Re: Be intelligent about fluoride, by Richard Scratch, April 11.
Great care is taken by the Windsor Utilities Commission to ensure that we have access to clean, safe water to drink and bathe in. We boast a stateof-the-art ozone water treatment system. http://www.windsorstar.com/health/Stop+adding+drinking+water/6507389/story.htmlI learned that hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFS), known to us as "fluoride," that's being added to our water is a highly toxic industrial waste product. Why are we going to the trouble of making our water clean only to dump this substance into it? I have also learned damage to teeth called "dental fluorosis" is caused by too much fluoride. We now know that HFS causes health problems that can affect every part of the body - and the smaller or more frail the body is, the higher the risk for damage to thyroid, kidneys, bones, central nervous system and more. People deserve to be warned about the dangers of any substance that is being added to their water so they can decide whether or not to ingest it. Recently, New Hampshire's House of Representatives voted in favour of a bill that would mandate warning labels on water bills in fluoridated communities that would read: "Fluoridated. According to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, if your child under the age of six months is exclusively consuming formula reconstituted with fluoridated water, there may be an increased chance of dental fluorosis. Consult your child's health care provider for more information." Windsor Utilities Commission might consider doing the same or, better yet, why not just stop adding HFS to our drinking water? ANTONIUS HEYNSBROEK, Tecumseh © Copyright (c) The Windsor Star Read more: http://www.windsorstar.com/health/Stop+adding+drinking+water/6507389/story.html#ixzz23vAQJZGb You will never have to worry about plastic contaminates... and it's on SALE..
http://www.fluoridealert.org/50-reasons.htm
Fluoridation is the practice of adding a fluoride compound to the public drinking water supply ostensibly for the purpose of fighting tooth decay. The levels used range from 0.6 to 1.2 milligrams of fluoride ion per liter (or parts per million, ppm). The practice began in the U.S. in 1945 and was endorsed by the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) in 1950. Very few countries have adopted this practice to any significant extent. Only eight countries in the world have more than 50% of their populations drinking artificially fluoridated water (Australia, Colombia, Ireland, Israel, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, and the U.S.). In Europe, only Ireland (with 73% of the population fluoridated), the U.K. (10%) and Spain (10%) fluoridate some of their water supplies. In the U.S., about 70% of the population is drinking fluoridated water – that is approximately 200 million people and about half the number of people drinking artificially fluoridated water worldwide. Some countries have areas with high natural fluoride levels in the water. These include India, China and parts of Africa. In these countries measures are being taken to remove the fluoride because of the health problems that fluoride can cause. By Paul Connett, PhD and other members of the Fluoride Action Network (including James Beck, MD, PhD, Michael Connett, JD, Hardy Limeback, DDS, PhD, David McRae and Spedding Micklem, D.Phil.) http://www.jpands.org/vol10no2/kauffman.pdf
Water Fluoridation: a Review of Recent Research and Actions 2005:There have been five lawsuits resulting in judgments against fluoridation: two in Pennsylvania and one each in Indiana, Ohio, and Missouri. None were decided on the merits of fluoridation, only on legal technicalities. page34 A group of chemicals found in household plastics and medical supplies is linked to higher rates of diabetes in women – up to double the rate for women with the highest levels, according to new research led by Harvard scientists. Blacks and Mexican Americans and women living in poverty are exposed to the highest levels of some of these compounds, called phthalates. “It’s extremely likely that phthalates and other chemical contaminants will turn out to be a big part of the obesity and diabetes epidemic, but at this point we really don't know how these chemicals are interacting with each other, or with the human body,” said Richard Stahlhut, a University of Rochester scientist who co-authored the study. By Crystal Gammon Environmental Health News July 30, 2012 A group of chemicals found in household plastics and medical supplies is linked to higher rates of diabetes in women – up to double the rate for women with the highest levels, according to new research led by Harvard scientists. Blacks and Mexican Americans and women living in poverty are exposed to the highest levels of some of these compounds, called phthalates, the scientists reported. Whether these chemicals actually cause diabetes in women, however, remains unclear. “These findings are important clues, but it’s only a first step,” said Richard Stahlhut, an environmental health researcher at the University of Rochester Medical Center who co-authored the study. “It’s extremely likely that phthalates and other chemical contaminants will turn out to be a big part of the obesity and diabetes epidemic, but at this point we really don't know how these chemicals are interacting with each other, or with the human body.” Phthalates make plastics such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) more flexible, and they are added to some cosmetics, perfumes and other personal care products to stabilize colors and fragrances. A wide variety of household goods rely on phthalates, including vinyl flooring, adhesives and shower curtains. More than 75 percent of Americans have phthalates in their urine. Blacks have a 77 percent higher rate and Hispanics have a 66 percent higher rate of developing diabetes than whites.
University of Arizona scientists are calling for a larger study after they became the first in the world to measure a potentially cancer-causing solvent in breast milk.
They studied 20 samples of breast milk from 20 women. Dr. Paloma Beamer, of the UA College of Public Health, says seven of the 20 samples contained low levels of trichloroethylene, or TCE. Beamer says there is nothing to compare that to since, to her knowledge, no one has ever done these measurements before. She says there also is no standard for breast milk contamination. The breast milk samples were taken two years ago. The findings were published last week. Beamer says, since the the first tests, more Nogales water samples have been tested and found to have no TCE contamination. Beamer and others involved in the study are urging mothers to continue breastfeeding their babies because of the tremendous health benefits to both mother and baby. Beamer says the next step is to secure funding for a major nationwide study of TCE contamination in breast milk. The goal is to see how prevalent it is. Scientists say they can then better understand what levels are safe and establish standards. Beamer says TCE is one of the most common contaminants in our environment. Copyright 2012 Tucson News Now. All rights reserved. Posted: Jul 30, 2012 7:11 PM CDTUpdated: Aug 06, 2012 7:11 PM CDTBy Barbara Grijalva Parents know intuitively that babies in the womb are more vulnerable to the effects of industrial chemicals than adults. A pregnant woman may avoid using hair dye and nail polish, pumping gas, or painting the nursery, for example, to protect her baby. This intuition is backed by science that has unfolded primarily over the past two decades. In 1993 the National Academy of Sciences enumerated, in a Congressionally mandated study, the primary factors that contribute to children's unique vulnerability to the harmful effects of chemicals (NAS 1993):
A recent review by government scientists of the "critical windows" of vulnerability reveals an urgent need for public health policies that recognize childhood sensitivity (Selevan et al. 2000). Many of these windows of vulnerability are found in the early months of human pregnancies, when cells are multiplying and differentiating into specific tissues and organs. Exposures during these times can lead to permanent damage. But a child's vulnerability continues long beyond early pregnancy: the central nervous system, immune, reproductive and endocrine systems, for example, continue to mature even after birth (NAS 1993, Makri et al. 2004). As a whole, these windows facilitate more pronounced risks and effects for chemical exposures in childhood than adulthood. For example, a mother's exposure to dioxins, mercury, or certain pesticides during pregnancy could measurably harm her baby, while affecting her own health perhaps not at all. In a decades-long mercury poisoning disaster in Minamata, Japan that began in the 1950s, some babies born to women who ate mercury-polluted seafood died within days of birth, while their mothers were free of symptoms. Autopsies revealed that in adults, mercury induced lesions that were concentrated in a few areas of the brain. In the fetus, however, mercury spawned lesions over nearly the entire brain cortex. In the decades following Minamata, scientists have developed a much fuller understanding of children's vulnerability to chemicals, discovering links between a host of health problems — including asthma, childhood cancer, and brain damage — and such common contaminants as solvents, pesticides, PCBs, and lead (Trasande and Landrigan, 2004). A recent National Academy of Sciences study suggests that environmental factors contribute to at least 28 percent of childhood developmental disabilities (NAS 2000a). The latest research investigates not only relationships between disease and exposures, but the root causes of chemically-induced disease with in uteroorigins. This research pinpoints traits of a fetus that contribute to vulnerability: low levels of some chemical-binding proteins in the blood, immature excretion pathways, and an immature blood brain barrier, for instance, which combine to increase the transfer of chemicals from the blood to the aptly named "target organs" that may ultimately bear the harm. The risks to a baby derive not only from his or her physical makeup, but also from the very behaviors and events that prepare the baby for life outside the womb. Beginning in the fifth month of pregnancy, babies regularly swallow and breathe, building muscles essential for survival after birth. Through these actions, the lungs and the gut are filled, again and again, with the same amniotic fluid that collects the baby's urine. Pollutants like plasticizers and pesticides excreted in urine accumulate in this fluid and are cycled right back into the baby's body through the mouth and nose. And in the third trimester the mother's body dissolves stored, maternal fat, shunting it to the baby through the blood, but with this fat the child also receives the persistent pollutants clinging to it, like PCB's, flame retardants, and dioxins. Faced with such diverse exposures and armed with a body ill-equipped to rid itself of chemicals, it is small wonder that a developing baby so often proves vulnerable to chemical exposures (Makri et al. 2004). Some studies are beginning to measure the sensitivity of a child relative to an adult for suffering impacts from chemical exposures. For instance, studies of mutagens called polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) — target chemicals examined in this study and waste products from burning gasoline and garbage — found that even though levels of PAHs are thought to be lower in the fetus than the mother (Srivastava et al. 1986), the fetus bears more cancer-inducing DNA damage from the exposures (Whyatt et al. 2001). But health and environmental officials have been slow to act on the wealth of studies on childhood vulnerability produced in the past 20 years. After nearly a decade of review, the Environmental Protection Agency updated its cancer risk guidelines in 2003 to explicitly acknowledge the importance of childhood exposures. The agency concluded, after a review of 23 studies of early life exposures to cancer-causing chemicals, that carcinogens average 10 times the potency for babies than adults, and that some chemicals are up to 65 times more powerful (EPA 2005a). EPA's new policy, though, targets only cancer. It leaves EPA with no formal policy regarding childrens' vulnerability to chemicals that damage the immune system, the brain, or the hormone system, kidney, liver, lungs, thyroid or a host of other potential targets, even though plenty of evidence says that children face higher risks for harm. Tests show 287 industrial chemicals in 10 newborn babies
Pollutants include consumer product ingredients, banned industrial chemicals and pesticides, and waste by products. Sources and uses of chemicals in newborn blood Chemical family nameTotal number of chemicals found in 10 newborns (range in individual babies) Common consumer product chemicals (and their breakdown products) 47 chemicals (23 - 38) Pesticides, actively used in U.S.Organochlorine pesticides (OCs) 7 chemicals (2 - 6) Stain and grease resistant coatings for food wrap, carpet, furniture (Teflon, Scotchgard, Stainmaster...)Perfluorochemicals (PFCs) 8 chemicals (4 - 8) Fire retardants in TVs, computers, furniturePolybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) 32 chemicals (13 - 29) Chemicals banned or severely restricted in the U.S. (and their breakdown products) 212 chemicals (111 - 185) Pesticides, phased out of use in U.S.Organochlorine pesticides (OCs)14 chemicals (7 - 14) Stain and grease resistant coatings for food wrap, carpet, furniture (pre-2000 Scotchgard)Perfluorochemicals (PFCs)1 chemicals (1 - 1) Electrical insulatorsPolychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)147 chemicals (65 - 134 )Broad use industrial chemicals - flame retardants, pesticides, electrical insultatorsPolychlorinated naphthalenes (PCNs) 50 chemicals (22 - 40) Waste byproducts28 chemicals (6 - 21) Garbage incineration and plastic production wastesPolychlorinated and Polybrominated dibenzo dioxins and furans (PCDD/F and PBDD/F) 18 chemicals (5 - 13) Car emissions and other fossil fuel combustionPolynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) 10 chemicals (1 - 10) Power plants (coal burning) Methylmercury 1 chemicals (1 - 1) All chemicals found 287 chemicals (154 - 231) Source: Environmental Working Group analysis of tests of 10 umbilical cord blood samples conducted by AXYS Analytical Services (Sydney, BC) and Flett Research Ltd. (Winnipeg, MB). Chemical exposures in the womb or during infancy can be dramatically more harmful than exposures later in life. Substantial scientific evidence demonstrates that children face amplified risks from their body burden of pollution; the findings are particularly strong for many of the chemicals found in this study, including mercury, PCBs and dioxins. Children's vulnerability derives from both rapid development and incomplete defense systems:
U.S. industries manufacture and import approximately 75,000 chemicals, 3,000 of them at over a million pounds per year. Health officials do not know how many of these chemicals pollute fetal blood and what the health consequences of in utero exposures may be. Had we tested for a broader array of chemicals, we would almost certainly have detected far more than 287. But testing umbilical cord blood for industrial chemicals is technically challenging. Chemical manufacturers are not required to divulge to the public or government health officials methods to detect their chemicals in humans. Few labs are equipped with the machines and expertise to run the tests or the funding to develop the methods. Laboratories have yet to develop methods to test human tissues for the vast majority of chemicals on the market, and the few tests that labs are able to conduct are expensive. Laboratory costs for the cord blood analyses reported here were $10,000 per sample. A developing baby depends on adults for protection, nutrition, and, ultimately, survival. As a society we have a responsibility to ensure that babies do not enter this world pre-polluted, with 200 industrial chemicals in their blood. Decades-old bans on a handful of chemicals like PCBs, lead gas additives, DDT and other pesticides have led to significant declines in people's blood levels of these pollutants. But good news like this is hard to find for other chemicals. The Toxic Substances Control Act, the 1976 federal law meant to ensure the safety of commercial chemicals, essentially deemed 63,000 existing chemicals "safe as used" the day the law was passed, through mandated, en masseapproval for use with no safety scrutiny. It forces the government to approve new chemicals within 90 days of a company's application at an average pace of seven per day. It has not been improved for nearly 30 years — longer than any other major environmental or public health statute — and does nothing to reduce or ensure the safety of exposure to pollution in the womb. Because the Toxic Substances Control Act fails to mandate safety studies, the government has initiated a number of voluntary programs to gather more information about chemicals, most notably the high production volume (HPV) chemical screening program. But these efforts have been largely ineffective at reducing human exposures to chemicals. They are no substitute for a clear statutory requirement to protect children from the toxic effects of chemical exposure. In light of the findings in this study and a substantial body of supporting science on the toxicity of early life exposures to industrial chemicals, we strongly urge that federal laws and policies be reformed to ensure that children are protected from chemicals, and that to the maximum extent possible, exposures to industrial chemicals before birth be eliminated. The sooner society takes action, the sooner we can reduce or end pollution in the womb. |