34 Comments

Seems either too crazy to be true or so crazy it has to be true but I read that flouride is so toxic an industrial by-product that it can’t be disposed of in landfills instead it is put into the drinking water. Apparently the flouride is toxic industrial waste from China...what could go wrong☠️

Expand full comment

BS theres naturally occurring fluoride in water all over the USA. Ever check the amount of naturally occurring arsenic in your water?

Expand full comment

Very few sources of municipal drinking water in North America naturally contain the high level of .7-1.0 mg/L that fluoridation imposes, and none contain the type of silico-fluoridation chemicals used to increase our fluoride (and cadmium, arsenic and lead) intake from tap water.

Expand full comment

So why add more?

Expand full comment

Yep. Just had my well tested. We have .24 mg/L of naturally occuring fluoride. Arsenic is also present but in very minute amounts. No lead, mercury, or aluminum.

Expand full comment

By international convention the Fluoride waste from Phosphate Fertilizer works, Nuclear Weapons factories ad Alumina Refineries ad Aluminium Smelters can't be dumped at Sea.

Expand full comment

Reducing is NOT the answer. Eliminate it entirely.

Expand full comment

Yes - I totally agree. We don't consent to mass medication. They only do it to dispose of the highly toxic waste anyway. Clean water is our right! That is what government is supposed to ensure. Why have government if they don't do what they're meant to do?

Expand full comment

They’ve been in bed with the big money people for way too long.

Expand full comment

Next, aluminum flocculants.

Expand full comment

Get that halogen out of our drinking water win!

Expand full comment

How about that other halogen chloride???

Expand full comment

One is less than two ; )

Expand full comment

Easy to remove from municipal tap water with point of use ion exchange and carbon filters to minimize the acknowledged long term consumption risks such as bladder cancer and toxicity from chloroform and other disinfection byproducts. Easy to reduce the amount of chlorine disinfection chemicals needed at the municipal treatment plant through pre-filtration and flocculation, and disinfection methods such as membrane filters and UV light. Fluoride is very difficult to filter out from tap water, plays NO role in disinfection, increases the amount of lead and arsenic in water from the tap, and the best solution is to not add fluoridation chemicals to public water at all.

Expand full comment

Totally agree. Look at all the energy people go through to purify the water of harmful toxins that are put into it deliberately!

Expand full comment

seems like such a no-brainer to so many people. but zoom out just a wee bit and ponder that a group of moms had to sue a govt agency to attempt to remove a harmful chemical from water that's put there intentionally. put. there. intentionally.

Expand full comment

The moms will demand accountability. Hurt our kids...

Expand full comment

question Dr Jack: will you be attending the Rescue The Republic rally this coming Sunday??

Expand full comment

Ca laugh porn ia is run by the MENTALLY ILL. REVOLT TO SOLVE.

Expand full comment

Sad. Lots of poor kids from awful homes gonna be in pain from cavities they can’t afford to fix. Good job Moms! Hope they will fundraise for their local public health clinic to fund all the dentistry this creates.

Expand full comment

The remedy for cavities has ALWAYS been better nutrition, starting with feeding pregnant women what the baby needs to grow teeth and bones - not industrial scrubber waste fluoride in the tap water. Nutritional supplementation can reverse the early stage of cavities.

Expand full comment

Fluoride tablets can beprovided instead of poisoning us all. Fluoride only works toipically anyway ane what they put into our water is not fluoride but fluorosilicic acid a well known as a chemical “byproduct” of the aluminum, steel, cement, and phosphate industries. You really want children to be drinking this toxin?

Expand full comment

Those lies are 80 years old. Its a well established fact that fluoride is a toxin. Toxins do not belong inside mouths or bodies of anyone.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the great news!

Expand full comment

We really shouldn't have to fight to STOP being poisoned though!

Expand full comment

It should be eliminated entirely. The fluoride added to water is not even calcium or sodium fluoride, it's hydrofluorosilicilic acid. It could burn a hole in concrete.

Expand full comment

While good it’s not good enough.

It shouldn’t be added at all!!!

Expand full comment

Yay! Thank you for this! I've put this latest development regarding fluoridated water into a timeline of verifiable facts and research dating back to 1956, which can help to make clear the importance and implications of this ruling.

https://birdseyeviewperspective.substack.com/p/after-three-generations-of-americans

Expand full comment
Sep 26·edited Sep 26

It's a mild win. Unless it's removed entirely, we run the risk of those deparments marginally reducing the amounts with the potential for it to still cause harm. Are those entities adding it to the water subject to ongoing inspections to prove it will remain at acceptable levels? Who will police it? Will they police it?

Expand full comment

For more on the history & dangers of fluoride added to our public water, see The Fluoride Deception:

(& visit the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) - https://fluoridealert.org/ for info on how to work against the fluoride added to your public water supplies. There is power in numbers armed w/fluoride facts).

> See: The Fluoride Deception : BY Christopher Bryson Publication date 2006

https://archive.org/details/christopher-bryson-the-fluoride-deception-history-of-water-flouridation-and-why-

As the description to the book The Fluoride Deception explains:

"With the narrative punch of Jonathan Harr’s A Civil Action and the commitment to environmental truth-telling of Erin Brockovich, The Fluoride Deception documents a powerful connection between big corporations, the U.S. military, and the historic reassurances of fluoride safety provided by the nation’s public health establishment. The Fluoride Deception reads like a thriller, but one supported by two hundred pages of source notes, years of investigative reporting, scores of scientist interviews, and archival research in places such as the newly opened files of the Manhattan Project and the Atomic Energy Commission. The book is nothing less than an exhumation of one of the great secret narratives of the industrial era: how a grim workplace poison and the most damaging environmental pollutant of the cold war was added to our drinking water and toothpaste."

> The Fluoride Deception Continues as US Govt Ignores Fluoride's Role as an Endocrine Disruptor (see attached pdf) - https://www.calledoutbelievers.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/The-Fluoride-Deception.pdf

Your govt is deliberately adding dangerous & deadly chemicals to your water... & doesn't care. :/

Expand full comment

Also, as mentioned by this comment below by SaHiB 20 hrs ago: "Next, aluminum flocculants."

To follow up w/SaHIB's suggestion: There is extensive evidence that aluminum production/manufacturing is very hazardous to health [JUST LIKE FLUOEIDE] & yet the product itself is still allowed as an addition to our water supply (supposedly to help "clean our water") & the EPA & other govt agencies tell us they haven't tested the aluminum additives for carcinogenity.

So, although manufacturing aluminum products for water IS MOST DEFINITELY CARCINOGENIC!), our health agencies aren't studying the ingestion of it. WHY not test for aluminum added to our water? Well, the DUMMIES Book of Water Additives say if you don't test for it, you can then claim ignorance.

The study cited directly below even says this directly >

"There are no published reports of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling of aluminium. A few models have been developed that incorporate the reported results of toxicokinetic studies with aluminium."

See, for example, a 2009 study of aluminium products & lack of overall testing for health problems:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2782734/

> Journal Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2009 Nov 25.

Published in final edited form as: J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2007; 10(Suppl 1): 1–269.

doi: 10.1080/10937400701597766 - PMCID: PMC2782734 - NIHMSID: NIHMS33559

PMID: 18085482

HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ALUMINIUM, ALUMINIUM OXIDE, AND ALUMINIUM HYDROXIDE

Daniel Krewski,1,2 Robert A Yokel,3 Evert Nieboer,4 David Borchelt,5 Joshua Cohen,6 Jean Harry,7 Sam Kacew,2,8 Joan Lindsay,9 Amal M Mahfouz,10 and Virginie Rondeau11

Author information Article notes Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer

EXCERPT:

Legislative controls

Classification and labelling

The carcinogenic risk from aluminium and its compounds has not been evaluated by IARC. However, IARC has deemed that that there is sufficient evidence to show that certain exposures occurring during the production of aluminium cause cancer in humans; therefore “aluminium production” has been classified as carcinogenic to humans (Group I) (IARC, 1987). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not classified aluminium for human carcinogenicity (ATSDR, 1999; IRIS, 1999) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has designated aluminium as a group A4 substance (“not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity”) (ACGIH, 1996; ATSDR, 1999).

Classification and labelling requirements in the European Union (EU) are based on inherent hazardous properties of a substance, and are laid down in Directive 67/548 (EEC, 1967) and later amendments and adaptations. The requirement covers physico-chemical properties, human health, and environmental toxicity. The classification is based on the results of specific prescribed tests, generally test guidelines developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Discussions regarding the classifications with respect to considerations for either health or environment are conducted in EU expert groups which evaluate the test data and propose the classification. This proposed classification is set out in Directives from the Commission. The classification of aluminium compounds is summarized in Identity, Physical and Chemical Properties, Analytical Methods, Classification.

All of this is to say that our govt is completely negligent when regulating our water & keeping all of us safe from deadly, carcinogenic additives. No excuses. Hold them accountable now.

Expand full comment

Watch the brief documentary: "The Fluoride Deception - An Interview with Christopher Bryson" https://www.bitchute.com/video/5Oveuc0aH9Uf (length 28+ minutes)

Quote: Fluoride science is corporate science.

Expand full comment