|
A.D.D. CONNECTION
In particular, a large number
of children diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) have
been shown to have dangerously high levels of lead, manganese,
or cadmium in bodily tissues, noted the study.
This information was of special
interest to Bill Siegmund, a microbiologist, certified water
specialist, and managing director of Pure Water Works in Traverse
City. Siegmund's son -- who was raised in Grand Rapids, the first
U.S. city to be fluoridated in the 1950's -- has been diagnosed
with ADD. In fact, Grand Rapids has an extremely high incidence
of ADD, noted Siegmund.
"I have heard numbers
like the highest percentage in the United States," he said.
"What they discovered is that heavy metals in the blood
stream during the formative years of prenatal to puberty will
prevent you from making the neurological function to transfer
messages from short-term to long-term memory. That, in essence,
is what ADD is.
"It's not the silicofluorides
that are causing ADD, but the fact that they cause you to absorb
more lead," Siegmund adds. "So even though lead exists
in a very small amount in a municipal system, you absorb more
of it in the presence of fluoride."
HEAVY METAL OVERLOAD
He added that this neurological
glitch occurs at any age, not just childhood. He also noted that
heavy metals accumulate in a person's body over a lifetime. "It
is difficult or impossible to get rid of them," said Siegmund.
"So a small exposure over a period of time is what the danger
is."
A source at the Grand Rapids-Lake
Michigan Filtration facility, who did not wish to be identified,
noted that they recently switched from powdered silicofluorides
to a liquid form called hydrofluosilicic acid (HFS).
"They're both poisonous,"
said the source, "but I think they wanted to get away from
the powder, because even with the dust collection system, you
did have some of it in the atmosphere throughout the plant...it
wasn't hazardous to the people, but I think they wanted to get
away from that."
But hydrofluosilicic acid,
although greatly diluted, has it's own problems, he noted. "The
quality of the piping and the molds and everything have to meet
the standards for an acid like that. You've got the hazards there,
too, but you don't have anything in the atmosphere, unless you
have a leak or something." (See sidebar)
IN DEFENSE OF FLUORIDE
John Wierenga, plant supervisor
for the Grand Rapids-Lake Michigan Filtration facility, agreed
that hydrofluosilicic acid is preferable to the powder they used
to use, "simply because the powder presented a dust hazard
to the employees," he said. "But basically, whatever
compound you use, you feed it into the water to derive the same
amount of fluoride."
Wierenga believes there is
no difference between food-grade sodium fluoride and industrial-grade
hydrofluosilicic acid. "The purity of both would be very
high," he said. "We're only feeding one part per million,
so if there is an impurity there, it would have to be exceedingly
high to be measurable."
The Grand Rapids plant receives
their hydrofluosilicic acid in 4000-gallon tanker shipments from
Florida. "The air pressure just puts it in our tank, and
that's all there is to it," said Wierenga. "It's a
sealed system."
He added that, among other
things, fluoride is used in many insecticides. "Like so
many things, it's all a question of dose. In the small amounts
that we take it in for public health, it's healthful and without
side effects. But if that amount is exceeded, then there can
be side effects... an enormous number of accusations have been
made about fluoride. I think, almost without exception, they've
been proven false. The anti-fluoridationists today are still
very active, perhaps because of their opposition to what some
would term 'enforced medication.' But, of course, put in the
water, [fluoride] is widely available and widely beneficial."
MANY STUDIES
Still, even Wierenga has his
doubts about fluoride, even though he works around it every day
and has a chemistry background. He cited an article written several
years ago for "Chemical and Engineering News," a widely
disseminated publication for professional chemists, in which
the author raised a number of legitimate concerns about fluoride.
"I thought the article
was well researched, and I guess I've always held the belief
that if you tried to get fluoride in the water today, you would
have great difficulty doing so," said Wierenga.
For one thing, things weren't
studied in 1945 like they are today, he noted. "The dentists
knew it was good for the teeth and in the water it went. But
how much study was done at that time on other health effects?
If there were any, they were very few. Since then, there have
been enormous numbers of studies.
Wierenga was not aware of the
recent study linking fluoride with Attention Deficit Disorder.
50-YEAR BLUNDER?
If all this isn't enough, here
are a few more facts about fluoride from an article entitled
"Fluoridation: a 50-Year-Old Blunder and Cover-Up,"
by David C. Kennedy, D.D.S., published by the Preventive Dental
Health Association (PDHA), a non-profit educational corporation:
1) Fluoride has been linked
to cancer. In 1956, Dr. John Chaffey, a professor of clinical
pediatrics at the College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia
University, noted cortical defects in the bone X-rays of 13.5
percent of the children living in fluoridated Newburgh, compared
to only 7.5 percent in the neighboring non-fluoridated Kingston.
Studies have now confirmed a dramatic increase in bone cancer
in young males exposed to fluoride during growth of the bones,
and a 5 percent increase in all types of cancers in fluoridated
communities.
2) Studies have shown that
fluoride in the drinking water adversely affects fertility rates
in women. A review of animal studies shows that fluoride affects
fertility in most other animal species, as well.
3) According to the National
Research Council, fluorosis, a disease characterized by brown
and white spots on the |
|
Drink up...
not Hydrofluosilicic acid, the chemical agent most used for water
fluoridation in the U.S., is the most corrosive chemical agent
known to man. It is derived from toxic gases produced in the
manufacture of phosphoric acid and phosphate fertilizers. It
contains lead, mercury, arsenic, and high concentrations of radionucleides.
Even bystanders who witnessed
a 1994 tanker truck accident which spilled 4,500 gallons of industrial
grade hydrofluosilicic acid near Deltona, Florida, were close
to death, according to Orlando Sentinel reporter Bo Poertner,
an eyewitness to the accident.
"We began to worry when
an emergency service officer introduced himself and declined
to shake Mike's hand," said Poertner. "We knew we had
been exposed to a dangerous chemical; after that we began to
feel contaminated. A towing service worker reminded me the next
day, 'You don't know how close to death you came.'"
TOXIC BYPRODUCTS
Because the industrial grade
fluosilicic acid is a toxic waste byproduct recovered from chimney
pollution scrubbers ("scrubber liquor"), the volume
of contaminants is profoundly influenced by the method of manufacture
and the quality of raw materials used.
A co-product from phosphate
fertilizer manufacture is yellow-cake uranium, a radioactive
substance used in the manufacture of nuclear weapons and the
nuclear power industry. The wastes (fluosilicic acid) from the
manufacture of phosphate fertilizers are also contaminated with
radium and are among the most concentrated radioactive wastes
produced from natural materials. These radioactive wastes are
referred to as naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM),
and the EPA has no regulations for NORM waste disposal.
The manufacturers of fluosilicic
acid do not routinely monitor for levels of uranium contaminating
the acid. No testing is done for NORM levels in Florida where
much of the fluosilicic acid used to fluoridate municipal water
supplies is produced.
The EPA's position on the use
of industrial grade fluosilicic acid for the fluoridation of
municipal water supplies is that it is the ideal solution to
the long-standing dilemma of disposing of the hazardous waste
by-product produced from the manufacture of phosphate fertilizers.
They contend that by recovering fluosilicic acid, water and air
pollution are minimized and water utilities are afforded a low-cost
source of fluoride.
COSTLY MISTAKE
Are you wondering why food
grade fluoride isn't used in the water fluoridation process?
The bottom line, of course. Although it would ensure purity and
consistency, the cost factors would be prohibitive.
Another issue is that fluoride,
heavy metals and insoluble contaminants contained in chemically
treated water are concentrated with cooking (heating). There
are no required or recommended tests to determine the cumulative
contaminant levels ingested daily from chemically treated water.
The EPA bases the "maximum contaminant levels" for
the average amount of water ingested (drunk by an individual)
in liters per kilogram of body weight (not to exceed a concentration
of 4.0 milligrams per liter). It does not account for incidental
sources like foods, processed or cooked, or soft drinks made
with chemically treated water.
And, although the EPA/National
Research Council cites many "safety and effectiveness"
studies in their 1993 publication, "The Health Effects of
Ingested Fluoride," they never state what grades of fluoride
products were used for the clinical studies. There are industrial,
food, and pharmaceutical grades of fluoride, and the results
of those studies would depend greatly upon the grade of chemicals
used.
Source: "Water A Toxic
Dump?" by George Glasser, printed in the December, 1994,
Sarasota ECO Report. |