Toxicity is in the dose or concentration of fluoride

FKANI came across a new organisation, the Fluoride Knowledge & Action Network, the other day. I first thought this is another one of those fluoride free activist groups and it is probably part of Paul Connett’s Worldwide Alliance to End Fluoridation. Digging a little deeper I was pleased to see it did not belong to this alliance, which is really just the anti-fluoride equivalent of the Comintern or the Fourth international.

In fact the Fluoride Knowledge & Action Network is an Indian organisation and describes itself as “a network of passionate people interested in finding solutions and improving awareness for the Fluorosis problem in Rural communities by working on safer water & better nutrition.”

So it’s not another one of these political activist anti-fluoride groups we have become so used to here. It is actually concerned with a real problem caused by excessive fluoride in water and diets which can cause severe dental fluorosis and skeletal fluorosis. These are real problems in parts of India, China,  Africa and the Middle East. They are not a problem in New Zealand and are not caused by fluoride at the optimum concentrations used in water fluoridation.

So, I wish the Fluoride Knowledge and Action Network well in their future activity. They are dealing with an important problem in their area and hopefully won’t get diverted by Connett’s organisation. I think that is a possibility because the fluoride free groups, and the “scientific” journal Fluoride they love to quote, does try to make capital out of these real problems by arguing that they are also a problem with fluoridation in countries like New Zealand. They aren’t.

Most of us understand the concept of “too much of a good thing.” This is also true with diet and with essential and beneficial micro-nutrients and micro-elements.  So it is not surprising to realise that, like selenium, fluoride can also be toxic at high concentrations but beneficial at lower concentrations.

Misrepresenting toxicity of fluoride

Trouble is, political activists opposing fluoridation often resort to using high dose, or high concentration, situations to argue against fluoridation. Here are a few example I came across today while browsing social media.

Remember – the optimum concentration for fluoridation of community water supplies is 0.7 ppm F.

Here’s a couple  of papers promoted by Carol Kopf, the Media Director of Paul Connett’s Fluoride Action Network. She uses the Twitter account @nyscof – the New York Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.

  1. Zhou, Y., Qiu, Y., He, J., Chen, X., Ding, Y., Wang, Y., & Liu, X. (2013). The toxicity mechanism of sodium fluoride on fertility in female rats. Food and Chemical Toxicology : An International Journal Published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 62, 566–72.

    These workers reported harmful effects of sodium fluoride on rats supplied with drinking water containing 100 and 200 ppm F.

  2. Simon, M. J. K., Beil, F. T., Rüther, W., Busse, B., Koehne, T., Steiner, M., … Oheim, R. (2014). High fluoride and low calcium levels in drinking water is associated with low bone mass, reduced bone quality and fragility fractures in sheep. Osteoporosis International : A Journal Established as Result of Cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 25(7), 1891–903.

    The paper reported negative effects on sheep in the Kalahari Desert, Namibia, which were drinking water containing about 10 ppm F.

Fluoride Free Hamilton often quotes “natural” or alternative health sources. Here they link to the article Fluorides: The neurotoxins in water and toothpaste. Trouble is they raise the bogey of high fluoride concentrations (in India) and link it to  flawed work claiming fluoride is a neurotoxin:

“Here in India at least 20 states, including Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, Mahatrashtra and Punjab are victims of elevated fluoride levels.”Fluorides are known to cause brain toxicity and neurological symptoms in humans,” said Philippe Grandjean, adjunct professor of environmental health at HSPH”

See Repeating bad science on fluoride for my comments on Grandjean’s paper.

Fluoride Free NZ is just as bad (well they are the same organisation and people). Fluoride Free Hamilton via Declan Waugh was recently fear-mongering about fluoride claiming it could be causing depression. They posed the question:

Have you noticed how many people who kill themselves are on anti-depressants? Prozac for one, has fluoride compounds in it. I wonder if there is any connection?

And cited to this paper:

O’Hara, P. J., Fraser, A. J., & James, M. P. (1982). Superphosphate poisoning of sheep: the role of fluoride. New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 30(12), 199–201. doi:10.1080/00480169.1982.34940

Simply reading the abstract shows this paper is not relevant to fluoridation. It says, in part, “A lethal dose of NaF caused severe depression, salivation, hyperpnoea, blindness, ataxia and incoordination. Death ensued three to 52 hours after dosing.” This paper described research into superphosphate poisoning of animals forced to graze freshly topdressed short pastures.

I have a picture of a poor sheep which has been poisoned and is lethargically sitting around waiting to die. But evidence for human depression! Come off it.

There is a lesson here of course. Be very wary of anti-fluoridation activists citing scientific papers as evidence for fluoridation being toxic. In most cases they will be using the evidence obtained from studies using much higher concentrations than used in community water fluoridation.

Concentration does make a difference – don’t be fooled.

Similar articles

39 responses to “Toxicity is in the dose or concentration of fluoride

  1. Fluoride free Dan.

    Load of crap. Fluoride is a bio-accumulative toxic chemical to human beings even at 0.7 ppm F. 18 scientific reasons to end fluoridation and it should only take one. ken perrott you and your mates from ‘making (NO( sense of fluoride’ facebook site are nothing but corrupt scientists with ulterior motives $!


  2. Fluoride free Dan.

    There is not even ONE single process in the human body that does require fluoride. Not ONE! Given the pharmacodynamics of fluoride it is most definitely a number *one* cause of chronic diseases. Including cancer.
    With the fluorine ion having a negative electrical charge and metal ions having a positive electrical charge, they readily combine to form metal-fluoride-complexes. Both metal ions and fluorine ions are very small. Consequently, they can easily pass through cell membranes. Once in the cell, a natural chemical reaction occurs where the fluorine ion is released from the metal ion. The fluorine ion interferes with the enzyme function and continues on, while the metal ion is left behind. It is also possible for the fluorine ion to attach to a trace mineral such as zinc, which is essential to enzyme function and remove it from the cell. This same scenario is how fluoride acts as a delivery mechanism for psychoactive drugs, but with water fluoridation, the passenger is a neurotoxic substance such as lead, mercury or aluminium for which the brain is the target organ…
    Discernment in this particular matter of fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid* is not simply what is right and what is wrong. Discernment is the difference between what is right and what is ALMOST right. Supporting science that is ALMOST right does not make it right. Inasmuch, it does however render those supporting such rogue science so desperately like ken perrott and daniel ryan, to be known now worldwide as total corrupt fraudsters stemming from their persistent efforts at trying to deceive public at all costs and believe me, people are easily working all of this out for themselves.


  3. Fluoride free Dan.

    Lastly, it is abominable how persons operating under a professional scientific body are blatantly lying to public regarding dissociation of *hydrofluorosilicic acid*, as this is NOT the case. This renders those who make such claims (ken perrott and daniel ryan) to be outright disingenuous!!


  4. Christopher Atkinson

    Hi FF Dan

    Don’t know if you are trying to be taken seriously as the references you provide are…well…rubbish

    Regarding dissociation, are you saying Ken is blatantly lying here?
    I would’ve though a secondary school education in Chemistry would have done it for you.
    But here is a reputable reference for you if this is not enough for you;

    The American Dental Association states;

    “Fluoride additives do disassociate very quickly and completely releasing fluoride ions into the water” (Pg 44 ADA: Fluoride Facts);

    Or are the ADA untrustworthy shills on the take from Big Business who are in cahoots’ with the Government who want to dispose of this “waste” product whilst making a quick buck!! 😉


  5. Christopher Atkinson

    Just an aside….to anyone “out there”

    Why is there an endless supply of idiots who think that providing crappy links to “no name” or conspiracy laden webpages could even remotely bolster their credibility?

    Do they not realise it just makes them look either stupid, politically motivated, outright wacko – or any combination thereof?


  6. Stuart Mathieson

    FFD is just a BSA playing at being at being a wiseman (who need a degree?)
    I often wonder whether it’s a perverted tall poppy syndrome against a scientific education.


  7. Stuart Mathieson

    Do the FF gang have harp strings of saliva decorating their gobs when they postulate?


  8. Stuart Mathieson

    What would our Danny Boy make of the fact that certain fluoride compounds have been found to enhance cognitive performance in Alzheimer’s conditions in on-going research program’s.

    Fluoride (MSF): A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of Safety and Efficacy in the Treatment of Senile Dementia of the Alzheimer Type.
    Moss, D E; Berlanga, P; Hagan, M M; Sandoval, H; Ishida, C

    Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders
    March 1999

    I’ve noticed if you google “pharmacodynamics of fluoride” you get all sorts of results rich in alarmingly suggestive associations that would ring alarm bells in ill-informed brains especially if they are into pretended “understanding”.


  9. Fluoride free Dan.

    Whenever there is a volcanic eruption, you will find that it is always the fluoride in the ash that causes the teeth of wildlife and farm animals to CRUMBLE and FALL OUT. It is only the fluoride that is to blame for this damage. It causes bones to break. But somehow dentists believe if you put this bio accumulative poison in a toothpaste tube or in tap water it becomes a miraculous substance that benefits everyone’s teeth. How dumb do they expect everyone to be?
    See online article, “Toxic Ash Threatens Iceland Animals “. “It [fluoride] also binds with calcium in the blood stream and after heavy exposure over a period of days makes bones frail, even causing teeth to CRUMBLE.”

    BBC News – Toxic ash threatens Iceland animals
    Icelandic farmers race to protect their animals from being poisoned as rural areas become caked in dust.

    See online article, “Volcanic Ash Could Hover For Days Over Europe”. “The ash is toxic — the fluoride causes long-term bone damage that makes TEETH FALL OUT and bones break.”…/news/bb8iceland15th041810.txt

    Volcanic ash could hover for days over Europe
    Associated Press

    And then there is PubMed. “[Fluorine as a factor in premature aging]”. “Dental fluorosis during tooth growth and loss of dentition (TOOTH LOSS) in adulthood are two consequences of chronic intoxication with fluorine compounds.”

    [Fluorine as a factor in premature aging]. [Ann Acad Med Stetin. 2004] – PubMed – NCBI

    Also dental fluorosis due to chronic fluoride overexposure seems to be a little more than just cosmetic. See “Comparative Toxicity of Fluorine Compounds”. “Mottled teeth are not only disfiguring in appearance but are so defective in structure and strength that they often have to be replaced by false teeth at an early age.”
    When did this FACT change?

    Comparative Toxicity of Fluorine Compounds – Industrial & Engineering Chemistry (ACS Publications)
    Abstract: The separation of chemical vapor deposited (CVD) graphene from the metallic catalyst it is grown on, followed by a subsequent transfer to a dielectric substrate, is currently the adopted method for device fabrication.

    H. Trendley Dean was the father of fluoridation. To paraphrase Dean’s findings, “As children’s teeth disintegrate, they may have fewer cavities”.Trendley Dean admitted under oath on a witness stand that his early data gave ZERO evidence that increasing fluoride concentration in the water supply reduced tooth decay.

    It’s a bio accumulative rat poison. Even Harold Hodge knew they were using a rat poison.

    “Appointed initially in biochemistry, Hodge pursued dental research including the toxicity of fluoride, as there was a huge stigma against using fluoride for the public health. (It was, after all, a RAT POISON.) ”

    Harold Carpenter Hodge (1904–1990)

    Dr. P.H. Phillips, biochemist, University of Wisconsin stated,
    “Fluoride is an accumulative poison which accumulates in the skeletal structures, including the teeth, when the body is exposed to small daily intakes of this element. …it is like lead accumulation in the bone until saturation occurs and then lead poisoning sets in.”


  10. Fluoride free Dan.

    Summarising thus far, because you bunch of pro fluoride scientists are either cognitively dissonant, corrupt or delusional – “or any combination thereof?” !!!!!
    Keep swallowing your toothpaste and drinking your bio-accumulative poisonous fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid* and you never know, at best you may even end up like this pathetic fool –
    Just leave the rest of the population out of your abominable scientific experiments from now on thanks…..
    FFD 😉


  11. Fluoride free Dan.

    OPEN YOUR MIND, fill it with fluoride and end up like a pro-fluoride fool…..

    On – “Aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease”
    “It is likely that long-term use of drinking water with a high aluminium concentration, with pH about or less than 7.0, and with low fluoride concentration, is associated with the increased relative risk of Alzheimer’s disease.”
    [Aluminum and Alzheimer’s disease]. [Srp Arh Celok Lek. 1998 Jul-Aug] – PubMed

    On – “Current trends in fluorine research”.
    “…topics in fluorine research are presented on findings by researchers in Szczecin and Poland, as well as in the world. Reports are cited on the distribution of fluorine compounds in the environment, penetration into living organisms, and methods for the determinations of fluorine content in air, water, soil, and foods. …aluminofluoride complexes (AlFx) as a messenger of false information during protein biosynthesis and their apparent role of Alzheimer’s disease.”

    Fluoride could potentially damage the heart muscle tissue of your grandchildren.
    See PubMed –
    “Effects of chronic ingestion of sodium fluoride on myocardium in a second generation…”
    “The present results revealed that prolonged ingestion of fluoride through drinking water, particularly with high doses, induced significant histopathological and biochemical changes leading to myocardial tissue damage.”

    Effects of chronic ingestion of sodium fluoride on myocardium in a second generation of rats
    Possible effects of long term exposure (6 months) to sodium fluoride (NaF) through drinking water on the morphology and biochemistry of myocardial tissue in second generation adult male rats were investigated.

    In fact, fluoride might even make your future grandchildren stupid. On – “Fluoride toxicity and status of serum thyroid hormones, brain histopathology, and learning memory in rats: a multigenerational assessment”

    “In the T-maze experiments, the fluoride-treated group showed poor acquisition and retention and higher latency when compared with the control. The alterations were more profound in the third generation when compared with the first- and second-generation fluoride-treated group. Changes in the thyroid hormone levels in the present study might have imbalanced the oxidant/antioxidant system, which further led to a reduction in learning memory ability. Hence, presence of generational or cumulative effects of fluoride on the development of the offspring when it is ingested continuously through multiple generations is evident from the present study.”

    Fluoride may even damage the lungs of your future grandchildren.
    On – “Histopathological and biochemical changes in lung tissues of rats following administration of fluoride over several generations”

    “This multigenerational evaluation of the long-term effect of different doses of fluoride intake through drinking water on lung damage shows that the lung tissues were damaged, there was emphysema and inflammation of lung parenchyma associated with loss of alveolar architecture and the degree of lung damage seemed to correlate with the increased dosage of fluoride.”

    On – “Is there a need of extra fluoride in children?”

    “Fluoride consumption by human beings increases the general cancer death rate, disrupts the synthesis of collagen and leads to the breakdown of collagen in bone, tendon, muscle, skin, cartilage, lungs, kidney and trachea, causing disruptive effect on tissues in the body. It inhibits antibody formation, disturbs immune system and makes the child prone to malignancy. Fluoride has been categorized as a protoplasmic poison…”

    Gwendolyn Dennis On – “Effects of the fluoride on the central nervous system”

    “INTRODUCTION: Fluoride (F) is a toxic and reactive element, and exposure to it passes almost unnoticed, with the consumption of tea, fish, meat, fruits, etcetera and articles of common use such as: toothpaste additives; dental gels, non-stick pans and razor blades as Teflon. It has also been used with the intention of reducing the dental cares.

    DEVELOPMENT: Fluoride can accumulate in the body, and it has been shown that continuous exposure to it causes damaging effects on body tissues, particularly the nervous system directly without any previous physical malformations.

    BACKGROUND: Several clinical and experimental studies have reported that the F induces changes in cerebral morphology and biochemistry that affect the neurological development of individuals as well as cognitive processes, such as learning and memory. F can be toxic by ingesting one part per million (ppm), and the effects they are not immediate, as they can take 20 years or more to become evident.

    CONCLUSION: The prolonged ingestion of F may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system. Therefore, it is important to be aware of this serious problem and avoid the use of toothpaste and items that contain F, particularly in children as they are more susceptible to the toxic effects of F.”

    Does fluoride cause cancer? On – “Relationship between fluoride concentration in drinking water and mortality rate from uterine cancer in Okinawa prefecture, Japan”

    “The Okinawa Islands located in the southern-most part of Japan were under U.S. administration from 1945 to 1972. During that time, fluoride was added to the drinking water supplies in most regions. The relationship between fluoride concentration in drinking water and uterine cancer mortality rate was studied in 20 municipalities of Okinawa and the data were analyzed using correlation and multivariate statistics. A significant positive correlation was found between fluoride concentration in drinking water and uterine cancer mortality in 20 municipalities ”


  12. FF Dan,

    I see you have chosen door number 3…

    Volcsano’s, Iceland, Animal teeth CRUMBLING…

    Stop…stop…please (tears running down my face)…I beg you


  13. Fluoride free Dan.

    Well done christopher, your proving yourself to be a combination of a delusional and cognitively dissonant imbecile. Clap Clap. Is it time for your next unknown dosage/ quantity of fluoride derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid* OR cheap tea is rather high in fluoride so I’m aware?


  14. I see Danny’s still spamming people with low-quality links and endlessly repeating the words “hydrofluorosilicic acid” rather than engaging in rational discussion. Very much his modus operandi on Facebook.


  15. Fluoride free Dan.

    I see that christopher banks is still a corrupt brown nose ass licker supporting abominable rogue scientific practice/ experiment such as fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid* being forced upon “human beings” like only a true fool would have the capacity to do.
    I have been analysing the health of the New South Wales population lately. Very interesting how almost 3/4 of same population is now diagnosed with chronic diseases…
    Only sell out corrupt fools like christopher would be unable to correlate the link that 95%+ of same population are obtaining “completely” unknown quantities of fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid* in their municipal water supplies and GOD knows what other sources…
    Chronically ill, feeble minded and severely depressed populations of epidemic proportions. My my isn’t modern science just the bees knees!


  16. And here we see Danny resorting to abuse when somebody calls him out for spamming people. I’m shocked. Shocked, I say.

    Wait, no I’m not. This is also entirely consistent with Danny’s past behaviour.

    I think we’ve pretty clearly established that rational discussion is simply beyond your ability, Danny, but by all means, carry on hurling abuse at people. You can only further damage your credibility.


  17. Fluoride free Dan.

    Unlike yourself christopher bank. Some people actually do still care about the health and well being of fellow humans. I am very passionate about discerning what is “right” from what is “almost right” regarding this matter of fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid*! Inasmuch, had you properly and throughly read everything I have posted here to date, then you would have worked already worked that out about me. However, unlike me, you appear to have naively made up your mind years ago (according to screen cap) that these fluoridation chemicals are perfectly safe for *ALL* human beings over time and just like your indecisiveness regarding your feelings, you are obviously very similar when it comes to discernment as evidenced by your “off topic – poor me comments”.
    christopher banker I am much more interested in discerning exactly what these fluoridation chemicals are doing to peoples health in this matter than your feelings!
    P.S and didn’t your mother teach you that true champions refuse to be offended? Obviously not…!


  18. Oh, Danny. You don’t seriously expect me to believe you’ve read and critically analysed every link you’ve posted, do you?

    I mean, it’s not exactly difficult to work out that you are, quite literally, copying and pasting what somebody else has written without so much as a shred of critical thought going into the process.
    Does Gwendolyn know that you’re plagiarising her hard work?

    Not that I think she put all that much work

    Now, I could engage with you, working my way through each of Gwendolyn’s links in turn and figuring out where she’s gone wrong (one paper shows a ridiculously obvious misrepresentation of basic chemistry – I really do wonder how it made it past peer review), but firstly, you’re not Gwendolyn, and secondly, your historic response to people pointing out your errors has been to spam them with even more rubbish and hurl abuse at them.

    Additionally, you’re still ranting about HFA, despite people patiently and repeatedly explaining to you (and providing evidence) that the substance isn’t actually found in tap water. That alone would indicate that you’re not actually interested in a good faith discussion in which people set out their views, the evidence on which they’re based, and modify their arguments or positions in light of evidence.


  19. Fluoride free Dan.

    christopher bankface you are delusional and a complete waste of my time!


  20. Oh yes, and as a final note, Danny, whatever gives you the impression that my feelings are hurt? I’ve simply pointed out that you’re spamming people and hurling abuse in lieu of reasoned discussion. People are quite welcome to draw their own conclusions from your behaviour.

    Quite honestly, there is no way I’m going to be able to keep up with the volume of spam you can generate, so there’s no point in me spending valuable time on actual, reasoned analysis in response.

    So much easier to demonstrate the pattern of behaviour (spam and abuse). That way, sensible people will conclude that nothing you say is worth taking seriously.


  21. Fluoride free Dan.

    christopher, if your colleagues (the few who may not be corrupt like you) haven’t already told you – get over yourself ! Maybe ask your Dr for some prozac, I hear that is loaded with your favourite fluoride…


  22. Don’t you find it moderately concerning, Danny, the sheer number of people (especially professionals and scientists) you have to claim are corrupt in order to explain away the fact that they disagree with you?

    It is, of course, ever so much easier to claim they’re corrupt than it is to defend your position through reasoned discussion.

    Shall we stack this up as further behaviour which undermines your credibility?


  23. Fluoride free Dan.

    Let me get a couple of things in context before I leave you to your pathetic self centred corrupt and pathetic existence.
    I am a concerned New Zealand citizen, (you trying to debunk me like I am another professional scientist only makes you look incredibly desperate to say the least) a country in which both of my grandfathers fought in the airforce in world war II to protect all of its people from *all* harm. I believe that there are serious health risks *directly* associated with the human ingestion of fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid*, especially regarding fluorides insidious and accumulative pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetic processes over long term exposure.
    You (and ken perrott), well, where do I start… Are the most transparently corrupt and pathetic pro-fluoride supporter of all them put together. However, without wasting anymore of my time on you than I already have…..
    People can discern for themselves regarding your appalling naivety as evidenced from your long term bias support for the human ingestion of fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid*!! People such as yourself should be held fully accountable for your professional stance on this matter once complete evidential harm has been confirmed. Wont be long now. Keep taking your prozac in the meantime… “Fool”


  24. Oh, Danny.

    Do you really think this is how I’d “debunk” a scientist? That’s kind of sad, really. Do you really think that just because somebody who sounds halfway rational (well, I like to think I do anyway) talks to you on the internet, they’re engaging with you as they would a scientist?

    “Hey, people are paying attention to me! That must mean they’re threatened by my science-speak!”

    No genuine scientist is going to need me to tell them that spamming people with low-quality links and abuse is not condusive to a rational discussion, and they’d be hideously embarrassed to be caught in plagiarism by copying and pasting somebody else’s words without attribution.

    This isn’t me trying to debunk you as I would a scientist. This is me trying to outline a few basic principles of rational discussion.

    If that comes across as a bit too sciencey for you, well, I suppose I shouldn’t be overly surprised.


  25. Looks like Danny O’Reilly has run off. Good riddance I guess. He is so rude, offensive and irrational I was seriously considering putting him under moderation to see if I can calm him down.

    I surprised people in the fluoride free movement don’t try to reign that guy in as he must do so much damage to their cause with his mad ideas.



  26. From his facebook page Danny O’Reilly’s interests include chemtrails, advocating for an inquiry to get to the truth of 9-11, how to “live the gospel to change the world” and anti fluoridation groups.

    He’s “friends” with Ian Wishart, and probably with *Ninny Eastwood too , I wouldn’t be surprised to discover.

    So yes, irrational is a fair description.

    *”Ninny” – hey, what a great typo – I won’t even bother to correct it!


  27. Fluoride free Dan.

    Nothing rude, offensive and irrational about insidiously poisoning fellow human beings with fluoridation chemicals derived from *hydrofluorosilicic acid* in your mentally deranged delusional head is there ken corrupt perrott.
    Just incase if anyone missed out on seeing ken perrott (msof) being exposed as a total fraud by having *direct* connections to the fertiliser industry where this highly toxic category 8 industrial waste product (hydrofluorosilicic acid) comes from for dumping into peoples drinking water supplies, just for you here it is –
    and a little more evidence as to why these chemicals are a *direct* health risk, just for the off chance that there are a any genuinely trustworthy scientists watching. Unlike ken perrott and christopher banks.


  28. OK Danny O’Reilly. I have put your back into moderation and will block any further offensive comments from you? Be a bit more civil and there will be no problem.


  29. Christopher Atkinson


    Danny, you’re just a special kind of person in a *special* kind of way 😉


  30. Stuart Mathieson

    He simply recycles the same old rubbish. Leave him out.


  31. Pingback: Fluoride & Neurotoxicity in The Lancet | Skeptical Vegan

  32. Of course you’re liberally assuming some unfounded health benefits of a dirty and poison leaden byproduct of superphosphate industry and not the topical application of calcium fluoride directly on teeth, vis-a-vis toothpaste.
    Since there have been no studies to suggest any health benefit of hydrofluorosilic acid by ingestion in drinking water, it’s just then a game of cat and mouse whilst dumping a diluted waste product into drinking water. the superphosphate industry has mountains of this arsenic polluted material building up, since they were forced to scrub it from initial air emissions that killed livestock and land. As per all previous hiding poisons under the rug, including nuclear fallout from testing and asbestos, when its finally proven beyond industry/government funded number manipulators, nobody will be held to account for the deaths and illness and misery it caused. Give the ruthless commercial interests and their stooges in govt a round of applause for level headedness. Decry the absurd fringe conspiracy theorists as representing concerned mainstream. Divide and conquer and obfuscate and beffudle the rest.
    At least come clean about the real reason you’re pro-fluoride (tailings from superphosphate scrubbing) instead of being a liar.


  33. r3sponse, you are incorrect in many of your claims:

    1: Calcium fluoride is not used in toothpaste – its solubility is too low. Monofluorophosphate is a common chemical used.

    2: I don’t know what this “dirty and poison leaden byproduct of superphosphate industry” is. Health regulators would of course not allow such use in water treatment. You are clearly wrong.

    3: There is absolutely no fluorosilicic acid in tap water – its occurrence at such dilutions is just chemically impossible as it decomposes with dilution. Have a read of my article Fluoridation: Some simple chemistry. This will help explain the chemistry in simple terms for you.

    4: Your understanding of the nature of fluorosilicic acid is poor. You describe it as “arsenic polluted” – yet there are regulations about the content of contaminants in any water treatment chemical. Becuase of the nature of production of fluorosilicic acid differential distillation actually produces a very pure product which easily passes the regulation criteria.

    In fact, any contamination from use of fluorosilicic acid in water treatment is far lower than the already existing level of contaminants in the pure source water. Hundreds of times lower. If you are upsetting yourself about the treatment chemicals you should be hundreds of times more concerned about the original water source. Have a read of my article Chemophobic scaremongering: Much ado about absolutely nothing for the calculations involved in comparing the two sources of contaminants in your tap water.

    The rest of your comment appears to be uninformed but politically motivated belief rather than facts.

    Perhaps you are the one who should “come clean” about their motivation for spreading such misinformation. Do you have financial interests in the “natural”/alternative health industry? Or is it simply ideological?


  34. Ken. Your response to my post is confused.
    You dont believe health authorities would pump untreated HFSA to “fluoridate” drinking water, but then you’d be wrong. You can obtain this information, instead of blind faith in authorities.
    Secondly, there has been no tests completed on the safety of dumping untreated HFSA into drinking water OR the assumed benefit of dosing populations indiscriminately with this toxic fluoride derivative via ingestion for the purpose of dental health. The only real benefit studied is lab grade clean sourced natural fluoride applied topically to teeth.
    Assertions that the heavy metals from HFSA are suitably diluted as akin to saying you can dump any toxic poisons into drinking water reservoirs because it will get diluted enough.
    I dont believe in stupid conspiracies about fluoridation. Nevertheless between commercial interests and authorities that cornered themselves it so transpired that superphosphate producers were forced to scrub this toxic fluoride during fertilizer production offgasing, as it was a nasty airborne pollutant. With nobody to buy this byproduct and nowhere to dump it legally on land or as discharge to sea, they ended up dumping this crap into drinking water with false pretence it does something good for dental.
    Money talks and authorities backed themselves into a position they wont easily budge from. There’s an uncanny litany of this type of behaviour by authorities when they get too close with commercial interests: tobacoo, asbestos, leaded petrol, (completely safe) fallout from nuclear testing, the list goes on and on.
    But anyway, you can follow the trucks if you like, from agricultural fertilizer company scrubbed smokestacks untreated HFSA, straight to fluoridation depot.
    Ask any dentist if they know what sort of fluoride is being used. Has the TGA approved this “medication”?


  35. David Fierstien


    In reading your comments, I think you are getting at the (I’ll use the word) “myth” that the phosphate industry is forced to get rid of fluorosilicic acid because it is “toxic waste,” and the solution it came up with was to dump it in public water systems.

    (Your quote: “With nobody to buy this byproduct and nowhere to dump it legally on land or as discharge to sea, they ended up dumping this crap into drinking water with false pretence it does something good for dental.”)

    It’s a great story, but it’s not true. The fact is that only a percentage of fluorosilicic acid is used for water fluoridation. Other commercial uses include solar panel fabrication, computer chip fabrication, glass etching, and chemical feed stock for producing other chemical products. Industry is willing to buy FSA from the manufacturer, so why would anyone risk “dumping a toxic substance into a public water supply and poison the population?” The idea flies in the face of logic.

    So you can see, there is no need for a clandestine, nefarious plot for the disposal of this product.

    This comment from you is odd: “You dont believe health authorities would pump untreated HFSA to “fluoridate” drinking water, but then you’d be wrong.”

    No one ever said that HFSA is treated. Why would it be?

    And I should also point out that, in the United States at least, all additives to public potable water must meet the standard NSF 60. NSF 60 standard is 10 times more strict than EPA standards.

    So, let’s apply this to arsenic, since you brought that up. The EPA Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for arsenic is 10 parts per billion. NSF 60 standard ALLOWS no more than 1 part per billion. But there’s more —

    Fluorosilicic acid is used in drinking water with a dilution of roughly one-in-300,000, so anything in the fluorosilicic is roughly divided by 300,000 by the time it is diluted in drinking water. In round numbers, arsenic averages one-hundredth of the allowable level, considerably less than the required one-tenth. This equals 0.1 parts per billion (and remember, the EPA limit is 10 ppb).

    Ken is very good at answering more scientific and chemistry related questions, and I suggest you take advantage of his expertise while you have his attention.


  36. Actually r3ponse, you are the one presenting confusion – and intentionally so.

    What I actually wrote was:

    “I don’t know what this “dirty and poison leaden byproduct of superphosphate industry” is. Health regulators would of course not allow such use in water treatment. You are clearly wrong.”

    This is obviously quite different to what you attribute to me. Yes, fluorosilicic acid is one of the most common fluoridating chemicals used. it is very pure (it does not need further treatment as, I suggest, the differential distillation of heavy metal fluorides allows their separation during manufacture). its quality is controlled and certificate of analyses are required to indicate contaminant levels. It is not hard for you tin to find this information for yourself.

    Your second point is completely wrong – and a little bit of reading would show that to you. You could start with one of the very readable reviews. For example:

    Oral Health in America: A Report of the Surgeon General.
    A systematic review of the efficacy and safety of fluoridation.
    Health effects of water fluoridation: A review of the scientific evidence. A report on behalf of the Royal Society of New Zealand and the Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor.

    “Natural fluoride” would not be approved for topical application to teeth becuase it is impure. Any fluoride that is used does originate from natural sources, of course, but because purification requires decomposition and formation of the pure chemical it is technically a manufactured compound that is used.

    Do you not realise how silly this statement is?:
    “Assertions that the heavy metals from HFSA are suitably diluted as akin to saying you can dump any toxic poisons into drinking water reservoirs because it will get diluted enough.”

    Apply that to the pure water source used before treatment – it contributes hundreds of times the concentration of contaminants than the treatment chemicals used do. You are effectively saying that the pure water sources should not be used.

    Tthe rest of you comment is simply ideologically motivated political rubbish. My article is about the science.


  37. All the scientific studies to do with using fluoride for some health benefit in dental use lab grade fluoride and not HFSA. These same studies do not look into any possible long term side effects on health. The TGA has not done any testing on lab grade fluoride or HFSA as a medication for safety or efficacy when administered as a mandated dietary intake, with no regard to other dietary intake of fluoride or regulation on prescribed amount of this diluted “medicine” administered without consent.
    Even clean fluoride is not a required substance for life and it bio-accumulates in humans and food grown where tap water is used. Has anyone done any safety checks on amounts accumulating in the human populations that they’re so happy to force this stuff into? No.

    There is no viable market for fertilizer byproduct HFSA, which is costly and difficult to separate into component fluoride, heavy metals and small fraction silica. Show me who buys this toxic residue for cpu chips, instead of using cheap and more available sand. That claim is ridiculous.
    Last year (2016) our fertilizer company illegally discharged undisclosed amounts of HFSA on three occasions. It was fined $17K for that by EPA. They’re laughing all the way to the bank. Would have cost much more to try to get rid of it any other way.
    Do you need photos/video of this otherwise useless and troublesome byproduct accumulating in ever growing stockpiles?
    There is no excuse for authorities to use a waste product in fluoridating the public at large.
    As always, it’s not about some tin foil hat conspiracies but instead about ruthless commercial interests and authorities only too happy to help out those commercial interests since they’ve forced them into scrubbing this poison from emissions.
    You’ve finally conceded that untreated HFSA is used, despite previous assertion purely based on emotive argument from ignorance. Logic argument ignorance, not calling people names.
    However, cant take any of your chemistry lessons seriously, when you demonstrate a purely ideologically driven goal, vis-a-vis using the silica for cpu chips.
    The NHMRC refuses to take lots of good science into consideration, in plain view in their reviews. All the public can mostly read about fluoridation is lots of fluff. But with patience and only when you know what to look for, you can finally confirm between the fluff that HFSA untreated industrial waste product is used to fluoridate or drinking, showering, gardening water. That it has been renamed to “co-product” from “by-product”, only further illustrates authorities readiness to “educate” and mislead the public as much as possible.
    Lastly, whilst most countries where their citizens are heard have stopped this dubious fluoridation, here in Oz, New Zealand, America and a handful of countries persist. Wherever commercial interests take precedence to true democracy. But then you’d probably call all those fluoride free countries communists, just as you tried to make me look like: tin foil hat conspirationalist, science uneducated and anti-establishment.
    Unlike authorities and vested commercial interests, real science progresses with the times.


  38. But anyway, had enough talking to conservative thinktank anti-climate bought retired scientists greedy for a few bucks more for retirement luxuries.
    You are only publicly shaming yourself in lieu of greed, which you openly admit. Your style of selective science is anything but.
    Which boat do you want to buy with your dirty money hiding dirty laundry that affects everyone? You are not a good human, probably a conservative christian monster.


  39. We haven’t had a cretin of the order of r3sponse in here for quite a while.


Leave a Reply: please be polite to other commenters & no ad hominems.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s