Inside Sport

Fluoride Officially Classified as a Neurotoxin in World’s Most Prestigious Medical Journal


https://forum.insidesport.com.au/Topic2260383.aspx

By paulbagzFC - 11 Nov 2015 7:47 PM

Quote:
The movement to remove industrial sodium fluoride from the world’s water supply has been growing in recent years, with evidence coming out against the additive from several sources.

Now, a report from the world’s oldest and most prestigious medical journal, The Lancet, has officially classified fluoride as a neurotoxin, in the same category as arsenic, lead and mercury.

The news was broken by author Stefan Smyle and disseminated by the Facebook page Occupy Food, which linked to the report published in The Lancet Neurology, Volume 13, Issue 3, in the March 2014 edition, by authors Dr. Phillippe Grandjean and Philip J. Landrigan, MD. The report can be viewed by clicking here.

Industrial Chemicals Identified
As noted in the summary of the report, a systematic review identified five different similar industrial chemicals as developmental neurotoxicants: lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, arsenic, and toluene.

The summary goes on to state that six additional developmental neurotoxicants have also now been identified: manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers. The authors added that even more of these neurotoxicants remain undiscovered.

ADHD, Dyslexia, and other cognitive impairments
In the Lancet report, the authors propose a global prevention strategy, saying that “untested chemicals should not be presumed to be safe to brain development, and chemicals in existing use and all new chemicals must therefore be tested for developmental neurotoxicity.”Also in the report, they note that neurodevelopmental disabilities, including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and other cognitive impairments, are now affecting millions of children worldwide in what they call a “pandemic of developmental neurotoxicity.”

They continue: “To coordinate these efforts and to accelerate translation of science into prevention, we propose the urgent formation of a new international clearinghouse.”

The report coincides with 2013 findings by a Harvard University meta-analysis funded by the National Institutes of Health that concluded that children in areas with highly fluoridated water have “significantly lower” IQ scores that those who live in areas with low amounts of fluoride in their water supplies.

Fluoride also linked to Cancers
Sodium fluoride in drinking water has also been linked to various cancers. It is functionally different than the naturally-occurring calcium fluoride, and commonly added to drinking water supplies and used by dentists and in dental products who posit that it is useful for dental health.

Currently, fluoride is added to water supplies across much of North America, but as this list of countries that ban or reject water fluoridation shows, the practice is actually not too common, or banned entirely throughout most of Europe and in several other developed nations across the world.


http://eatlocalgrown.com/article/13130-fluoride-classified-neurotoxin.html?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=postplanner&utm_source=facebook.com

MUH ADHD.

-PB
By chillbilly - 15 Nov 2015 11:42 AM

batfink wrote:
sorry it's the truth, is that not statistically science??

and what did the aboriginals of each nation do before fluoride and chlorine??


Not trying to get into the war on diets but they didn't eat large amounts of processed grains and other things that go with a society that lives in a fixed position. When humans switched from hunter gathers to farming and started making food made from grains a staple is the where they start finding increased levels of tooth decay. As I understand it this creates a different ph and then sort of bacterial ecosystem in your mouth that isn't great for your teeth.

Quote:
Ok experts, explain to us "fools" the benefits versus the risk (that science has proven) involved with adding an industrial by-product to perfectly good drinking water. What if the worst should happen and dangerous levels were to go through unchecked? Is it a necessary risk for the so called benefits?

Please no strawmen about anti vaccers etc or corporations needing profits fluoridating our water to make new drugs.

But its potentially not perfectly good drinking water. Its a very large stagnant pool of water that is a prime area from which to spread disease. We have our water governing bodies filter it and then treat it with other chemicals (most likely industrial waster too, as that would be the cheapest and most effective way to produce it. Doesn't mean it isn't useful) to make sure that we don't have spread whatever bacteria or disease related organism to the general public.

Too assess the risk/benefit I'd suggest reading documents such as the one in link below by NSW health and if you can find it the Australian Standards for adding fluoride to water.

http://www.health.nsw.gov.au/environment/water/Documents/fluoridation-questions-and-answers-nsw.pdf