Fluoride’s Proven Effects
(Text from Dr. Kennedy's Powerpoint presentation...)

Slide #1
This Power Point Presentation has been prepared to help others talk about the effects of water fluoridation on the health of their local community. Scientific references from the peer-reviewed literature to support the basis of these graphics are provided below.

Although some have called artificial fluoridation controversial, I find that it can be a very easy subject to understand. It is as easy as 1, 2, 3.
1) Does fluoride work to reduce tooth decay if swallowed?  No
2) Is it safe for babies or the handicap?  No
3) Is ingested fluoride for the purpose of reducing tooth decay FDA approved?  No
A simple as 1,2,3.

Slide #2 & 3 Point 1
There is almost unanimous agreement in the scientific community today that if fluoride has an impact of tooth decay it is by topical mechanisms and not via systemic ingestion as was once believed.  Dr. Featherstone in his July 2000 article about on fluoride and tooth decay reminded every dentist and reader of the American Dental Association Journal that the level of fluoride in saliva or incorporated into the enamel from ingesting fluoridated water is insufficient to have a measurable impact on tooth decay. The fact that fluoride has only a topical effect is recognized on the United States Department of Agriculture  (USDA) web page. Like sun block. You put it on the skin’s surface and there is no point in drinking it.

Proponents of fluoridation now contend that the fluoride in drinking water has a topical effect on the enamel. Dr. Hardy Limeback, Professor of Preventive Dentistry in Toronto suggests that the appropriate use for fluoridated water would therefore be to swish it around tour mouth and then spit it out.

(Footnote: Discussed in detail in Colquhoun J. Flawed foundation: A re-examination of the scientific basis for a dental benefit from fluoridation. Community Health Studies 14 288-296 1990)

Slide #5 & 6 Fluoridation causes dental fluorosis
This child has severe dental fluorosis. It is a structural defect in the enamel that weakens the tooth makes it crack, break and wear out prematurely. It is caused only by ingested fluoride in children. Adults do not develop dental fluorosis. They develop skeletal fluorosis. http://www.inter-view.net/~sherrell

 Fluoridation causes dental fluorosis and all sources of fluoride intake are cumulative.  However, water fluoridation causes dental fluorosis more often than toothpaste and all the other fluoride exposures combined. The graph displayed here is from the 1987 National Institute of Dental Research survey of 39,000 children in 84 communities. As you can see the amount of dental fluorosis this very profluoridation government research body found went up directly proportional to the amount of fluoride in the drinking water.

The raw data found 66% of the children in the fluoridated communities had at least one tooth with dental fluorosis. So they decided to not count the children with only one tooth scarred by fluoride. They then took the classification of the second most severely damaged tooth to claim that most of the children suffered only mild or very mild dental fluorosis. Still 29.9% of the children raised in a fluoridated community have two or more teeth showing visible scaring of the enamel.

Slides 7 & 8 (mild and very mild dental fluorosis)
Fluoride appears to impact some subsets of the population more severely especially the African American and Hispanic. Early studies of fluoridation found twice as much dental fluorosis in African American children than their Caucasian counterparts. That fact alone makes water fluoridation a racist policy.

The proponents of fluoridation contend that dental fluorosis is merely a cosmetic defect. This argument fails for many reasons. Dentists are paid to fix cosmetic defects therefore cosmetic damage is by definition also economic harm. For example if I spilled a bucket of paint on your new BMW, would you agree that a mere cosmetic defect was of no concern? Or would you demand that I pay for the damage to the appearance of your vehicle? In California the Department of Health has determined that dental fluorosis could also damage the child‘s self image and thus would be psychological harm as well.

Slide 9 Point 2
“Infants receiving substantial quantities of infant formula generally should not use powder or liquid concentrate if water fluoride levels are near optimal or above, since the water fluoride alone might exceed total, recommended daily levels.”
The English translation for the rest of us; Don’t make up fluoridated tap water formula for babies. They will get dental fluorosis. Breast milk has virtually no fluoride and thus the longer an infant is breast fed the less likely they are to develop dental fluorosis.

It the Wall Street journal the CDC fluoride promoters took the dental fluorosis rate for the fluoridated areas and averaged that with the dental fluorosis rate from the non-fluoridated areas to claim that only 22% of the children now suffer from dental fluorosis.

Slide 10
Did you read about this in your local newspaper? Of course not. Newspapers seldom print articles about the negative side effects of ingested fluoride but the manufacturers liability is clear.  The child in this case swallowed the Colgate toothpaste. Now toothpaste in the United States contains the following warning, “KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 6. Use only a pea sized amount. If the amount used in brushing is swallowed seek professional help or contact a poison control center immediately”

Slide 11
When confronted by Wall Street Journal reporter Tara Parker-Hope the fluoridation promoters made an astounding admission, “There probably is excess exposure,”

Slide 12
“A recent national study found that 22% of U.S. children have some form of fluorosis. Bleaching can't fix it. Dentists often use expensive veneers to cover the teeth.”

You might ask how they arrived at just 22% since I just showed you evidence of a much higher level of dental fluorosis in fluoridated communities. They averaged the amount of dental fluorosis from unfluoridated communities with that found in fluoridated communities to reduce the amount to 22% or slightly more than one out of five.

Slide 13 & 14 Point 3.
By 1975 the Food and Drug Administration had rejected 35 new drug applications for fluoride/vitamin combinations because “There is no substantial evidence of drug effectiveness as prescribed, recommended, or suggested in labeling.”

Slide 15 & 16
 “At the present time there are no new drug applications on file.”

Slide 17 & 18
American Academy of Pediatrics
A) Now recommends no prescription fluoride before age of 6 months.
B) After 6 mo. To 3 yr. when all other sources are considered deficient, only 0.25 mg/day. Equivalent to just one cup of fluoridated water.
C) Human breast milk contains almost no fluoride or less than 0.05 PPM
D) Research shows that breast-fed infants are smarter and healthier than bottle-fed.

Slide 19
Water fluoridation delivers a drug to infants at a level that is malpractice if prescribed by a physician!
It is as easy as 1,2,3
Not effective swallowed. Not FDA approved and Not safe for the baby.
Slide 20
Now for the really bad news. When fluoride is in drinking water, it is in everything! Fluoride is in so many water supplies and used so widely as a pesticide that it is found virtually in every product and beverage found on the grocery store shelves. The higher level found in grape juice and grape juice sweetened products is most likely pesticide residue. The lower levels we’ve measured in soft drinks and reconstituted juices is probably from fluoridated drinking water used to prepare those drinks. http://www.nofluoride.com/consumption.htm

Slide 21
It is physically impossible to suffer from a fluoride deficiency since fluoride is not an essential element. That is there is no known use for fluoride in any human system. But even if you think fluoride is good you are getting more than the alleged beneficial amount of 1 mg/day already. <http://www.nofluoride.com/juice_content.htm> <http://www.zerowasteamerica.org/Fluoride.htm>

Slide 22-27 Fluoride is a pesticide
These are the new higher permissible fluoride pesticide residue levels allowed in our food. They are going to include fluoride as an ”organic” pesticide so that even organic produce will have fluoride residue.
Slide 28
These are the measured amounts that we’ve found in food from the grocery store shelves.

Slide 29
The baby food chicken was the highest at 8 ppm. A child frequently consuming this product daily dose of fluoride would clearly exceed the threshold for dental fluorosis and bone pathology.

Slide 30
Because fluoride is widely used as a pesticide by many U.S. wineries it is found in high levels in some wines. European wines generally have much lower levels of pesticide since the European standard (EU) is for no more than 0.5 ppm of all pesticides combined including fluoride.

Slide 31
The fluoride in the pet food can cripple the dog. If the pet food contains ground bone meal then it will be high in fluoride since the animal stores the fluoride in the bones over a lifetime.  Therefore the secret to the dietary treatment for arthritis in animals is “no ground bone meal.”

Slide 32 - 34
“Existing data indicate that subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and its compounds.”
Who is saying making this kind of statement? The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry a division of the Center for Disease Control formed by the Super fund Legislation several years ago.

“These populations include the elderly, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium, and/or vitamin C, and people with cardiovascular and kidney problems.” Elderly is defined as over 50 years old.

Slide 35
The scientists at the EPA have formed a labor union over the issue of ethics. They contend that fluoride is a protected pollutant. All other toxic substances in drinking water such as arsenic, lead, cadmium, chromium, mercury, selenium are regulated at a much lower level than fluoride which has a permissible level in states other than California of 4 ppm. California is 2 ppm. Cal/EPA refused to adopt the federal level of 4 ppm because 100% of the children would suffer from dental fluorosis much of it severe. http://www.senate.gov/~epw/hir_0629.htm

Slide 36 - 38
Fluoride is more toxic than lead and slightly less toxic than arsenic and just like lead accumulates in and is linked to damage of brain/mind development in children, i.e. produces abnormal behavior and reduces IQ.

Slides 39
Fluoride affects IQ

This study conducted in China published in the peer-reviewed journal Fluoride shows a dramatic drop in the IQ if children affected by dental fluorosis.

Slide 40
This study conducted in China published in the peer-reviewed journal Fluoride shows a dramatic drop in IQ where high fluoride water is consumed versus moderate fluoride 4.12 vs. 0.91. <http://www.fluoride-journal.com>

Slide 41
The very first study of fluoridation found a five-month drop in the age of onset of puberty. That has steadily increased as our children’s exposure to fluoride has grown.  The mechanism of fluoride‘s action on the pineal gland has now been confirmed in animal studies showing a 1/3 drop in the onset of estrus in animals dosed with fluoride. We’ve seen this happen in endemic fluorosis areas of India and China also.

Slide 42 & 43
Fluoride Cripples People
When you ingest fluoride only about 50% comes out and the remainder is stored in the bone so that the amount in bone accumulates over a lifetime. This young man has bent knee and has not walked since age 18. He inhaled fluoride from burning coal indoors.

Slide 44 & 45
This 49-year-old man drank water that was about 5-ppm natural fluoride. The U. S. National Academy of Science has established an upper tolerable intake for fluoride that is 2 1/2 times higher than has been shown to cripple people in other countries.

Slide 46
This x-ray of the white fluoride poisoned spine was taken in the endemic fluorosis areas of China. Although not as severe x-ray surveys of women living in artificially fluoridated areas of the U.S. have also shown increased radio-opacity. Low-level skeletal fluorosis is often misdiagnosed as arthritis and old age. The symptoms may be somewhat reversible if the patient is given fluoride-free water and fluoride exposure eliminated.

Slide 47
Our scientific advisors at the EPA have stated that Fluoride/Fluoridation increases risk of hip fractures  Research supports that view.

Slide 48
This graph shows a doubling of the hip fracture rate for 75 years old women who were first exposed to fluoridated drinking water at age 49. The majority of the people in this study lived in a Mormon community. That religion prohibits drinking and smoking so two of the major risk factors for hip fracture were greatly reduced. Note that older women did not suffer the same increase but men did. This is perhaps due to the differences in bone turn over rates between the two sexes.

Slide 49 & 50
There were 4 studies in the 1990’s published in the Journal of the American Medical Association linking fluoride in drinking water to increased risk of hip fracture. At last count there were about 8 studies from both US and Europe linking fluoride in drinking water to higher risk of hip fracture.

The enormous medical costs of treating hip fractures and the 25% mortality rate makes the risk of drinking water fluoridation far greater than the alleged dental benefit.

Proponents of fluoridation call this research “junk science” and claim that fluoride is used to treat osteoporosis and that their studies have found fluoridation safe. To be fair lets take a brief look at some of those studies.

Slide 51 Fluoride is NOT FDA approved for osteoporosis
The case controlled clinical trials found no benefit and if they were over 4 years of taking fluoride as a drug they actually found an increased risk of hip fracture. Consequently the drug was never approved.

Slide 52

Other studies like this one that found no increase are highly touted by the fluoride promoters. This study is transparently flawed.

No increase from smoking, drinking or low calcium intake
No increase in cortical bone fluoride
No significant increase in trabecular bone
Combined data for men and women
Long time supporters of fluoridation

Slide 54

 Cauley JA, Murphy PA, Riley T, and Black D.  Public health bonus of water fluoridation: Does fluoridation prevent osteoporosis and its related fractures Am J Epidemiol 1991; 134:768

 1) Mean exposure time of only 6 years
 2) 27% not exposed to fluoridated water
 3) Does not address long-term impact

Slide 54
 1992 M. E. Suarez-Almazor  Canada Edmonton vs. Calgary found
1) No increased hip fracture in women
2) Did show an increase in men

Slide 55-56

Fluoride causes cancer NTP

Thyroid adenomas
Oral dysplasias

Slide 57
Dr. William Marcus who was senior science advisor at the Environmental Protection Agency Office of Drinking Water won his whistle blower lawsuit over the cancer production in rats and mice given sodium fluoride in their drinking water. <http://www.nofluoride.com/three.htm> During his trial the EPA witness tampered by threatening his witnesses with reprisals if they testified on his behalf and the justice department shredded evidence when the trial judge asked to see the original documents. As a result the judge not only found DR. Marcus innocent of any wrong doing but awarded him all back pay, promotions, and punitive damages of $50,000. He says that the study clearly shows that fluoride caused a rare form of live r cancer, (hepatocolangioma) and that cancer is enough to require the removal of fluoride from all drinking water systems. His May Day Memo from 1990, which precipitated his dismissal, called for an independent review of the pathology slides by the EPA. This memo details his reasons for the review in his own words is available at  <http://www.sonic.net/kryptox/medicine/cancer/ifin19.txt>

The text of his May Day Memo is below.

1) Sodium Fluoride: individual animal tumor pathology table [rats], Battelle Memorial Institute, February 23, 1989
2) Sodium Fluoride: individual animal tumor pathology table [mice], Battelle Memorial Institute, April 11, 1989
3) Dr. Wm. Marcus’ May Day Memo discussed in Lancet 36, page 737 (1990)

Slide 57
 Grandjean P; Olsen JH; Jensen OM; Juel K.
 Cancer incidence and mortality in workers exposed to fluoride.
 Journal of the National Cancer Institute,
 1992 Dec 16, 84(24):1903-9
Grandjean’s research has found excess lung cancers in Cryolite workers that could not be explained by smoking alone.

Slide 59
In 1992 the Department of Health in New Jersey found a dramatic increase in a rare form of bone cancers in young men living in the fluoridated areas of New Jersey. Other research has confirmed this link.
Fluoride causes cancer
 Cohn, PD Association of Drinking Water Fluoridation and the Incidence of Osteosarcoma Among Young Males

 Environmental Health Services New Jersey  Nov 8, 1992

Slide 60-61

The largest North American Study of tooth decay by the National Institute of Dental Health in 1986-87 found no significant difference in tooth decay rates regardless of the level of fluoride. Water fluoridation does not reduce decay
NIDR 1987 Fluoridation Survey 39,000 Children in 84 areas found NO difference

Slide 62

Water fluoridation does not reduce decay. The effects if any are topical and not systemic. The ADA Journal reported in 2000 that the level of fluoride incorporated into dental mineral by systemic ingestion is insufficient to play a significant role in caries prevention. 1, 2
 1) Featherstone JD. Prevention and reversal of dental caries: role of low-level fluoride. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1999
 2) Featherstone, John M.Sc, Ph.D. The Science and Practice of Caries Prevention  JADA Vol. 131 pp.887-899 July 2000

Slide 63
WHO data shows that fluoridation does not reduce decay. Many countries that do not allow fluoridation have had a steeper decline in tooth decay that where fluoridation has been promoted or required. For example Ireland is the only European country with substantial fluoridation and has some of the worst teeth. They are sixth in the list of cavities. England, which has about 10%-fluoridated water, was 5th. The four top countries have no fluoridation. http://www.nofluoride.com/eight.htm

Slide 64
Water fluoridation
does not reduce decay
Canada’s lowest tooth decay rate is found in the least fluoridated areas
New Zealand 80,000: children found no difference in decay
Tucson, AZ 25,000 children: over 50 years, “slight” increase in Hispanic
India 400K children: highest tooth decay with high fluoride low calcium and the lowest tooth decay rate with high calcium and low fluoride. Poverty and malnutrition is the root cause of tooth decay.

Slide 65-66
Our scientific advisors are the members of the Union that represents all of the scientists, toxicologists, and other professionals at the EPA headquarters in Washington, DC. Dr Hirzy confirmed their endorsement of our efforts to keep fluoride out of the public drinking water in a letter to Jeff Green dated 7/2/97 and stated that,

 Dr. Wm Hirzy, Senior Vice-Pres. NFFE/NTEU The union which represents all of the scientists, toxicologists, and other professionals at the EPA headquarters in Washington, DC http://www.nofluoride.com/hirzy_senate.htm

 7/2/97 in an open letter to Jeff Green and Citizens for Safe Drinking Water
“Our members review of the body of evidence over the last eleven years, including animal and human epidemiological studies, indicate a causal link between fluoride/fluoridation and cancer, genetic damage, neurological impairment and bone pathology. Of particular concern are recent epidemiological studies linking fluoride exposures to lower I.Q. in children.”

The reason that he said 11 years is because in 1986 the Union filed an Amicus Curiae suit against the EPA over the new higher Maximum Contaminant Level for fluoride (MCL) of 4,000 ppb (4 ppm). At this level 100% of the children will have dental fluorosis and much of it severe. Later in life many will have Stage I and II crippling skeletal fluorosis. It is not protective at all of the most vulnerable subsets of the population. http://www.fluoridation.com/epa2.htm

Slide 67

The most difficult question to answer is why are they promoting fluoridation so vigorously. The old axiom of “follow the money” seems to apply. 90% of the communities that add fluoride to their drinking water use raw untreated hazardous waste directly from the pollution scrubbers of the phosphate fertilizer industry. <http://fluoridealert.org/f-pollution.htm> Most of it from Florida. The new spelling for that state’s name is Fluorida. The substances are called silico fluoride and can be either a powder or liquid. Hydrofluosilic acid is the liquid form and is about 23% fluoride. The rest is the elixir from the scrubber that contains numerous toxic elements including heavy metals like lead, arsenic, even radionucleotides. http://www.nofluoride.com/chemical_analysis.htm

This waste cannot legally be disposed of in a river or the ocean the air or buried in the ground. It must by law be sent to the highest rated hazardous waste disposal landfill where it is detoxified with calcium (lime) and buried. This costs $150 a gallon and they sell it to cities to “fluoridate their water at as much as $2.00 per gallon. Considering there are billions of gallons disposed of this way it is not difficult to see the economic motivation behind the promotion of fluoridation.

68-69 Fluoridation with silico fluorides causes a significant increase in blood lead levels in children. http://www.fluoridation.com/lead.htm

When Director Carol Browner of the EPA  was specifically asked by Congressman Ken Calvert, she was unable to identify any safety studies of silico-fluoride used to fluoridate our drinking water. <http://www.citizens.org/Food_Water_Safety/Fluoridation/fluoridebackgr>.htm

According to the EPA there is no safe exposure level to lead. Numerous problems are related to early childhood exposure to lead including lower IQ, violent behavior, and learning disorders. http://www.nofluoride.com/lead.htm

Slide 71
Utilizing data collected in three different states for the NHANES III child health protocols where blood lead levels are measured Roger Masters and Myron Coplan have identified silico-fluoride as a risk factor for increased blood lead in children. They did not find the same increased risk if the water had no fluoride, natural fluoride or was fluoridated with sodium fluoride. What they also found was that there are extreme racial differences in the amount of lead children accumulate with the Hispanic and African-American children much more susceptible to high blood lead levels. African-Americans have been shown to be at greater risk of developing dental fluorosis than Caucasian children. These factors make the continued fluoridation of drinking water a racist policy.

Slide 72 Masters and Coplan also found a significant increase in crime in the areas that fluoridated their waters with silico-fluorides.

Slide 73 Fluoridation: A house of cards based upon scientific fraud

When serious specific questions are asked of fluoridation promoters they have repeatedly failed to respond with cogent answers. For example, all of the broad based blinded studies of tooth decay find no significant difference in decay rates whether or not the water contains fluoride at one part per million yet, promoters claim otherwise. As the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology mantra says, “Where is your Science” or in the case of fluoridation and the numerous adverse health effects that have been documented “Where is your conscience.”  One of the ways to sort out differences of opinion is what “experts” say under oath in court. http://www.nofluoride.com/legal.htm

Slide 74

The ADA would seek to portray itself as a public servant however they are not a disinterested party. <http://www.nofluoride.com/50k_vote.htm> The income of dentists appears to go up after a community fluoridates its water supply so dentists have suffered no economic harm and in fact have prospered with the advent of fluoridation. What are all those dentists doing do you suppose. The American Academy of Cosmetic dentistry says demands for cosmetic procedures are skyrocketing. We could add the same comment for the children who suffer from crooked teeth due to the delayed growth of the arches and malpositioning of teeth due to excessive fluoride intake.

Slide 75
The ADA is paid for their “Seal of Approval” and only approves fluoridated toothpastes. They also receive tax free gifts to their non-profit and are paid large sums of money for rent of booths at their conventions and for advertising in their widely read trade journals that are only open to companies that have products that received the “Seal of Approval.”  Fluoride has proven very lucrative for the dental trade industry, the ADA and the 100,000 dentists it represents. They are far from disinterested parties.

Slide 76
The dentist claim that ingested fluoride is safe yet according to the California Department of Consumer Affairs Dental Board a dentist may not diagnose or treat or provide a medical opinion regarding the systemic effects of ingested fluoride. In fact they may not even study the subject for continuing education credit. It is not in the purview of dentists. Therefore, one may not rely upon the dentist‘s opinion. By law they quite simply are not licensed or qualified to render this judgment. http://www.nofluoride.com/cal_dental_examiners.htm

Slide 77-79

The public is often swayed by very simple public relations techniques that have been used for years to sell products. When research turns up some bad news about a certain product is the first job of the PR experts is to deny everything and admit nothing. Second they criticize the research as flawed and being junk science and make counter claims against the reporting scientists. Lastly they cite authority for example, It is recommended by the ADA, the US PHS and the American Water Works Association. The latter approach is called prestige endorsement.

80 Slide
We can say for certain that fluoride causes truth decay.

81 Slide
Call Jeff Green and Citizens for Safe Drinking Water at 800-728-3833.  <http://www.saveteeth.org> 1010 University Ave.#52 San Diego, Ca 92103

82 Miscellaneous slides.

Science:  by endorsement and bureaucratic protection

The proponents are frequently seen holding up a placard of many organizations that supposedly support fluoridation. The list of organizations that do not support fluoridation or have had their name removed from the list of supporters and many who never gave permission for their name to be placed upon that list is considerably larger than the list as it appears today. Those familiar with the list still find numerous discrepancies between the list shown public officials and the corrected version. “Maureen Jones mocjones@msn.com <mailto:mocjones@msn.com>
In just one year between August 1995 and August 1996 these organizations were removed from the list of fluoridation supporters.
* American Cancer Society
* American Heart Association
* National Kidney Foundation
* American Academy of Allergy and Immunology
* American Diabetes Association
* Society of Toxicology
* Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Activation Network
* American Psychiatric Association
* American Chiropractic Association
* American Civil Liberties Union
* National Institute of Law Municipal Officers

Slide 83
This photo is of a 10 year old child who had only 2 months of the recommended fluoride vitamins in 1985. His sister had 2.5 years. He was fortunate enough to cease the prescription fluoride before major damage occurred. Peebles found that 67% of the children given fluoride tablets as directed permanent teeth suffered from dental fluorosis.

Slide 84 Dental Fluorosis fluoridated water
“It costs a lot more to cover-up  dental fluorosis  than fix cavities” according to Hardy Limeback, DDS, PhD former advisor to CDA on fluoridation, Professor Toronto Dental School
Slide 85 Dental Fluorosis is Expensive to Fix
2 porcelain veneers @ $833 each replace average 10 years $1,666  X 6 = $10,000 Lifetime cost

Slide 86 David C. Kennedy, DDS CV or make up your own

Slide 87 Fluoride’s anticaries effects are topical (If desired this goes before the ADA Featherstone article slide #3)
Slide 88 Duplicate of Slide #47. Title slide duplicates are for the summary and closing

Slide 89-90 Toothpaste Warning

The following warning is required on all fluoridated toothpaste by the FDA
Since April of 1997 due to the large number of calls to the Poison Control
Centers for children who became acutely ill from ingested fluoride. There
is approximately 1 milligram of fluoride in a pea-sized drop of toothpaste.

WARNING: Keep out of reach of children under 6 years of age. In case of
accidental overdose, seek professional assistance or contact a poison
control center immediately.

Slide 91-92  Fluoride causes iodine deficiency which can result in hypothyroidism and frequently in hyperthyroidism. Fluorides were prescribed to patients suffering from hyperthyroidism as anti-thyroid medication prior to 1950. Fluoride exposure may exacerbate iodine deficiency. During pregnancy, when iodine requirements are at their peak, the fetus is especially vulnerable. Even a slightly underfunctioning thyroid gland can result in loss of IQ in the newborn.

Kennedy Biography | Articles | Money by the Mouthful | Subscribe | Distillation FAQs | Products