Facts About Fluoridation You Did Not Know

Facts About Fluoridation You Did Not Know

By Fluoride Action Newtwork, 2002

98% Of Western Europe Has Rejected Water Fluoridation. This includes Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. The predominant reason for Europe’s rejection is the belief that public drinking water is NOT the appropriate vehicle with which to deliver medication to a population.

Fluoride Is Not An Essential Nutrient, which means that no human disease (including dental decay) has ever been linked to a fluoride deficiency. (1)

The fluoride used to fluoridate water is an industrial waste product from the phosphate fertilizer industry. It is an unprocessed hazardous waste, contaminated with a number of toxins, particularly arsenic.

Fluoridation adds between 0.1 and 1.6 parts per billion (ppb) arsenic to drinking water, and therefore violates the EPA’s Maximum Contaminant Level Goal for arsenic – which is 0 ppb. (2)

Hydrofluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride, which are the chemicals used to fluoridate 91% of fluoridated water in the US, have never been tested for safety and effectiveness.

According to a November 16, 2000 letter from the EPA, “to answer your question on whether we have in our possession empirical scientific data on the effects of fluosilicic acid or sodium silicofluoride on health and behavior, the answer is no.”

Most dental authorities are now conceding that there is little, if any, benefit from swallowing fluoride, and that fluoride’s benefits (whatever they are) come from topical application.

When water fluoridation began 50 years ago, it was believed that fluoride needed to be ingested in order to be effective. This is NO longer the view of the dental establishment, which now generally concedes that fluoride’s benefits are derived primarily from topical application. (3)

According, for instance, to the US Centers for Disease Control, “Laboratory and epidemiologic research suggests that fluoride prevents dental caries predominately after eruption of the tooth into the mouth, and its actions primarily are topical for both adults and children.”

All fluoride products designed to be ingested (e.g. fluoride supplements) are available by prescription only. No fluoride products designed for ingestion have ever been approved as safe or effective by the US Food & Drug Administration. (4)

                      By Logical Extension, Fluoridated Water Can Appropriately

                           Be Classified As An Unapproved Prescription Drug.

The dental community concedes that fluoride is ineffective at preventing the most common type of dental decay – pit & fissures. Pit & fissure decay – which is the decay found in the crevices of the chewing surfaces – accounts for upwards of 85% of dental decay now experienced in the US. (5)

New evidence suggests that fluoridation is either unnecessary or doesn’t work. Cavities have declined at similarly impressive rates throughout the entire western, industrialized world over the past half century.

The largest dental survey ever conducted in the US found virtually no difference in dental decay between children living in fluoridated vs. unfluoridated areas.

The study, which was conducted by the National Institute Of Dental Research (NIDR), found that the average difference in tooth decay (0.6 tooth surfaces) between children living in fluoridated vs unfluoridated areas amounted to LESS than 0.5% of the 128 total tooth surfaces in a child’s mouth. (7)

Five peer-reviewed studies published in the last 2 years have found that dental decay DOES NOT increase when communities stop fluoridation. (8)

The rhetoric supporting fluoridation is increasingly centered around the notion that fluoridation benefits the neediest in society the most. This claim flies in the face of the experience of most US inner cities over the past 50 years.

Despite the fact that nearly all large US cities have been fluoridated for decades, dental decay is currently rampant in virtually all poor urban areas.

One of the major dental health problems experienced in poor communities is a debilitating condition known as “baby bottle tooth decay” which is also referred to as “early childhood caries.”

This condition, which results from excessive consumption of sweetened liquids at a young age, is not prevented by water fluoridation. (9) According to a study in Pediatric Nursing “Data from Head Start surveys show the prevalence of baby bottle tooth decay is about three times the national average among poor urban children, even in communities with a fluoridated water supply.”

Fluoride Is A Very Toxic Substance, which is why it is the active ingredient in a number of pesticides. Just 2 grams of fluoride is enough to kill an adult, and just 500 mg is enough to kill a child. (11) In the US, people have died, and many have become sick, when faltering fluoridation equipment has pumped excess fluoride into the water.

Poor nutrition exacerbates the toxic effects of fluoride exposure, which is a further reason why it’s wrong to target poor communities with fluoridation (as poor nutrition is more prevalent in low income communities).

According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, “Existing data indicate that subsets of the population may be unusually susceptible to the toxic effects of fluoride and its compounds. These populations include the elderly, people with deficiencies of calcium, magnesium and/or vitamin C, and people with cardiovascular and kidney problems.” (12)

Contaminated Food Chain – Many of the processed beverages and foods sold in the US contain elevated levels of fluoride due to the use of fluoridated water during manufacturing, and the presence of fluoride pesticides.

Total fluoride exposure has increased substantially since the early days of fluoridation. (13) When fluoridation first began, exposure to fluoride from sources other than fluoridated water, was minimal.

Today that is not the case.

People now receive fluoride from a whole host of sources, including pesticide residues, fluoridated dental products, mechanically deboned meat, fluoride air pollution, and processed foods & beverages prepared with fluoridated water (e.g. soda, juice, beer, cereal, etc).

It has now reached the point where most people receive the “optimal” 1 mg/day of fluoride (which fluoridated water was designed to deliver) without ever drinking a glass of fluoridated water.

Despite the increase in total fluoride exposure, the concentration of fluoride added to drinking water (0.7-1.2 mg/L) as prescribed by the US Government, is still the same as it was back in the 1940s. Due to the increase in total fluoride exposure, there has been a major increase in the rate of dental fluorosis found among American children. According to the US Government, approximately 1 in 3 children living in fluoridated areas have dental fluorosis on at least 2 teeth. (14)

Dental fluorosis is the first visible sign that fluoride has poisoned enzymes in the body.

Approximately half of the fluoride we ingest each day accumulates in our bodies, primarily in the bones, but also in soft tissues. (15)

High levels of naturally occurring fluoride causes a crippling bone disease known as skeletal fluorosis. According to UNICEF, skeletal fluorosis is endemic “in at least 25 countries across the globe” (16) with the problem particularly acute in India, China and other developing countries.

Skeletal fluorosis comes in varying degrees of severity depending on the level of exposure. The earliest symptoms are characterized by joint pain that is difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish from arthritis.

According to a review on fluoridation by Chemical & Engineering News: “Because some of the clinical symptoms mimic arthritis, the first two clinical phases of skeletal fluorosis could be easily misdiagnosed [as arthritis].” The World Health Organization states that “early cases [of skeletal fluorosis] may be misdiagnosed as rheumatoid or osteoarthritis.” (17)

It is estimated that approximately 40 million Americans suffer from arthritis, the most common type being osteoarthritis.

Fluoride stimulates abnormal bone development. Clinical trials published in the New England Journal of Medicine and Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (18) report that high dose fluoride treatment increases bone mass but that the newly formed bone is “structurally unsound” (19). Thus, instead of reducing hip fracture, the studies found that high doses of fluoride increase hip fracture.

There is concern that “low” doses of fluoride, taken over long periods of time (e.g. fluoridated water), may also increase the rate of hip fracture. Approximately 20 recent studies have investigated the relationship between fluoridated water and hip fracture, with approximately half of the studies finding an association. (20)

A 1995 study in the journal Neurtoxicology and Teratology, found that fluoride accumulated in the brain of rats and produced age-specific behavioral deficits typical of most neurotoxic agents. (21)

In the study, fluoride induced damage to the hippocampal region of the brain. Damage to the hippocampal region has been linked to hyperactivity and cognitive deficits. Based on the results, the lead author of the study, Dr. Phyllis Mullenix, has come out and advised against water fluoridation.

Five recent peer reviewed studies from China have found an association between elevated fluoride exposure and decreased IQs in children – an effect that would be expected based on Mullenix’s research. (22)

In the late 1990s, a British scientist discovered that fluoride accumulates to very high levels (avg = 9000 ppm) in the crystallized tissue of the human pineal gland.

A subsequent animal study found that fluoride interferes with the pineal gland’s production of melatonin, a hormone which helps regulate the onset of PUBERTY. In the study, animals dosed with fluoride had reduced levels of melatonin metabolites in their urine and had earlier onsets of puberty than the controls. (23)

Up until the 1950s, European doctors used fluoride to reduce the activity of the thyroid gland for people suffering from overactive thyroid (hyperthyroidism). (24) The daily dose of fluoride which people are now receiving in fluoridated communities (1.6 to 6.6 mg/day) (25) actually exceeds the dose of fluoride which was found to depress the thyroid gland (2.3 to 4.5 mg/day). (26)

Hypothyroidism (under-active thyroid) is currently one of the most common medical problems in the United States. Synthroid, the drug doctors prescribe to treat hypothyroidism, was the fourth most prescribed drug in the US in the year 2000. Symptoms of hypothyroidism include depression, fatigue, weight gain, muscle and joint pains, increased cholesterol levels, and heart disease.

A recent study published in the journal Brain Research found that 1 PPM fluoride in water facilitated the uptake of aluminum into the brain of rats, producing the type of brain tangles (amyloid deposits) that are associated with Alzheimer’s disease and other types of dementia. (27)

An epidemiological study published in the December 2000 issue of the Journal Neurotoxicology, found that fluoridated water was associated with elevated levels of lead in children’s blood. (28)

The study’s findings parallel the findings of an earlier study published in the September 1999 issue of the International Journal of Environmental Studies. (29) Lead in the blood is associated with a variety of neurological problems, including reduced intelligence, aggression and hyperactivity.

Dozens of laboratory studies have found that fluoride is a mutagen – a classification which frequently indicates that a substance is carcinogenic (i.e. that it causes cancer). (30) A cancer bioassay conducted by the National Toxicology Program found that rats dosed with fluoride had a statistically significant increase in bone tumors (osteosarcomas), which were not found among the controls.

The initial review of the study also reported that the fluoride-dosed rats had tumors of the thyroid, oral cavity and rare tumors of the liver; however these tumors were later downgraded under conspicuous and controversial circumstances. According to Dr. William Marcus, the Chief Toxicologist at the EPA’s Office of Drinking Water, the downgrading of the tumors was politically motivated and not scientifically defensible. (31)

A recent epidemiological study conducted by a scientist from the US Public Health Service found that female infertility was associated with elevated levels of fluoride ( >3ppm) in drinking water. The study concluded that more emphasis needs to be given to the effects on health from total fluoride exposure – not just exposure to fluoridated drinking water. (32)

In light of the recent research indicating health risks from low level fluoride exposure, the Union ofScientists and professionals at EPA headquarters has voted to oppose fluoridation (33) and has called upon Congress to issue a “national moratorium” on the fifty year old policy.

According to the Vice President of the Union, Dr. J. William Hirzy, “In summary, we hold that fluoridation is an unreasonable risk. That is, the toxicity of fluoride is so great and the purported benefits associated with it are so small – if there are any at all – that requiring every man, woman and child in America to ingest it borders on criminal behavior on the part of governments.”

After years of overlooking the problems with fluoride & fluoridation, the environmental community is finally beginning to address the issue. In September of 2001, the Sierra Club announced that:

There are now valid concerns regarding the potential adverse impact of fluoridation on the environment, wildlife, and human health. The Sierra Club therefore supports giving communities the option of rejecting mandatory fluoridation of their water supplies. To protect sensitive populations, and because safer strategies and methods for preventing tooth decay are now available, we recommend that these safer alternatives be made available and promoted.”

Please note: certain passages have been bolded and underlined for emphasis (not the author’s).


  1. Fluoride: Not an Essential Nutrient: National Research Council (1993). Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride. National Academy Press, Washington DC. See page 30.
  2. Arsenic Levels in Fluoridation Chemicals: Hazan, Stan (2000). Letter to Florida Department of Health from Stan Hazan, General Manager, Drinking Water Additives Certification Program, National Sanitation Foundation International. 24 April 2000. http://www.fluoridealert.org/NSF-Letter.pdf
  3. Fluoride’s Topical Vs. Systemic Effects:
  4. Burt, B.A. (1994). Letter. Fluoride, 27, 180-181.
  5. Carlos, J.P. (1983). Comments on Fluoride. J. Pedodontics. Winter, 135-136.
  6. CDC. (2001). Recommendations for Using Fluoride to Prevent and Control Dental Caries in the United States. Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Review. August 17, 50(RR14):1-42.
  7. CDC (1999). Achievements in Public Health, 1900-1999: Fluoridation of Drinking Water to Prevent Dental Caries. Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Review (MMWR), 48(41);933-940 October 22, 1999. http://www.cdc.gov/epo/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4841a1.htm
  8. Featherstone, J.D.B. (1987) The Mechanism of dental decay. Nutrition Today, May/June, 10.
  9. Featherstone J.D.B. (1999) Prevention and reversal of dental caries: role of low level fluoride. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 27:31-40.
  10. Featherstone, J.D.B. (2000). The Science and Practice of Caries Prevention. Journal of the American Dental Association. 131, 887-899.
  11. Fejerskov, O. et al (1981) Rational use of fluorides in caries prevention. Acta. Odontol. Scand., 241-249.
  12. Levine, R.S., (1976). The action of fluoride in caries prevention: a review of current concepts. Brit. Dent J140, 9-14.
  13. Locker, D. (1999). Benefits and Risks of Water Fluoridation. An Update of the 1996 Federal-                           Provincial Sub-committee Report. Prepared for Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.
  14. Limeback, H. (1999). A re-examination of the pre-eruptive and post-eruptive mechanism of the anti-caries effects of fluoride: is there any caries benefit from swallowing fluoride? Community. Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 27, 62-71.
  15. Margolis, H.C. and Moreno, E.C. (1990). Physicochemical Perspectives on the Cariostatic Mechanisms of Systemic and Topical Fluorides. J. Dent. Res 69 (Special Issue) 606-613.
  16. Fluoride Never Approved as Safe & Effective by FDA: Kelly, J.V. (2000). Letter to Senator Robert Smith, Chairman of Environment and Public Works Committee, U.S. Senate, August 14, 2000. (for text see http://www.fluoridealert.org/f-supplements.htm)
  17. Fluoride Ineffective at Preventing Pit & Fissure Decay:
  18. Dental study upsets the accepted wisdom. Science News. Vol. 125, No. 1. Jan.7, 1984.
  19. Gray, AS. (1987). Fluoridation: Time For A New Base Line? Journal of the Canadian Dental Association. No. 10.
  20. Loe, H. (1984). Hearings: Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives. Dr. Harald Loe, Director of the National Institute of Dental Research.
  21. Journal of the American Dental Association. (1984). Preserving the perfect tooth. Editorial. Vol. 108.
  22. Pinkham, JR, ed. (1999). Pediatric Dentistry Infancy Through Adolescence. 3rd Edition. WB Saunders Co.
  23. Public Health Reports. (1993). Toward Improving the Oral Health of Americans. Vol. 108, No. 6. Nov. – Dec.
  24. Cavities Declining throughout Western Industrialized World, Irrespective of Fluoridation:
    1. Colquhoun, J (1997) Why I changed my mind about Fluoridation. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 41, 29-44. http://www.fluoride-journal.com/98-31-2/312103.htm
    2. Diesendorf, M.(1986). The Mystery of Declining Tooth Decay. Nature, 322, 125-129.
    3. WHO (Online). WHO Oral Health Country/Area Profile Programme. Department of Noncommunicable Diseases Surveillance/Oral Health.
  25. NIDR’s National Survey on Dental Health (Largest Dental Survey Ever Conducted in US):
  26. Brunelle, J.A. and Carlos, J.P. (1990). Recent trends in dental caries in U.S. children and the effect of water fluoridation. J. Dent. Res 69, (Special edition), 723-727. (Read correspondence on this study).
  27. Hileman, B. (1989). New Studies Cast Doubt on Fluoridation Benefits. Chemical and Engineering News, 67 (19) May 8. http://www.fluoridealert.org/NIDR.htm
  28. Yiamouyiannis, J.A. (1990). Water Fluoridation and Tooth decay: Results from the 1986-87 National Survey of U.S. Schoolchildren. Fluoride, 23, 55-67. http://www.fluoridealert.org/DMFTs.htm
  29. Fluoridation Cessation Studies:
  30. Burt BA, Keels MA, Heller KE. (2000). The effects of a break in water fluoridation on the development of dental caries and fluorosis.J Dent ResFeb;79(2):761-9.
  31. Kunzel, W., Fischer, T., Lorenz R., Bruhmann, S. (2000). Decline in caries prevalence after the cessation of water fluoridation in former East Germany.Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 28(5): 382-389.
  32. Kunzel, W. and T. Fischer (2000). Caries prevalence after cessation of water fluoridation in La Salud, Cuba. Caries Res 34(1): 20-5.
  33. Maupome, G. et al. (2001). Patterns of dental caries following the cessation of water fluoridation.Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 29(1): 37-47.
  34. Seppa, L., Karkkaimen, S. and Hausen, H. (2000) Caries trends 1992-98 in two low-fluoride Finnish towns formerly with and without fluoride. Caries Res 34(6): 462-8.
  35. Fluoridation doesn’t Prevent Baby Bottle Tooth Decay:
  36. Barnes GP et al. Ethnicity, Location, Age, and Fluoridation Factors in Baby Bottle Tooth Decay and Caries Prevalence of Head Start Children. Public Health Reports; 107: 167-73, 1992.
  37. Von Burg MM et al. Baby Bottle Tooth Decay: A Concern for All Mothers. Pediatric Nursing; 21:515-519, 1995.
  38. Lack of Dentists Accepting Medicaid Patients: Guiden, M. (1990). Dental Health for kids moves to the forefront. State Health Notes 19(280). Forum for State Health Policy Leadership, National Conference of State Legislatures. July 6. (Cited in: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (U.S. DHHS) (2000).  Oral health in America: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Health. http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/sgr/execsumm.htm)
  39.  Fluoride Acute Toxicity Data:
  40. Hodge, H.C. and Smith, F.A. (1965). Fluorine Chemistry Vol. IV. Academic Press, New York.
  41. Gleason, M.N., Gosselin, R.E., Hodge, H.C., & Smith, R.P. (1969). Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products. 3rd Ed. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore.
  42. Physicians Desk Reference (1995). Pedia-flor Drops. pp. 2114.
  43. Nutritional Deficiences Exacerbate Fluoride’s Toxicity: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (1993). Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluoride, and Fluorine (F). U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Public Health Service. ATSDR/TP-91/17.
  44. Total Fluoride Exposure on the Increase:
  45. Environmental Fluoride (1977) National Research Council of Canada (NRCC No.16081) Associate Committee On Scientific Criteria For Environmental Quality.
  46. DHHS (1991). Review of Fluoride: Benefits and Risks, Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Fluoride of the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs. Department of Health and Human Services, USA.
  47. 29.1% of US Children in Fluoridated Areas have Dental Fluorosis on 2 teeth: Heller KE et al (1997). Dental Caries and Dental Fluorosis at Varying Water Fluoride Concentrations. J of Pub Health Dent, 57;No. 3, 136-143.
  48. An Average of 50% of all Fluoride Ingested Accumulates in the Body National Research Council (1993). Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride. National Academy Press, Washington DC. See page 131.
  49. UNICEF’s Report on Fluoride: UNICEF Water, Environment & Sanitation. Fluoride in water: An overview.Waterfront December 1999 http://www.unicef.org/programme/wes/info/fluor.htm
  50. Chemical & Engineering News Review of Fluoridation: Hileman, B. (1988). Fluoridation of water. Questions about health risks and benefits remain after more than 40 years. Chemical and Engineering News. August 1, 1988, 26-42. http://www.fluoridealert.org/hileman.htm
  51. Clinical Trials Examining the Effectiveness of Fluoride Therapy for the treatment of Osteoporosis:
  52. Hedlund LR, Gallagher JC. (1989). Increased incidence of hip fracture in osteoporotic women treated with sodium fluoride. J Bone Miner Res Apr;4(2):223-5.
  53. Riggs, B.L. et al (1990). Effect of Fluoride treatment on the Fracture Rates in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis. N. Eng. J. Med., 322, 802-809.
  54. New England Journal of Medicine Editorial Discussing Fluoride & Bone: Lindsay, R. (1990). Fluoride and Bone – Quantity Versus Quality. Editorial. New England Journal of Medicine. Vol. 322. No. 12. March 22.20) Water Fluoride/Hip Fracture Studies:
    1. Cauley, J., P. Murphy, et al. (1995). “Effects of fluoridated drinking water on bone mass and fractures: the study of osteoporotic fractures.” J Bone Min Res 10(7): 1076-86.
    2. Cooper, C., C. Wickham, et al. (1991). “Water fluoridation and hip fracture.” JAMA 266: 513-514 (letter, a reanalysis of data presented in 1990 paper).
    3. Cooper, C., C. Wickham, et al. (1990). “Water fluoride concentration and fracture of the proximal femur.” J Epidemiol Community Health 44: 17-19.
    4. Danielson, C., J. L. Lyon, et al. (1992). “Hip fractures and fluoridation in Utah’s elderly population.”Journal of the American Medical Association 268(6): 746-748.
    5. Feskanich D., et al. (1998). Use of toenail fluoride levels as an indicator for the risk of hip and forearm fractures in women. Epidemiology 9(4): 412-6.
    6. Hegmann, K.T. et al (2000) the Effects of Fluoridation on Degenerative Joint Disease (DJD) and Hip Fractures.Abstract #71, of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Society For Epidemiological research, June 15-17, 2000. Published in a Supplement of Am. J. Epid.
    7. Hillier, S., C. Copper, et al. (2000). “Fluoride in drinking water and risk of hip fracture in the UK: a case control study.” The Lancet 335: 265-269.
    8. Jacobsen, S., J. Goldberg, et al. (1992). “The association between water fluoridation and hip fracture among white women and men aged 65 years and older; a national ecologic study.”Annals of Epidemiology 2: 617-626.
    9. Jacobsen, S., J. Goldberg, et al. (1990). “Regional variation in the incidence of hip fracture: US white women aged 65 years and olders.” J Am Med Assoc 264(4): 500-2.
    10. Jacobsen, S.J. et al (1993). Hip Fracture Incidence Before and After the Fluoridation of the Public Water Supply, Rochester, Minnesota. American Journal of Public Health, 83, 743-745.
    11. Jacqmin-Gadda, H. (1995). “Fluorine concentration in drinking water and fractures in the elderly.”JAMA 273: 775-776 (letter).
    12.  Jacqmin-Gadda, H., A. Fourrier, et al. (1998). “Risk factors for fractures in the elderly.”Epidemiology 9(4): 417-423. (An elaboration of the 1995 study referred to in the JAMA letter).
    13. Karagas,M.R. et al (1996). “Patterns of Fracture among the United States Elderly: Geographic and Fluoride Effects”. Ann. Epidemiol. 6 (3), 209-216.
    14. Keller, C. (1991) Fluorides in drinking water. Unpublished results. Discussed in Gordon, S.L. and Corbin, S.B,(1992) Summary of Workshop on Drinking Water Fluoride Influence on Hip Fracture on Bone Health. Osteoporosis Int. 2, 109-117.
    15. Kurttio, P., N. Gustavsson, et al. (1999). “Exposure to natural fluoride in well water and hip fracture: A cohort analysis in Finland.” American Journal of Epidemiology 150(8): 817-824.
    16. Lehmann R. et al (1998). Drinking Water Fluoridation: Bone Mineral Density and Hip Fracture Incidence. Bone, 22, 273-278.
    17. Li Y, et al. (2001). Effect of long-term exposure to fluoride in drinking water on risks of bone fractures. J Bone Miner Res.16(5):932-9.
    18. May, D.S. and Wilson, M.G. Hip fractures in relation to water fluoridation: an ecologic analysis. Unpublished data, discussed in Gordon, S.L. and Corbin S.B.,(1992), Summary of Workshop on Drinking Water Fluoride Inflruenbce on Hip Fracture on Bone Health. Osteoporosis Int. 2, 109-117.
    19. Phipps, K. R. (2000). Community water fluoridation, bone mineral density and fractures: prospective study of effects in older women. British Medical Journal, 321: 860-4.
    20. Sowers, M., M. Clark, et al. (1991). “A prospective study of bone mineral content and fracture in communities with differential fluoride exposure.” American Journal of Epidemiology 133: 649-660.
    21. Suarez-Almazor, M., G. Flowerdew, et al. (1993). “The fluoridation of drinking water and hip fracture hospitalization rates in two Canadian communities.” Am J Public Health 83: 689-693.
  55. Neurotoxic Effects of Sodium Fluoride: Mullenix, P. et al (1995).Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats Neurotoxicology and Teratology, 17, 169-177.
  56. Chinese Studies Concerning Relationship between Fluoride & Decreased IQ:
  57. Li, X.S., (1995). Effect of Fluoride Exposure on Intelligence in Children. Fluoride, 28:4, 189-192
  58. Li Y, Li X, Wei S. (1994). [Effect of excessive fluoride intake on mental work capacity of children and a preliminary study of its mechanism] Hua Hsi I Ko Ta Hsueh Hsueh Pao Jun; 25(2):188-91.
  59. Lin Fa-Fu; et al (1991). The relationship of a low-iodine and high-fluoride environment to subclinical cretinism in Xinjiang. Iodine Deficiency Disorder Newsletter. Vol. 7. No. 3.
  60. Lu, Y. et al (2000). Effect of high-fluoride water on intelligence of children. Fluoride, 33, 74-78.
  61. Zhao, L.B. et al (1996). Effect of high-fluoride water supply on children’s intelligence. Fluoride, 29, 190-192.
  62. Fluoride & Pineal Gland:
  63. Luke, J. (1997). The Effect of Fluoride on the Physiology of the Pineal Gland. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Surrey, Guildord.
  64. Luke, J. (2001). Fluoride Deposition in the Aged Human Pineal Gland. Caries Res. 35:125-128.
  65. European Doctors Used Fluoride to Treat Hyperthyroidism:
  66. techer, P, et al. (1960). The Merck Index of Chemicals and Drugs. Merck & Co., Inc, Rathway NJ.
  67. Waldbott, G.L., Burgstahler, A.W. and McKinney, H.L. Fluoridation: The Great Dilemma. Coronado Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas, 1978.
  68. US Government Data on Total Fluoride Intake (1.6-6.6 mg/day) in Fluoridated Communities: DHHS (1991). Review of Fluoride: Benefits and Risks, Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Fluoride of the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs. Department of Health and Human Services, USA.
  69. Study Discussing Dosage of Fluoride (2.3-4.5 mg/day) Found to Depress Thyroid Gland: Galletti, P. & Joyet, G. (1958). Effect of Fluorine on Thyroidal Iodine Metabolism in Hyperthyroidism. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology; 18:1102-1110 http://www.fluoridealert.org/galletti.htm
  70. Brain Research Study Reporting that Fluoride Administers the Uptake of Aluminum into the Brain: Varner, J.A. et al (1998). “Chronic Administration of Aluminum-Fluoride and Sodium-Fluoride to Rats in Drinking Water: Alterations in Neuronal and Cerebrovascular Integrity” Brain Research, 784, 284-298.
  71. Epidemiological Studies Reporting Association Between Fluoridated Water and Elevated Blood Lead Levels in Children: Masters, R. et al. (2000). Association of Silicofluoride Treated Water with Elevated Blood Lead. Neurotoxicology. 21:6, 1091-1099.
  72. Another Epidemiological Study Reporting Association Between Fluoridated Water and Elevated Blood Lead Levels in Children: Masters, R.D. and Coplan, M. (1999). “Water treatment with Silicofluorides and Lead Toxicity” International Journal of Environmental Studies. September.
  73. Fluoride is a Mutagen: Department of Health and Human Services (1991). Review of fluoride benefits and risks. Appendix H. H1-H6.
  74. EPA’s Dr. William Marcus Discussing his Objections to the NTP’s Downgrading of the Tumors:
  75. Marcus, W. (1990). Memorandum from Dr. William Marcus, to Alan B. Hais, Acting Director Criteria & Standards Division ODW, US EPA, DATED MAY 1, 1990, and subsequent memos. These can be viewed on the web at http://www.fluoridealert.org/marcus.htm
  76. Marcus, W. (1995). Radio Interview with Dr. Gary Null. March 10. See www.fluoridealert.org/ifin-19.htm
  77. Study Finding Decreased Female Fertility in Areas with Elevated Fluoride in the Water: Freni SC. (1994). Exposure to high fluoride concentrations in drinking water is associated with decreased birth rates. J Toxicology and Environmental Health 42:109-121.
  78. Statement from EPA Headquarters Union on Why they Oppose Fluoridation: Hirzy, J.W. (1999). Why the EPA’s Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation. Press release from National Treasury Employees Union, May 1, 1999. (For text see http://www.fluoridealert.org/HP-Epa.htm )