The Fluoride Debate

HOME

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

HISTORY/
ENVIRONMENT

CENSORSHIP

THE FLUORIDE
DEBATE

BENEFITS
Question 1
Question 2
Question 3
Question 4
Question 5
Question 6
Question 7
Question 8

ALTERNATIVES
Question 9
Question 10
Question 11
Question 12


SAFETY
Question 13
Question 14

OVERDOSE
Question 15
Question 16
Question 17

DISEASES
Question 18
Question 19
Question 20
Question 21
Question 22
Question 23
Question 24
Question 25
Question 26
Question 27
Question 28
Question 29
Question 30
Question 31
Question 32
Question 33

PUBLIC
POLICY

Question 34
Question 35
Question 36
Question 37
Question 38
Question 39
Question 40

COST
EFFECTIVENESS
Question 41
Question 42
Question 43

CONCLUSION

CONCLUSION

Seldom has an issue come before the public that affects our personal health (and our personal freedom) as much as does this one. When the "smoke and mirrors" of the proponents of fluoridation are cleared away by scientific evidence, it is plain that there is no justification for putting this toxic substance in our water supply.

"Esteemed Voices have, for 50 years, warned the American public that water fluoridation has dangerous long-term consequences to health." (See 43-3: List of 128 leading authorities who are opposed to fluoridation, Maureen Jones, San Jose Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, Telephone (408) 297-8487).

Following are some of their quotes:

"I am appalled at the prospect of using water as a vehicle for drugs. Fluoride is a corrosive poison that will produce serious effect on a long-range basis. Any attempt to use the water this way is deplorable." Charles Gordon Heyd, M.D., Past President, American Medical Association.

On Nov. 24, 1992, Robert Carton, Ph.D., a former EPA scientist made this statement: "FLUORIDATION IS THE GREATEST CASE OF SCIENTIFIC FRAUD OF THIS CENTURY, IF NOT OF ALL TIME."

Professor Albert Schatz, Ph.D., Microbiology, discoverer of the antibiotic streptomycin, was of the same opinion. His statement was: "fluoridation ... it is the greatest fraud that has ever been perpetrated and it has been perpetrated on more people than any other fraud has."

David R. Hill, P.Eng., Professor Emeritus, The University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, in Aug. 1997, stated: "My own conclusion is that there are, at best, real unresolved and serious questions about the safety and benefits of water fluoridation and related uses of fluoride. The most recent evidence suggests it is not particularly beneficial, and certainly not safe. The most charitable interpretation that one can put on the situation is that old habits die hard, and the medical/dental establishment is slow to adapt to the realities of modern research, and is fearful of losing both face and law suits if they admit they made a mistake."

For too many decades we heard from scientists who worked for the cigarette companies that cigarettes were not addictive, even in the face of mounting evidence of harm. No one died from smoking one cigarette, one pack, or one carton. But after twenty years, cancers started to "mysteriously" appear. We were told these deaths were unrelated to smoking.

Now, the American Cancer Society states that, "During 1995, approximately 2.1 million people in developed countries died as a result of smoking." Tobacco use is responsible for nearly one in five deaths in the U.S. Scientists were wrong about tobacco; tobacco was not safe and neither is fluoride.

The powerful financial interests behind fluoridation have managed to keep the public from knowing the truth by controlling the media. Here is the opportunity for those who have the courage to speak out and let the truth be known to do a real service for the public, who in the majority of cases have not even been given a choice in the matter.

Those opposed to fluoridation have but one thing to gain — water that is free of medication, a medication that has been proven time and again not to work for the purpose intended, and is harmful to many.

It is time to bring the evidence out in a free and open discussion, where reason and facts are the guidelines, rather than emotion and politics. To ignore the issue is to let others make the decision for us. It has been said that: "All bad men need is for good men to do nothing." Please help spread the true facts on this issue.

Download
The Fluoride
Debate

as a .pdf

What is a .pdf?
It is an electronic file that is an e-book version of this website. Please be sure to have Adobe Acrobat's Plug-in installed for your internet browser so that you may view it.

 

 

NOTICE

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.


This site and accompanying book is published by
Health Way House | 403 Marcos St | San Marcos, CA 92069

First Edition
February 2001

This information provided on this site was compiled by
Anita Shattuck | Tel: 760-752-1621 | bakeranita@cox.net

This site and accompanying book was edited by
Edward Bennett

Site Builder: Michelle@Jabbocat Consulting