed to premier’s office.)

Due to the lack of an honest response from Premier Anna Bligh to our letters etc.,

We are left with an unhappy choice between her being dishonest or incompetent, – or both.

The Australian Fluoridation Skeptics

Working For A Fluoridation Free Australia

—

We Wish To Thank All Our Team, Other Anti-Fluoride Groups

And The Public For The Support We Have Received So Far,

And Adam Lin, Who Administers This Web Site.

.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.

Bligh Puts House on The Line for Fluoride

By Andrew Wright 12 February 2009

Anna Bligh has signed a personal guarantee that could cost the Premier her personal assets in a court battle if people become sick from water fluoridation, a Brisbane lawyer said.

This week, Ms Bligh confirmed she had signed a legal document in which she accepts full personal liability for fluoridation and promises to provide financial compensation in the event that it causes adverse health affects.

Fluoride was introduced into the state’s water supply in December. At the time, Health Minister Stephen Robertson was presented with two petitions totaling 6000 signatures against the move, which will see a final fluoride concentration of 0.6 parts per million.

The document, which Ms Bligh signed on October 15 at a community meeting, was first published in the Hinterland Voice independent newspaper.

“The Premier signed the document as a demonstration of her commitment to fluoridation,” the Premier’s spokeswoman said.

“She did not make this decision lightly and stands by it.”

But the promise could provide a loophole for anti-fluoridation activists to take legal action over the rollout of fluoride.

Mark O’Connor, a compensation specialist and partner at Brisbane law firm Bennett & Philp, said state laws prevent residents from taking any action against water authorities.

However, he said the Premier’s pledge means she could be liable as a private citizen, although it would be difficult to establish a case against her.

“You’d have to provide medical evidence the condition has been caused by consumption of fluoridated water and not another factor,” Mr. O’Connor explained.

He said anyone bringing a case against Ms Bligh would have to show they had changed their behavior on the basis of the promise.

“It’s an unusual case. I’ve never seen this done before,” he said.

“It would appear she is giving a personal guarantee, rather than a guarantee on behalf of the Government.

“Any claim would therefore be against Ms Bligh’s own assets.

“I doubt she would put her assets at risk, unless she was sure that fluoride wouldn’t cause disease.”

At an anti-fluoridation rally on Tuesday, Queenslanders Against Water Fluoridation spokeswoman Jeanie Ryan said the group was still calling on Ms Bligh to end fluoridation because of its health effects.

An article published in the respected medical journal Lancet said fluoride can cause nurotoxicity in laboratory animals, but hasn’t yet been proven to be toxic to humans.

Studies in rural communities in China have found high fluoride concentrations in well water may cause skeletal abnormalities and affect intelligence.

Australian Dental Association Queensland branch president, Rockhampton dentist Greg Moore, said there could be a 20-40 per cent reduction in tooth decay as a result of fluoridated water.

1994 In November 1994 in Australia, the Victorian Parliament passes an

amendment to the “Fluoridation Act” to change the constitution in order to

stop the Supreme Court of Victoria from hearing any public cases or

evidence against artificial fluoridation.

1995 In Australia, the Tasmanian government passes a bill to prohibit the

holding of meetings on the subject of fluoridation. Called the

“Consequential Amendments Bill”, it is later withdrawn for rewording and

reissue at a later date.

Emeritus Professor of History and Politics at Griffith University,

Ross Fitzgerald is the author of 33 books.

“Premier in line for more water torture”

Ross Fitzgerald  2 December 2008

Article from: ‘

QUEENSLAND Premier Anna Bligh’s spectacular back-downs on recycled water and on the controversial Traveston dam project will not save her at the next state election. Not unless she shelves her plan to add fluoride to the drinking water.

Those who think the introduction of fluoride is a minor issue should think again. It was, after all, a highway through koala habitat in southeast Queensland that ended the government of Wayne Goss.

Fluoride will be added to Queensland drinking water just before the new year break. The problem for Bligh is that the citizens who vociferously rally against fluoridated water are part of the same group that was instrumental in denouncing recycled water. It’s issues such as these, where governments run roughshod over the electorate, that really bite.

Bligh claims that most Queenslanders are in favour of fluoridation, but there is widespread scepticism, particularly among farmers, who have known for many years that some bore waters high in natural fluoride have a detrimental effect on the health of livestock.

Chronic fluorine toxicity results from continuous consumption of fluorine while the sheep are young and teeth and bones are growing. The teeth become chalky white, mottled and pitted. The bone of the lower jaw thickens and bony outgrowths may develop.

In some instances this can lead to lameness and fractures.

Selling the message that fluoride is good for human consumption is a hard task in country Queensland, especially as the Department of Primary Industries warns against a consumption of 2mg a litre for sheep. This amount would be drunk by a farmer in a normal day’s work if the drinking water had fluoride levels proposed by the Bligh Government of 0.8 to 0.9 parts per million.

During a visit to Queensland, Andrew Harms, past president of the South Australian branch of the Australian Dental Association, said the addition of fluoride to water in these mining towns would increase the uptake of lead by children and adults who already had gravely high lead levels in their blood samples.

City folk may be a different matter, especially as a substantial number of Queenslanders have migrated from NSW or Victoria. This group is seemingly content with the message that they have better teeth than their next-door neighbours. The problem is that not all Queenslanders agree with the message and that many citizens are against any form of mass medication in the water supply.

The Bligh mantra of “safe and effective” does not convince everyone and there is much evidence that contradicts the government line. In November 2006 the American Dental Association announced that baby formulas made up with fluoridated water should be avoided for infants younger than six months.

The Australian Dental Association and the National Health and Medical Research Council came on line with similar suggestions: babies six months to a year should have only about 600ml of fluoridated water, increasing slightly as the child grows.

Mistrust of government festers within a community that has started looking elsewhere for information. The Lancet medical journal and Scientific American put the cat among the pigeons with negative comments about water fluoridation and its effects on body systems.

Add to that data from the national survey of adult oral health (2004-06), published in 2007, which showed no difference in the dental health of Queenslanders and people in other states.

Some medical professionals have tried to stem the flow of indoctrination but have been ridiculed for their objections. A prime example is the highly respected Brisbane-based general practitioner John Ryan, who has postgraduate qualifications in nutrition and children’s diseases and in environmental medicine.

What irritates him is the failure of the Bligh Government to tell Queenslanders of the NHMCR fluoride warnings to mothers with babies. “Where is the Government’s duty of care?” he asks.

Ryan is angry that the Government would deceive the public about data from a much-publicised Townsville study. Oral health data was collected about children living in Brisbane (non-fluoridated) and Townsville (fluoridated). There was much publicity by the Government indicating a supposedly vast difference between the two cities. In fact, the study showed there was less that half a tooth difference.

This, Ryan says, is an ancient and poor quality study, on which the media indoctrination largely is based. “We were so shocked by five very significant untruths told to the public by the Government,” he says. As a consequence, opponents of introducing fluoride into the water supply took the matter to the Criminal Misconduct Commission. The CMC indicated it was not within its brief and referred the matter back to Queensland Health. Eight months later it has still not responded.

The primary aim of the new Queensland Safe Water Association is to inform metropolitan and country Queenslanders about the negative aspects of recycled and fluoridated water. The message is simple: the state Government is putting public health at risk. Adult Queenslanders do not have the worst teeth in Australia and babies should not be given fluoridated water.

The Bligh Government has estimated that about 30 per cent of the population is not in favour of water fluoridation, so you can bet the number is much higher. In the state election due next year, the Liberal National Party led by the urbane Lawrence Springborg, who is opposed to compulsory fluoride, may well ride to power on the back of this debacle.

Media Release 23 February 2008

NEWS ALERT

Qld Health staff doctored tooth decay data used in decision to force fluoridation.

This alert is to inform Queensland Members of Parliament and others, that Queensland Health staff have doctored tooth decay rates data used in the decision making process and the massive fluoridation advertising promotions.

A delegation to the Queensland Premier, Health Minister and Chief Health Officer on the 12th Feb made them aware of this situation, however it appears that this is being ignored by the Premier and that Legislation that has its basis in fraudulent data will be rammed through Parliament on Tuesday 26th Feb.

Premier Blighs announcement on 5th Dec that she had made the decision to force fluoridation was hilighted by comparison of tooth decay rates ( but using data only from baby teeth ) between Townsville and Brisbane and led into newspaper advertisements which stated “In Townsville, water supplies have been fluoridated since 1964, resulting in 65% less tooth decay in children than those in Brisbane” additionally “… fluoride is proven safe and effective”

Examination of the source of the data used reveals that Qld Health staff have changed results from “teeth surfaces” to “teeth” a four to five fold difference ( teeth each have 4 or 5 surfaces depending on the type of tooth) leading to a false and exaggerated impression of tooth decay favouring fluoridated Townsville.  Brisbane children were falsely shown as having  2 more decayed baby teeth than Townsville children, when in reality, averaged out, it would have been only a fraction of a tooth. The data from permanent teeth in children aged 6 to 12 years old which was available but not used by Qld Health, showed on average only a tiny fraction of a tooth difference in decay rates…

Queensland Health also portrayed that the data is from 1996 when in fact it is from mid 1991 to 1992. Queensland Health have refused to acknowledge tooth decay data in permanent teeth from recent Queensland Children’s Dental surveys and refused to acknowledge  tooth decay data from children’s permanent teeth measured at 12 years of age which is the international standard of comparison. Recent Tooth decay data from permanent teeth shows that Queensland compares favourably to other Australian states.

There is no scientific evidence to show that water fluoridation results in 65 % less tooth decay as Queensland Health claimed. A major British Government commissioned review of water fluoridation done in 2000 by York University found that size of estimated benefit to be only of the order of 15% and additionally that the review did not show water fluoridation to be safe.

Queensland Health staff have illegimately dismissed creditable scientific publications showing links with harm from Osteoscarcoma and other adverse health effects and also recommendations from the Centre for Disease Control that infants under 12 months of age not consume fluoridated water.

Freedom of Information shows that a senior Oral Health advisor to the Health Minister had written in 2006 that there are no scientific studies to prove water fluoridation is safe.

Queensland Health would have spent millions promoting “safety“ of water fluoridation in newspaper, radio television advertising, even in posters in public toilets, yet the 2008 Water Fluoridation Bill assures the Queensland Government blanket protection from liability.

The Water Fluoridation Act 2008 will give ” protection from civil rights and remedies” to any person or corporation involved in water fluoridation. Unless Criminal negligence can be proved, no harmed person will ever be able to bring a case of harm against, or prosecute the State of Queensland, the Minister, any analyst, any official or any person authorized under the Fluoridation Act, or any Water Supplier.

It is contradictory for the Queensland Premier to claim water fluoridation is safe, and then introduce Legislation that forces fluoridation on the population but also prevents any people harmed by it (even by accident) from making a claim against the decision makers or any person authorized under the Act.

We urge the Members of the Parliament of Queensland to vote against this legislation which was based on and promoted by fraudulent data.

For further information contact www.qawf.org

info@qawf.org

Message authorised by Merilyn Haines

President

Queenslanders Against Water Fluoridation Inc

.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.

FLUORIDE AND LEAD

by Frances Frech

Originally presented at a State Lead Commission hearing in
Hannibal, Missouri in 1994

All of the fluoride products used in the artificial fluoridation of water

are contaminated with lead and arsenic.

(We received the evidence from Margaret Stasikowski,

an official with the EPA, in the form of copies of pages from Water Chemicals

Codex, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1982.)

.

The lead contamination is considered the most serious so we’ll deal with that one rather than with both substances. Lead is creating the most concern today we’ll go into the arsenic angle in a later paper.

So how does the tainting occur? In the matter of the fluosilicates (such as hydrofluosilicic acid);

the most commonly used fluoride substances in community water systems, this is the story:

The fluosilicates are the by-products of the phosphate fertilizer industry. In the manufacture of this kind of fertilizer, phosphorus is obtained from phosphate rock, which has to be broken down with sulfuric acid.

(1) Fluorine occurs naturally in combination with the phosphates.

(2) In these two facts lie the keys to the presence of lead in the fluosilicates.

Step One: Sulfuric acid is prepared by either of two ways, the lead chamber process

(3) or the contact method.

(4) In its purest form (made by the contact method) it is used in pharmaceuticals; in its lowest grade (produced by the lead chamber process) it is used by the fertilizer industry.

(5) It is also frequently recovered for re-use, but this form is too impure for any purpose except the manufacture of fertilizer, for which it is quite suitable.

(6) In the lead chamber process purification is carried out only to the extent of removing substances that could clog the machinery.

(7) Of the common metals, only lead is resistant to cold sulfuric acid in concentrations up to 100%. But in hot acid the resistance is up to about 70%.

(8) The lead chamber type uses heat (about 600 C) and isn’t cooled during the process. That’s why a certain amount of lead is leached during this procedure.

If a pure product is needed, the contact method is used, but it’s more expensive, more complicated. In the making of fertilizer, however, a pure grade is not necessary. After all, neither fertilizer nor its by-products were intended for human consumption.

Step Two: Fluorine, which is a highly reactive element capable of joining with any other element except oxygen, is able to leach lead from the contaminated sulfuric acid. In the past hydrofluosilicic acid was simply neutralized and discarded. The picking up of lead wouldn’t have been a problem. But eventually it was decided that the acid, being already in solution, would be better, simpler to use, and less expensive than sodium fluoride.

(9) The lead contamination, apparently, was forgotten (if, indeed, it had ever been noticed.)

Sodium fluoride is also lead-tainted (and with arsenic, as well.) Aluminum ore (bauxite) is usually contaminated with lead and arsenic (and a number of other elements.) In order to obtain a pure product, these have to be removed.

(10) They become part of the major by-product of aluminum refining, sodium fluoride.

Another way in which fluoridation contributes to lead in the water is through its action on whatever lead pipes may still be in existence in older homes. Any lead pipes would be old lead. These are ordinarily covered by a protective coating made by the lead itself which is impervious to diluted acids (as all of them would be in water.) Water acts slowly on lead, forming lead hydroxide, but the action is slight if the water contains carbon dioxide or carbonates or sulfates which interact with lead to form these protective coatings.

(11) It’s interesting that the lead pipes in Roman aqueducts, 2000 years old, are still in such good shape the numbers and letters engraved on them are clearly legible.

(12) In fluoridated water, though, it’s a different matter. Fluorine can and does destroy the protective coatings; it can and does leach lead.

A pediatrics textbook published in 1964

(13) noted that the incidence of lead poisoning had been rising in certain metropolitan areas in Eastern United States. The blame was laid on old lead paint flaking from walls and woodwork. But most of the lead chips were old before 1964; some children chewed them long before then. But a new source of lead had arisen–unnoticed: The fluoridation of water, with lead-contaminated fluoride, a substance also capable of leaching lead from the pipes. Although there were scattered places fluoridating throughout the nation, larger numbers of eastern metropolitan communities were doing so.

Today one in nine children under the age of six is said to have unacceptably high blood lead levels

(14) even though lead paint was banned in 1978 (and hadn’t been used extensively since the 1950′s!) Lead in gasoline has been phased out, and lead solder hasn’t been permitted on copper tubing since 1986 (eight years ago.) The EPA says that lead stabilizes in five years. So except for fluoride use, any pipes, whether of lead or lead-soldered, should not now be hazardous. The most revealing statistics, though, are the high blood lead levels in 400,000 newborns each year. Newsweek in its article on lead and the threat to children

(15) said that pregnant women passed this toxic substance to their unborn children by eating, drinking, or breathing it. But even though pregnant women do sometimes have weird cravings, it’s not likely more than a tiny percentage would be chewing paint chips, nor would a significant number of them be engaged in renovating old houses. The lead is in the water–and in foods and beverages prepared with the water.

The EPA estimates that 10-20% of the lead in children comes from the water.

(16) That agency, which knows of the lead contamination of fluoride products, insists the amount is too small to be of regulatory concern. What they have overlooked, though, is that it concentrates in the body tissues, and over time, would add up to quite a lot. In addition, it becomes concentrated in products processed with the water. The 10-20% directly from the water can easily become three or four times as much.

The EPA lists as health problems caused by lead the following conditions: Interference with formation of red blood cells, anemia, kidney damage, impaired reproductive function, interference with Vitamin D metabolism, impaired cognitive performance, delayed neurological and physical development, elevations in blood pressure. (17) The agency also suggests lead my be a carcinogen, possibly causing kidney tumors and lymphocytic leukemia.

(18) Furthermore, it’s a known scientific fact that lead poisons the bone marrow.

(19) Surely, then, it would be prudent to avoid even “a little bit of lead,” assuming that’s all fluoridation contributes.

But the evidence shows it’s much more than that. Let us tell you a tale of two cities–Tacoma, Washington, and Thurmont, Maryland. Both of them saw significant decline in lead levels only six months after fluoridation was stopped. (In Tacoma, that was due to equipment problems, in Thurmont, it was a temporary ban by the city council.) Tacoma registered a drop of nearly 50%

(20); in Thurmont it was 78%.

(21) To the best of our knowledge, no other explanations were offered. In Thurmont the ban is now permanent. (22) In Tacoma, we’re told, a battle continues over whether or not to resume fluoridating.

We have more points to add. As we’ve already mentioned, the EPA says that lead may be implicated in causing leukemia. A booklet published by the Leukemia Society in 1987 noted that chemicals which damage the bone marrow can cause leukemia. The Book of Popular Science, 1974, pointed out that bone marrow is poisoned by lead.

(23) Are we to believe, then, nothing is wrong with putting a little bit of lead into the water (from which it will also enter, more concentrated, food and beverages prepared with the water?)

The EPA permits lead-contaminated fluorides to be added; they do not require it. Thus, any community, anywhere, could halt the program any time, with the consent of its citizens, who surely would consent if given the facts.

Lead-tainted fluorides are waste products mainly of the aluminum and phosphate fertilizer industries, largely from US companies. But we’ve learned that in some communities sodium fluoride imported from Japan or sodium silicofluoride from Belgium are used. Neither of these nations fluoridates its own water supplies.

(24) (Don’t you get the feeling we’re in the same category as a Third World country becoming a toxic waste dump for others?)

In California recently the Attorney General and two environmental groups have sued the makers of brass pumps containing lead which could contaminate water from wells.

(24) But who is suing companies who sell lead-tainted products to cities for their fluoridation purposes? Who is suing the EPA for allowing it? Where are the lawsuits against the US Public Health Service and the Centers for Disease Control for adamantly promoting it?

In conclusion, there’s still the matter of lead being leached from old pipes. Anyone who argues that fluoridation had nothing to do with it will have to explain those well-preserved lead pipes from more than 2000 years ago in unfluoridated Roman water.

REFERENCES:

(1) Book of Popular Science, Grolier, Inc., 1974, Vol.7, 63.
(2) Ibid.
(3) Book of Popular Science, Vol. 3, 167-169.
(4) Book of Popular Science, Vol. 7, 62.
(5) Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1957, Vol.21, 545.
(6) Ibid., 545.
(7) Ibid., 546.
(8) Ibid., 545A
(9) Book of Popular Science, Vol. 7, 63-64.
(10) Encyclopedia Americana, 1945, Vol. 1, 456.
(11) Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1957, Vol.1, 715.
(12) Book of Popular Science, Vol. 3, 39.
(13) Textbook of Pediatrics, Nelson WS, MD, WB Saunders Co., Philadelphia,London, 1964, 1557.
(14) Newsweek, “Lead and Your Kids,” July 15, 1991.
(15) Ibid.
(16) Ibid.
(17) Federal Register, Bol. 56, No. 110, June 7, 1991, 264.
(18) Ibid., 265-70.
(19) Book of Popular Science, Vol. 3, 74.
(20) Letter from the Tacoma Public Utilities, Dec. 2, 1992.
(21) Fluoride Report, newsletter, April, 1994, 5.
(22) Ibid.
(23) Book of Popular Science, Vol. 3,74.
(24) Letter from Tacoma Public Utilities, May 22, 1992.
(25) Kansas City STAR, April 19, 1994.

There is a custom of using pipes for electrical grounding.

Many older houses are still grounded through water pipes.

This accelerates lead corrosion and increases lead in drinking water.