Dr Vinograd's Best ToothPaste
(619) 378-1565 for appointments
Brighton Dental San DiegoBrighton Dental San Diego on YelpBrighton Dental San Diego on Google Plus

The Truth About Fluoride P5

 

Ian: until last week there were still telling us that we needed to drink 8 glasses of water every day and most people who drink 8 glasses but do it right out of the tap.

 

 

Paul : the CDC looks as if the y are taking  responsibility  know , the CDC simply [remotes fluoridation so the ex-communities are trapped into thinking   that this  whole medical establishment  is accepting responsibility for fluoridation  as being safe but there is nobody actually inching  of this program . when it comes down to the toxicity  of the chemical that are  used this sis in  the hand of a private body  called  the National Sanitation Foundation  and they have a disclaimer that they are  not responsible  for their recommendations  and when they are asked   for toxicology  studies on the chemical  used they  refuse to give them

 

 

 

Ian: if this is a  drug ,if it’s  an additive then tits  drug , if they are draining hat they put it in there  to  prevent  something from happening to your body then it’s a drug but the FDA  has north approved it as a drug . They are insisting that we put an unapproved drug in our bodies and they are doing it some sanitation committee department?

 

Paul: That’s right which has the industry on opts boaDr. The guys that produce this   stuff are on the board of thesis NFS. Let’s see what it means to be unapproved drug , it means that it hasn’t  gone through the  randomized  clinical trials to demonstrate effectiveness , it hasn’t gone through the same  trials  for safety  and they are not monitoring side  effects. if a drug goose out in the market  then both doctors and patients who find side  effects get that information to the FDA  and when the FDA have accumulated  enough complaints of  side effects then they determine whether the drug should be removed. none of that   ids happening with fluoridation , they alter  onto tracking exposure, they are not looking at fluoride levels in our urine , in our blood, in our bones, in a systematic way , doctors arte  not trained to look at side effects  and  we are not doing the studies  and we are not attempting to reproduce  the studies that arte going on  that are going on  right now in  India and china  which have actually produced  a <inaudible>  of problems  for people that swallow fluoride in naturally high communities and not that  high incidentally ; damage to the bone , damage to the brain , damage to the endocrine system , this is being documented  elsewhere but we are not f doing the obvious  studies in this country  or any other fluoridated countries and they  are basically what  you are looking at there. If you don’t look you don’t find, the absence of studies does not mean the absence of harm.  You get  this <inaudible> result for  example  i was in Dryden Ontario in April of 2008   and Dryden was considering if the y were going to  stop fluoridation and  eventually they did , they voted them  out but the chief dental officer for  Canada when to that community  and in his talk  he said  i walk  down  you r high streets this afternoon and i didn’t see anybody growing horns  and you have been fluoridated  for 40 years . He actually seriously offered this as evidence that fluoridation causes no harm, he diet see anybody growing horns. This is sheer lunacy.

 

 

Ian: I’m going to pull up something i    found on an FDA site in just a second but I’ll parallel something else. Charlie Sheen’s ex-wife  a woman name Brooke  Molar  has a drug problem and she  and a story i read   earlier this week she  was  trying to go to Mexico  to be treated by a FDA unapproved drug but they don’t sell it i, it’s not allowed  , its illegal in the united states called Imogene  and so hose clinics that are set up  to give drug addicts or people who have chemical depended issues Imogene  which apparently  disrupts their body an addiction processes and makes it easier   to give up drugs . if you take this drug  to break up the  other drugs then the FDA won’t approve it  and    it thought it  was so interesting that there are certain drugs that the FDA  says no  and it’s not  arrived it can’t in any way be sold   or  marketed in the united states as  a drug. i go to  the FDA  site from a year ago  and they  have here ,I’m going to read it right h here maybe h you already know abbot  this . It says “the FDA   orders a halt   to the marketing of unapproved single ingredient oral cortisone. “this is a drug commonly used to prevent gout, to  treat gout flares, to  treated m a couple of other things but mostly it’s for  gout and so they  go out of their  way   to say  if  we don’t approve it  you can’t sell it , you can’t  market it until we say  you can  but except for fluoride . Other people   coming on are saying we have a product, we would like to try it out over the next 40 years on the American people and see if it works   they would say obsoletely not to expect for fluoride.

 

 

Paul: fluoride is the exception for any  rule on pollutants  or drugs that  you can think of , it’s a protected  pollutant when the US public health services endorsed  fluoridation in 1950 it established  such a powerful vale of protection  in on this  practise  which stood a rational discussion , rational argumentation , scientific evidence , everything falls by the wayside in order  to protect this practise   and yes  i think the FDA   role in this is   despicable , its total  hypocrisy  to ban some useful things and  now   foxing overboard in trying   to regulate nutrients and  so on which they are  doing  and at the same time  allow those fluoride , this unapproved drug to go into the drinking water  of over a hundred  million Americans every day with no supervision , no study , no randomized  clinical trials  and ye to look at the back  of  your tube of tooth paste because  that is the FDA in action on fluoride but only on  the cosmetic because they regulate cosmetic  as well as food and drug . then you see what they should be doing with water but they have been kept  away by the US  Public Health Service, the  great big bus , the department of health and human  services have kept the FSDA away from doing these  job on this  issue .

 

 

Ian: very interesting in the case against fluoride and how hazardous waste ended up in our drinking water and the bad science and  powerful politics that  keep it there.  Who are the politicians for and against it, do you have anybody that have come out for you?  Do you have a national <inaudible> persons politically?

 

Paul: in fact you can find a lot about this there is so much to talk about this on this front. If you got to our web page fluoridealert.org you go to web page and at the top of the web page it tells you the recent communities stop fluoridation and links to   all the 200 communities that have stopped since 1990. it gives  details about how to  order out book , it gives  more information on all those  IQ studies , it gives the professional statement against fluoridation signed  by over 3700 medical scientific in  environmental professional nitrifies. if you keep scrolling down  you eventually comes down to  a statement by  Ralph Nature and  if you keep going down you will faint  the professional perspective  from   water fluoridation , 28 minutes, 15 scientist   and if that doesn’t convince you to stop  then i don’t know what will but perhaps the book  will .

 

Ian: who are  the politicians because i know  Ralph Nator you mentioned   but like i said  my grandmother  who was John Birch  society all the way  she would have hated the  fact …

 

Paul:  i f this is essential a political we have people on the right, on the  left ,  the centre run poor announced that he   became persistent how would  have not  fund the CDC to  promote fluoridation , he think it should be  a local decision not a federal  imposition . we have the  reverend Andre  Young , former ambassador to the UN,  former  mayor of  Atlanta   that worked with martin Luther king jar and  we have DR. Martin Luther king’s  daughter Venice and his niece has come out against  fluoridation . they are practically concerned in Georgia because they have mandatory   fluoridation , they are strictly concerned  in Atlanta because they see the CDC is not warning the family of colours , they are particularly susceptible  to fluoride at least as far as dental fluorosis  is concerned. I think reverend Andre young is very important because his father was a dentist and for a long time he supported fluoridation. Things change, science develop, we have more information today than we did 60 years ago and we have to patty attention to that. the mayor  of Peter Value JR , well known counsellor  of new  your city whose father was   very famous  in new York city  he has introduced a bill  in new York city to stop fluoridation . If you live in New York City and you are listening to tis contact Peter Valona Jar or contact your conceal person and ask them to support Peter Valona JR.

 

Ian: i assume when you mentioned Martin Luther King jar before you meant martin Luther king the third? Or did you mean MLK was interested in the fluoride issue themself.

 

Paul: not the American hero that got assonated.

 

Ian: ok.  internationally , it thought  this was an  interesting quote  this  is on the back of the book   The Case Against  Fluoride  and  sweeten  rejected fluoridation  in the 1970s  these three  scattiest have confirmed the wisdom of that decision . Our children have not suffered  greater tooth decay  as World Heath o Organization figures has  test and  in turn our children our citizens have no tot borne the other j hazards that  fluoride may cause. we do  have  whole countries where  there are healthy people  that we can use as  test subjects   and  you can compare and contrasts  and we can say this  western nation didn’t do fluoride and their teeth and their kids and everybody  else . By comparison to ours. are there any  cases  e where you can  make the argument   that they  didn’t put  fluoride in the water and they are  countries that do have tragic teeth problems because  of that . Are there any examples?

 

Paul: no. you can’t point, you can have perfectly good teeth with ought fluoride you don’t have to swallow fluoride that is very clear. There’s a much   stronger relationship between income levels and tooth decay than you are ever going to find between tooth decay and fluoride.  The whole thing is just been badly studies scientifically, no randomized clinical trials for example. there was a study recently done  financed  by the  US  government  published in 2009  where they actually looked at tooth decay as a  function of how much fluoride  the  kids swallow. they got a bunch  of kids, they calculated how  much flu rode the kids actually ingested from all sources in the toothpaste, pesticide  residue , water and so  on and found that there was no relationship between how much fluoride the kids have swallowed and tooth decay and again it comes  back  to the reason that fluoridation should have stopped was  when they’d found out that  fluoride  major   benefit if there’s any is  topical , it  works on the outside of the  tooth and not from swallowing it .

 

Ian : there are people who have obviously  been promoting this and  other politicians  that are part of this dental industry that are out there trying  to protect it through legislation ,  have you noticed ? Are there senators or congressmen who arte former dentist? Are they trying to? are they moving the needle  in favour  of fluoridation on anything that we can  resist and we can  write our congressman  or senators  about to object to ?

 

 

Paul: it is very difficult to function at the state and federal  level because the American dental association erases over 100 million dollars per year , i think they maintain something  like 20  bias in  Washington DC ` and our biggest concern is the amount of  federal money that is being  capped off to promote fluoridation and  the CDC  dollars . on the one  hand you have the ADA  sending  money on public  violation outfits working behind the scenes , lobbying state  legislators , they have a real big effort  at the   moment to try to  introduce  mandatory fluoridation . A couple of years ago they introduced mandatory fluoridation in Louisiana.

 

Ian: did they pass?

 

Paul: yes. Also in Arkansas they are trying in Pennsylvania, they try every two years n Aragon. In many off these states its being resisted   but they are having more success recently because they’ve got a strategy where the public doesn’t find out until they are ready to vote in the state legislate, theta what happen in Louisiana. No one knew about it. Even labia’s for the environmental movement did not know that fluoridation was going through by itself in the legislation.

 

Ian: we’re going to open up the phones and we   will take calls for Dr. Paul Connett the Case against Fluoride next   on Coast to Coast.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

You might also likeclose


Promoted by: San Diego SEO & Dental Marketing
(619) 630-7174. All Copyright © 2017 besttoothpaste.net or its affiliates.