"Fluoride Levels Too High" -
National Academies
(What the Press Release
Did Not Mention)
Copyright 2006 by Mary Sparrowdancer
March 26, 2006 - In what many are regarding as a first step in
the long-awaited correction of a 60-year old nationwide medical
mistake, a study by the National Academies’ National Research
Council (NRC), sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), has found that the current maximum levels of fluoride
allowed by the EPA in drinking water should be lowered due to
concerns over adverse health effects. The current maximum contaminant
level of fluoride is 4 mg/L and the secondary maximum contaminant
level is 2 mg/L. The NRC found that these levels are too high,
“not protective” of the population and the Council
urged further studies.
Although the press release of this fluoride report states, “The
report does not examine the health risks or benefits of the artificially
fluoridated water that millions of Americans drink…”
the 576-page report cites numerous studies that describe adverse
health effects associated with water fluoridation, and after reviewing
this evidence, the committee concluded unanimously that the maximum
contaminant level of fluoride in drinking water should be lowered.
(1, 2)
The press release makes reference to tooth enamel discoloration
as a side effect of excessive fluoride consumption, a risk factor
for bone fractures and possibly bone cancer. Again, however, the
576-page report contains numerous studies showing an association
between fluoride ingestion and a variety of other health problems
that are now prevalent and widespread in The United States, where
now two-thirds of the people are exposed to fluoridated drinking
water. Among those now-prevalent conditions found in Americans
of all backgrounds, are thyroid malfunction and GI problems.
Numerous studies are reviewed in the NRC report that indicate
subclinical or malfunctioning thyroid is “associated with
increased cholesterol concentrations, increased incidence of depression,
diminished response to standard psychiatric treatment, cognitive
dysfunction, and in pregnant women, decreased IQ of their offspring.”
(Page 198.) Additionally, their study reveals that a number of
authors have reported enamel disorders in juveniles suffering
from hypothyroidism. Yet, the possibility that dental fluorosis
might actually be late-appearing signs of thyroid fluorosis and
malfunction has not yet been studied in this country.
The NRC also reported on pages 231 and 236 that fluoride can “stimulate
secretion of acid in the stomach…reduce blood flow away
from the stomach lining…dilate blood vessels…increase
redness of the stomach lining…and cause cell death and desquamation
of the GI tract epithelium.”
In referencing a 1961 study pertaining to GI complaints, the NRC
tentatively states on page 230, “Perhaps it is safe to say
that less than 1% of the population complains of GI symptoms after
fluoridation is initiated (Feltman and Kosel, 1961).” The
“less than 1%” figure based on the 1961 Feltman and
Kosel report does not seem reasonable at the present, however,
because we have new and better evidence than in the past of widespread
gastric problems including gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD),
and acid reflux.
A population-based study in Olmsted County, Minnesota, published
in a 1997 issue of Gastroenterology also decried a lack of available
data on GERD. “Gastroesophageal reflux is considered a common
condition, but detailed population-based data on reflux in the
United States are lacking.” The findings of their study
in Olmsted were, “The prevalence per 100 of heartburn and/or
acid regurgitation experienced at least weekly was 19.8.”
Olmsted County was fluoridated 1959, and according to the CDC’s
records, most of Olmsted is now fluoridated at 1.20 mg/L. (3,
4, 5,)
The IMS Health’s list of top ranking pharmaceuticals sales
for 2005 also indicates a much greater prevalence of national
GI problems. Two drugs that decrease stomach acid, Prevacid and
Nexium, were among the top ten bestsellers, with sales for the
combined products totaling 9.7 billion US dollars during 2005.
The top seller for 2005 according to this report was Lipitor,
a cholesterol-lowering agent, with sales of 12.9 billion US dollars.
(6)
According to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists,
approximately 27,000,000 Americans have thyroid disorders, but
only about half of them are aware of it. In the RxList website’s,
“Top 300 Prescriptions for 2004 by Number of US Prescriptions
Dispensed,” Synthroid, a thyroid drug, is ranked as the
fifth most popular prescription, with a total of 44,056,176 prescriptions
dispensed during that year. Lipitor, had the second highest number
of prescriptions dispensed, at 69,766,431. The NRC states on Page
2 of their report that in 2000, there were approximately 162,000,000
people receiving water artificially fluoridated at levels of 0.7
to 1.2 mg/L. (7, 8)
One report studied by the NRC on page 194 showed “statistically
significant changes in TSH concentrations (increased), T3 concentrations
(decreased),” following “prolonged consumption of
‘high-fluoride,’” at 2.3 mg/L. On page 195,
another study examined children in a high fluoride and low iodine
area. The “high” fluoride level in this study was
“0.88 mg/L.” The children were found to have a “lower
mean IQ,” as well as deviations in TSH and T3 levels. An
additional study by Susheela et al. (2005), found “well-defined
hormonal derangements” in children with fluorosis from drinking
water with “1.1 - 14.3 mg/L” fluoride. On page 196,
the NRC states that “studies showing no effect of fluoride
on thyroid function did not measure actual hormone concentrations…did
not report iodine intakes,” and used lower fluoride doses
than other studies.
“Thus,” NRC stated on page 197, “several lines
of information” were reviewed that indicated fluoride exposure
had an effect on thyroid function. The effects included decreased
production of thyroid hormone, disruption of conversion of T4
to T3, and effects on blood transport - the details of which remain
unclear. Also mentioned was the fact that some studies were not
available in English.
The historic impact of this extraordinary report is immeasurable.
I contacted Dr. Hardy Limeback - BSc, PhD, DDS, Associate Professor
and Head of Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto - one
of the twelve members of the NRC who had co-authored the report.
I asked if there were any comments he might have.
His reply was, “I, for one, would look at the graph at the
top of page194 and ask, ‘Are undernourished black children
in fluoridated cities (1 ppm) more susceptible to thyroid problems
than those living in non-fluoridated cities, as that graph might
suggest?’ Perhaps. As far as I know, we have no data for
this problem in North America.”
Perhaps, indeed, this might explain the pandemic of obesity and
type-2 diabetes seen in low-income, ethnic neighborhoods in the
United States.
Since current recommendations suggest that babies up to six months
of age receive no fluoride at all, Dr. Luise Light, former USDA
Director of Dietary Guidance and Nutrition Education, proposed
other questions that concerned parents should now ask: “How
do we avoid giving babies fluoridated water if it’s in our
municipal water systems? Does this mean we have to buy special
water to make our babies’ food and drinks? And what about
the water we bathe them in?”
Because the EPA has now been advised of the potentially adverse
effects fluoride has on the entire body when administered systemically
in unknowable doses via drinking water, it would be in the interest
of this nation if diligent members of the EPA would now locate
and have translated the extensive German studies dating back to
the 1930s. That was when German scientists discovered that fluorides
could be used as an effective agent to block thyroid function
in patients suffering from overactive thyroids. Of particular
national interest would be translations of the German studies
in which hundreds of patients with overactive thyroids had their
thyroid function blocked by being bathed in fluoridated water.
The EPA should call for an immediate moratorium on water fluoridation
until scientists and healthcare professionals can determine -
at last - what the true health impacts have been and will continue
to be as a result of fluoridating a nation of people through their
drinking water.
--------------------------------------
Mary Sparrowdancer is the author of The Love Song of the Universe,
(2001, Hampton Roads), and is a science and health writer with
training in clinical laboratory sciences, including bacteriology,
electroencephalography, hematology and microscopic evaluation.
www.sparrowdancer.com
Mary co-authors a health newsletter with Dr. Luise Light, author
of “What to Eat,” (2006, McGraw-Hill). Luise is former
USDA Director of Dietary Guidance and Nutrition Education, and
was the creator of the real fruit and vegetable Food Pyramid.
www.luiselight.com
------------------------------
References
1. National Academies Press - “Fluoride in Drinking Water,”
Full Report. Table of Contents. March 2006
http://darwin.nap.edu/books/030910128X/html/
2. News Release - National Academies - “EPA Standard for
Fluoride in Drinking Water Is Not Protective; Tooth Enamel Loss,
Bone Fractures of Concern at High Levels” March 2006
http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/030910128X?OpenDocument
3. Medscape - Gastroenterology, 1997, “Prevalence and clinical
spectrum of gastroesophageal reflux: a population-based study
in Olmsted County, Minnesota.” March 2006.
http://www.medscape.com/medline/abstract/9136821
4. Rochester, MN - Olmstead Fluoridation record: 1959. March
2006. https://www.rochestermn.gov/departments/attorney/ordinances/pdf/ORD140.pdf
5. CDC - My Water’s Fluoride, Olmstead County. March 2006.
http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/MWF/SearchResultsV.asp
6. IMS Health - “Leading Products by Global Pharmaceutical
Sales, 2005” - March 2006
http://www.imshealth.com/ims/portal/front/articleC/0,2777,6599_77478579_77479663,00.html
7. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists - “Thyroid
Awareness Month, 2003.” March 2006
http://www.aace.com/public/awareness/tam/2003/facts.php
8. RxList - Internet Drug Index - “The Top 300 Prescriptions
for 2004 by Number of US Prescriptions Dispensed.” March
2006
http://www.rxlist.com/top200.htm
