Sauerheber on Fluoride and Bone

Print Friendly

Dr. Sauerheber, Ph.D.:

Bone turnover has historically been estimated with radioactive phosphorus, not with fluoride. Why would turnover studies be done with abnormal, fluoridated bone to assess normal turnover rates? Fluoride interferes with bone turnover.

Bone is heterogeneous, and different parts have different turnover rates. Fluorotic bone does not exhibit normal turnover. Fluorotic bone is diseased bone. The thickened portions observed on X-ray after chronic continuous fluoride exposure are irreversible, not only in man but also in horses. They are gross anatomical abnormalities that cannot be reformed or corrected by normal osteoclasts or osteoblasts. Once it’s malformed its malformed.

The only argument you are left with is that the amounts of fluoride, lead, hydrofluoric acid, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, and thallium are so miniscule that they could not possibly be doing any harm. Where is your proof for this? It does not exist.

We could talk about lead and the way it poisons.

Any argument that fluoride could induce micro-evolution is biologically and chemically impossible. Fluoride and lead are inherently destructive to life.

And there is zero evidence man micro evolved in any way in response to fluoride. There is zero evidence that fluoride has a function in the human body. The best evidence is summarized by biochemist John Yuamanis Fluoride, The Aging Factor, which is completely accurate despite the fact that is over 20 years old. Yuamanis says fluoride has no functional purpose in any living organism and never has, and we are not evolving into a state where it ever will.

It is a toxic calcium chelator that belongs in the ocean with plentiful calcium surrounding it.

Unaccompanied by plentiful calcium, fluoride is a poisonous substance. That’s that.

Richard

***

Excerpts from previous posts:

William:

Infants and individuals with kidney disease already exceed the standards (IRIS and other data sources)…as presently determined by the governmental pro-fluoride groups. Now that the real cost of fluoridation chemicals is more honestly appraised and published, we need to demand that CDC (and others) remove their incorrect data.

See: http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/factsheets/cost.htm with the reference to Griffin, and start to reference Thiessen http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25471729 Note, I think there are some funny things going on with the search engines… similar to what Stephan Barrett was doing with his Quackwatch. They are spinning the top search results. PHS should quit claiming a 40% reduction in DMFT with community water fluoridation…which even the ADA does not agree … and start quoting the Iowa or other studes. http://fluoridealert.org/studies/ifs/

Without proper oral hygiene, water fluoridation does nothing to stop gum disease.

***

From Richard:

Bone is really a fluoride sink or trap, not so much a fluoride releasing medium. There is not a chance that under *in vivo* conditions in extracellular fluid at pH 7.4 with 2 mM calcium that fluoride can coexist at mM concentrations as the free ion. The Ksp for calcium fluoride is far exceeded at that level. Heart block occurs at about 4-5 ppm fluoride due to association with 2 mM calcium. Again, bone traps fluoride, it doesn’t release it at pH 7.4. The body maintains a regular pH around 7.35 to 7.45. Acidosis or alkalinity kills patients.

I used to work in a clinical biochem lab and MDs used to freak out of the pH of the serum left that tightly controlled range. Sure at that pH the bone mineral is stable, otherwise we all turn out to be like boneless chickens.

This agrees also with studies conducted by chemists in 1954, demonstrating that fluoride does not incorporate into bone hydroxyapatite by calcium fluoride precipitation, but rather by ion exchange, where fluoride replaces hydroxide to form fluorapatite by diffusional motion. The reverse reaction to remove fluoride from fluoroapatite does not occur at physiologic extracellular pH.

Filters that trap fluoride and defluoridate water do so by washing with extremely high pH sodium hydroxide, which reverses the ion exchange reaction, replacing hydroxide for fluoride again on the apatite. This is also consistent with the real data (not the models) summarized in the NRC report, where the half life for fluoride removal *in vivo* was estimated at a very long 20 years, because the long term study done by transferring individuals to fresh water supplies found very little lowering of bone fluoride. Fluoride turnover is slow.

Arsenic is found in bone naturally, but again so what? That does not mean arsenic is supposed to be in bone, has a physiologic role in bone, or is normal bone rather than contaminated bone. The same with fluoride. Natural fluoride of course exists and can incorporate into bone depending on an animal or person’s diet. But like arsenic, fluoride has no functional purpose in bone, is a contaminant in bone, and fluorotic bone is abnormal bone. Fluoride does not belong in bone.

The incorporation of fluoride into bone as a function of dietary concentration is basically a nearly linear, nonsaturable process, which itself proves it is not a functional, physiologic process as with a nutrient mineral, whose effects are always curvilinear, fully saturable, and fully immediately readily biochemically reversible. Fluoride in bone has none of these properties because fluoride is not a mineral nutrient (FDA, 1963), does not strengthen bone (NIH) and above 3,000 mg/kg weakens bone making bone more subject to fracture (NRC)–all because it does not belong in bone.

Back to the original post:

Bone turnover has historically been estimated with radioactive phosphorus, not with fluoride. Why would turnover studies be done with abnormal, fluoridated bone to assess normal turnover rates? Fluoride interferes with bone turnover.

Bone is heterogeneous, and different parts have different turnover rates. Fluorotic bone does not exhibit normal turnover. Fluorotic bone is diseased bone. The thickened portions observed on X-ray after chronic continuous fluoride exposure are irreversible, not only in man but also in horses. They are gross anatomical abnormalities that cannot be reformed or corrected by normal osteoclasts or osteoblasts. Once it’s malformed its malformed.

The only argument you are left with is that the amounts of fluoride, lead, hydrofluoric acid, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, and thallium are so miniscule that they could not possibly be doing any harm. Where is your proof for this? It does not exist.

Any argument that fluoride could induce micro-evolution is biologically and chemically impossible. Fluoride is inherently destructive to life.

And there is zero evidence man micro evolved in any way in response to fluoride. There is zero evidence that fluoride has a function in the human body. The best evidence is summarized by biochemist John Yuamanis Fluoride, The Aging Factor, which is completely accurate despite the fact that is over 20 years old. Yuamanis says fluoride has no functional purpose in any living organism and never has, and we are not evolving into a state where it ever will.

It is a toxic calcium chelator that belongs in the ocean with plentiful calcium surrounding it.

Unaccompanied by plentiful calcium, fluoride is a poisonous substance. That’s that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

eighteen + nineteen =