Translate

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Fluoride - You Can't Handle The Truth!

Integrative Medical Solutions Looks At Fluoride



Why Is There Any Discussion?

I'm discussing this now because I was at a large meeting with a lot of people very interested in nutrition and adult stem cell activity this past weekend.

I was asked at least three times about fluoride, about it's being so poisonous and causing so many problems.

My first question to them was always, "Do you know why we fluoridate water?  The answer was easy, "Sure, to prevent tooth decay."

Admittedly not a bad thing, right?  But Fluoride was also accused of causing many other problems.

So I asked, "Do you know how the amount of fluoride we recommend in our water was decided?"  Always, "No idea."

It seems an important issue now, doesn't it?  Fluoride is in our water everywhere!  But natural amounts vary.  So, let's take a look at the issues here.


Why The Heck Did They Decide To Put It In My Water?


First, as they say, the jury is still out as to whether "Fluoride" is a danger as it is being used in our water supplies.  Why the Quotes?  Why the underline?  It's a poison!

So is salt.  So is water.  So it oxygen.  Same for Selenium, Vitamin A, Potassium, Iodides and many other things we eat and drink and breathe in daily and we need keep us alive. 

All of these are poisons when ingested in amounts larger than we can tolerate.  Basically speaking, only mercury has a zero tolerance level.

One significant thing to keep in mind is that Fluoride is NOT like GMOs or hormones fed to chickens or in cattle feed.  It is not a complex chemical that interacts with our body's systems as these do.  

It is an ionic nutrient.  Just like Phosphate or Sodium, or Iodine, or Chlorine, or Calcium.  We need some to live a healthy life.  A small amount is beneficial, not detrimental.



World War II

World War II contributed a lot of things that we came to depend on, seemingly can't live without anymore.  Jet engines, for instance.

We also learned to use Penicillin.  A lot!  It stopped most infections and fast, back then.  Then Tetracycline was developed.  This is about Fluoride, why discuss this?

Because a perspective is needed.  Dentists and physicians began to learn things together.  They added knowledge the others didn't have and they made mistakes together, also.

There is an example about fluoridation here.  Tetracycline was used when Penicillin didn't work because some bacteria mutated.  They "learned" to chop the Penicillin molecule into pieces and ate those pieces.  

Ok, so good.  We had Tetracycline.  No, bad...when it was used on children under about 8 years old!

What?!  Physicians gave it to lots of kids.  LOTS of kids. 

Our Doctors don't want to hurt us!  Let's be real.  They want to help us.  We "like" to vilify them, but probably too often because we became cynical and we don't face the costs of education and insurance they do, either.

But those children grew up and many had discolored teeth.  Blotches, browns, reds, even violet and purple!  

When these teeth were studied in the laboratory Tetracycline was found in the enamel so Dentists told Physicians not to use it on children during the ages when teeth were still developing their outer coats of enamel.


Ok, so what about Fluoride?


World WAR II again.  For the first time Dentists got to examine men from ALL over the country at once.

They saw whiter teeth with loads of decay from northern states.

They saw beige, brown and some white with much less incidence of decay from southern states.

They had to extract some for various reasons but they studied them in laboratories.  They found different levels of fluoride in them.  BINGO!

High fluoride from the south.  Low fluoride in the north.  Same in the NATURAL water supplies.

Next, how much is good?  How much is bad?  At 2 ppm (parts per million) fluoride levels in the natural water supply there was tooth discoloration.  

But at 1 ppm there was no discoloration, but still a 90% reduction in decay.  

So if we add fluoride where the amount is lower than that to raise it a bit it seems a good thing, right?

Let's also be safe.  Maybe it won't distribute perfectly so we'll go for the 1.0 ppm and have the extra safety even if it doubles.

That's how it was decided to Fluoridate our water supplies, especially in the north right when I was born, about 1951.


Can A Case Be Made That We Are Still Using Too Much?

I stated before that there was a LOT more Fluoride in southern waters than in northern.  How much difference?

I just checked a few areas as I wrote this.  In Texas some areas have natural levels of 5.0 - 5.6 ppm and it is 8.8 ppm in Rusk County.  Almost NINE times HIGHER than we aim for when we add fluoride to help stop decay!

In Florida I quickly found a county with 3.6 ppm.  

None of these areas reports increased incidences of cancers, birth defects or any other health issues that people have claimed are due to high Fluoride levels.

Need I go on looking for proof that there is more here in an issue that seemed so simple before?  Is it really an issue at all?  Is it a contrived belief?  Is it just a fear that has been blown up by repetition?

If there is some actual (not identified) problem, then it's not just Fluoride levels.  In one discussion we both wondered if there was a "different form of Fluoride" as a cause?  (Still assuming there is any "cause" with any real "negative effects.")

I haven't yet looked, but I suspect the ionic issues are not the cause either.  Fluoride is HARD to dissolve in water.  It forms such strong bonds with anything it combines with that it's hard to free it up.

That's why the frozen and colder months up north cause such low dissolved levels.  So, ionic fluoride is likely the same ionic form all over...but I guess I'll need to look into this further some day.

For now, every major organization that looks after our health issues believes Fluoridation is protective and should not only be continued, but also expanded where levels are still low and where municipal water supplies exist.

I hope this information helps reduce fears based on misunderstandings many of you may have.

I cannot be responsible for people's reactions if they want to believe conspiracy theories that somehow governments want to "calm and control" us or even to hurt us with Fluoride.  

Those fears currently do not seem to be based on any supportable reality.


Visit my Facebook page: Integrative Medical Solutions:

Visit Stemtech to learn more about organic phytonutrients and adult stem cell nutrition as well as about D-FUZE, which protects against cell phone, tablet and iPod RF emissions (EMF.)  More D-FUZE FAQs are available also.

Visit my Post about Cell Phone Dangers

To see what I've written about Stem Cells

Disclaimer:

·       PLEASE NOTE:  This is not meant to replace your Physician or other therapists and their advice. Please consult them for their opinions and further consideration. 

·       What is expressed here is purely my opinion, based on my experiences and the research I did for the benefit of my patients. 

·       It is meant to help people and therapists at all levels of expertise in the search for explanations. 

·       INTEGRATIVE MEDICAL SOLUTIONS will, I hope, help to advance the understanding of medical knowledge by contributing my perspective.





4 comments:

  1. Great to have a well researched and balanced understanding
    thanks Donald I think you have probably allayed many peoples' fears

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the debate on use of fluoride during wwII revolves around the use of it to affect mind control in, perhaps, higher quantities but also it wasn't a natural form but rather a petroleum byproduct, if I remember the research correctly. Today's fluoride, I believe, though used in far lesser quantities such as you've mentioned, is this same petroleum byproduct. I'll see if I can dig up some research I did on this year's ago and on you, if you'd like.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That's supposed to say "and pm you", not "on you"....!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think this How to remove Fluoride from water article will fully complement your article. PLease continue publishing helpful topics like this. Regards, from CWR.

    ReplyDelete