WHO Ignores Science, Questions - Recommends Toxic Fluoride

Categories

Health

Legislation

When the World Health Organization in its most recent issue of Drinking Water Guidelines recommends that fluoride should never be missing from our water, is it really doing the bidding of the Sugar Industry?

Certainly dental caries is promoted by our consumption of sugar and sweets, including soft drinks, and the economic interests behind these junk foods are enormous. Fluoride provides a convenient "red herring" to put our attention on a supposed "deficiency". What we should do is examine what junk we are putting into our mouths calling it food.

And certainly fluoride is not something to swallow voluntarily, it has been linked with aggression, lower IQ scores, cancer, obesity, irritable bowel syndrome and it seems to interfere with thyroid hormones.
Fluoride is systemically toxic and seems to be an ingredient of many of the chemical industry's products, from pesticides to medicines.

Joe Thornton has looked at the composition of the WHO fluoride panel and it appears that the recommendations are authored by a clique of well known fluoride promoters, rather than a wide selection of experts in health and biochemistry, as one would have expected.

Paul Connett of the Fluoride Action Network introduces Thornton's research with the following words.

Today I received this tour de force from Joe Thornton, an Irish citizen who resides in Germany. He rips into the World Health Organization (WHO) for their fluoride section in their new report on Drinking Water Guidelines. He decries their (unsupportable) use of the word "nutrient" to describe fluoride and he exposes the fact that three of the four experts (Drs. Michael Lennon, Denis O'Mullane and Helen Whelton) who drew up the guidelines for fluoride have a hugely pro-fluoridation bias. This bias is exposed in excruciating detail...

You will need a lot of stamina to get through this tightly documented "treatise" but this is a gold mine of information for those who have an interest in the abuse of the public trust by health and regulatory bodies throughout the world. If you cannot get through it all in one reading, file it away in a safe place ready for the next official who tells you that fluoridation must be OK because it is supported by the World Health Organization.

For the brave ones among you, here is Joe Thornton's treatise showing us the entrance to this particular rabbit hole...

- - -

The WHO Drinking Water Guidelines and Fluoride
"Two legs good, four legs bad"

The World Health Organization (WHO) has drawn up new Drinking Water Guidelines, including guidelines on the level of fluoride.

The WHO record on promoting fluoride is documented in, among other places, Barry Groves' book "Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves To Death" (Newleaf, 2001). To put it bluntly, the WHO has been part of the fluoridation fraud since 1958. The current revision of drinking water guidelines shows that nothing has improved in the WHO as regards fluoride. There is a serious absence of honesty, scientific standards, and concern about human health.

We should remind ourselves that... "There is no evidence that fluoride is an essential nutrient for humans." (Physicians' Desk Reference)

In 1979 the U.S. FDA required the deletion of all government references previously classifying fluoride as "essential or probably essential" (Federal Register, March 16, 1979, pg. 16006).

In other words, nobody needs fluoride -- ever. So, given that fluoride is a deadly cumulative poison AND is one of the world's most troublesome industrial pollutants, you would expect that the WHO would be warning us off fluoride. But you'd be wrong.

WHO's BIG MISTAKE #1:

The WHO guidelines name fluoride as a "nutrient mineral" and "essential" for human health. But fluoride is not a nutrient of any sort. Not only is it not essential, it should be avoided at all costs. The WHO's error (or deception) reinforces the widespread belief in the concept of "fluoride-deficient water", a belief that seems to have infected all the WHO people involved.

Many of WHO's web pages name fluoride as "a nutrient" or "essential". For example:

"Chromium, copper, fluoride, iodine, manganese, molybdenum, and selenium are essential elements in human nutrition..." (pdf file here)

And in this report we find the statement that fluoride is "known or suspected to be essential for humans." And: "The optimal drinking water concentration of fluoride for dental health is generally between 0.5 to 1.0 mg/litre and depends upon volume of consumption and uptake and exposure from other sources. These values are based on epidemiological studies conducted over the past 70 years in communities in many countries with natural and added fluoride in their drinking water. In this concentration range the maximum caries preventative effect is achieved while minimizing the levels of dental fluorosis."

It needs to be said that there is NO scientific basis for such an "optimal" concentration of fluoride. Those so-called epidemiological studies of the last 70 years do not stand up to scrutiny. (See, for example, this critique)

The WHO document goes on:

"Where the aggregate risk factors for dental caries are low (and are remaining low) consuming low fluoride water would probably have little or no impact on dental caries, but to guard against possible net loss of fluoride from the skeleton, the group felt that consideration should be given to maintaining a baseline level of 0.1 to 0.3 mg/l."

Now that is dangerous lunacy. Really, it's just a false argument for universal water fluoridation. Yes, UNIVERSAL. This is the WHO getting ready to instruct governments all over the world as follows: "Any public water supplies with fluoride levels below 0.1 mg/l (ranging up to 0.3 for cooler climates) need to be fluoridated with artificial fluoride." (That means MOST water supplies in the world.)

Don't have any doubt about it: This is a global project to dose every human being with unmeasured amounts of toxic waste fluoride (while dispersing vast amounts of it in the environment). See Christopher Bryson's exposé "The Fluoride Deception" (Seven Stories Press), published last year.

In its nutrition guidelines, the WHO gives an "Adequate Intake" (AI) figure as its recommendation for fluoride. (Note the prior error of including fluoride in "nutrition guidelines".)

Q. How do they get the AI figure?
A. "When there is insufficient information available to calculate an EAR (Estimated Average Requirement), an AI value based on experimentally derived intake levels or approximations of customary mean nutrient intakes by group or groups of healthy subjects, is used instead of the traditional RDA (Recommended Dietary Allowance)."

The WHO report goes on:

"AIs are provided instead of RDAs when there is insufficient scientific information to estimate requirements. The nutrient intake of breast-fed infants is usually utilised to set AIs for infants from 0 to 6 months of age, and for infants 7 to 12 months of age the average intake from human milk plus the additional intake provided by complementary foods is utilised (WHO/FAO/IAEA 1996; IOM 2002; SCF 1993)."

Somehow, in the case of fluoride, this practice of utilizing "the nutrient intake of breast-fed infants" was forgotten about. An infant fed on formula made up with fluoridated water gets about 100 times as much fluoride as a breast-fed infant. The WHO's range of AI figures seems to be chosen to fit artificially fluoridated water.

The WHO's redefining of fluoride as a "nutrient" is truly a "two-legs-good, four-legs-bad" rewriting of reality. By coincidence, the great fluoridation project was being launched in the U.S. just as "Animal Farm" was first published in 1945.

The difference between PRE-fluoridation statements from the U.S. medical establishment and POST-fluoridation statements is startling. For example, in 1943, the editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association stated: "Fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, probably because of their capacity to modify the metabolism of cells by changing the permeability of the cell membrane and by inhibiting certain enzyme systems. The exact mechanism of such actions is obscure." -- JAMA, Sept 18, 1943, Editorial. And in 1944, the editorial in the Journal of the American Dental Association stated that "...drinking water containing as little as 1.2 to 3 ppm of fluorine will cause such developmental disturbances in bones as osteosclerosis, spondylosis and osteopetrosis, as well as goiter." -- JADA, October 1944, Editorial

The WHO defines Guideline Values for chemicals in drinking water according to the following definition:

"A guideline value represents the concentration of a chemical constituent that does not result in any significant risk to the health of the consumer over a lifetime of consumption."
See: this document

In the new Guidelines, the guideline value for fluoride in drinking water remains at 1.5 mg/litre (th