How Do The Fluoridationists Get It So Wrong?

by | Dec 2, 2013 | Pro-Fluoridation, Pro-Fluoride | 1 comment

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

A supporter of fluoridation asks:

“This is a question which you haven’t the courtesy to reply to. It is a variation of Richard’s timeless question;

“How and why do all the health and scientific authorities get it so wrong?…
That requires a mechanism for the failure of process.”

“Until you can come up with a credible mechanism for the failure of the scientific consensus nobody with any sense is going to accept your word over the position generated by the scientific consensus and its representative organisations.”

Dear Christopher,

I think I have covered this. Agencies got set up with all good intentions. But big corporations wanted to be let off easy, and so they went to work through lobbyists and donations to politicians and got “their people” appointed to the agencies, such as Michael Taylor, Mr. Monsanto, heading up the FDA branch that approves GMO crops and food.

In the EPA there is a split between EPA administrators and EPA scientists. The scientists oppose fluoridation and even sued the administrators. The CDC is split too. Fluoridation policy is run out of one office made up of a bunch of administrative dentists while the rest of the CDC looks the other way. The CDC scientists post articles which admit that 41% of the kids have some degree of fluorosis, with 12.% of it being noticeable and embarrassing. The CDC scientists post articles which say that the effect of fluoridation is primarily topical and not systemic and that the effect is post-eruption of the teeth, which means that it does not help to give fluoride to kids. Yet CDC administrators still promote fluoridation.

And you have the EPA administrators setting up the NSF and offloading fluoridation approval to NSF while the EPA scientists wrote the NSF 60 requirements that fluoridation materials to be approved go through 20 tox studies, which they haven’t, which makes all fluoridation materials non- compliant with NSF 60.

Like everything in our country there is political division in the agencies just as in Congress. Big corporations do not want to lose their cash flows and so they hire the lobbyists and fund the politicians.

So that is the mechanism. You should not be so trusting of our agencies. I would say one of the mechanisms that allows fluoridationists to remain trapped in their maze is that the exits from the maze are blocked. One of the blocking mechanisms is the belief that we should trust our agency heads and that if fluoridation were not good it would have been halted.

It was as scam from the beginning. It was a profitable scam, and so FDA and EPA never developed the will to stop it.

Cargill and Mosaic donate heavily to medical and dental schools, which follow the pro-fluoridation line.

So, think for yourself. Don’t let the agency heads think for you. Quit being so naive.



1 Comment

  1. Robert Reed

    There are really only two effective ways to attack the powerful fluoridation lobby: by addressing the method of fluoridation delivery and the cost. They apparently cannot be out-argued as to the effect of fluoridation on dental caries and it’s time that the antifluoridists selfishly consider, first, protecting themselves and their families..
    Less than 1% of fluoridated water is actually ingested by humans. So for every 100 barrels of fluorosilicic acid(fluoride) added to your water supply 99+ barrels go down the drain and have nothing to do with reducing cavities except maybe for the fish. And we’re supposed to be the smartest animals on the planet? How about a much cheaper alternative like fluoride tablets(These already exist)? Using taxation money, the government could mail them to homes at no cost or the taxpayers could pick them up free at the pharmacy . The pills come in at least two sizes with one for adults and one for kids. Now everyone could take their recommended dosages just like with all of your other medicines while those who choose so can opt out of the program saving the taxpayers more money. Everybody is now happy and as a bonus the tablet program would cost the taxpayers less than 3% of what water fluoridation does. As another bonus there would be no fluoridated water added to our food chain. Seriously, this is not quantum chromodynamics.

    Two years ago New Jersey was on the fast track to fluoridate the whole State. I sent this basic argument
    to the entire New Jersey Legislature and to Governor Christie with calculations showing a fluoride tablet
    program would save NJ about fifteen billion dollars over ten years as compared to fluoridating the
    whole water supply as was being proposed. Governor Christie’s office sent a letter assuring me that my argument would be strongly considered should the water fluoridation bill ever came across his desk. Time will tell, but so far there hasn’t been a peep about the subject for two years now.

Submit a Comment

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

3 × 5 =

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Donate to Fluoride Class Action


Products I Use, Like, and Recommend

Search the NRC 2006 Report on Fluoride

Recommended Products

My Water Distiller


My Fluoride Meter


The Fluoride Song