As posted on TIP, an article by Anthony Gucciardi, ‘NaturalSociety‘, discusses new additional evidence of the toxicity of fluoride compounds often added to domestic water supplies. Supposedly added for dental health reasons, the study links sodium fluoride to cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death worldwide.
Groundbreaking new research has linked sodium fluoride to cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death worldwide. Researchers found that fluoride consumption directly stimulates the hardening of your arteries, a condition known as atherosclerosis that is highly correlated with the #1 killer. Sodium fluoride is currently added to the water supply of many cities worldwide, despite extreme opposition from health professionals and previous studies linking it to decreased IQand infertility.
In their research, scientists examined the relationship between fluoride intake and the hardening (calcification) of the arteries. Studying more than 60 patients, the researchers found a significant correlation between fluoride consumption and the calcification of your arteries. Published in the January edition of the journal Nuclear Medicine Communications, the research highlights the fact that mass fluoride exposure may be to blame for the cardiovascular disease epidemic that takes more lives each year than cancer. In 2008, cardiovascular killed 17 million people.
According to the authors of the study:“The coronary fluoride uptake value in patients with cardiovascular events was significantly higher than in patients without cardiovascular events.”
Amazingly, this is not the first report to come out on the dangers of water fluoridation, however the United States government along with other nations have allowed for the continued fluoridation of the public water supply despite these key findings. In fact, the U.S. government has even gone on record stating that a reduction in water fluoridation needs to occur following the results of a massive study that found water fluoridation affected cognitive function to the point of lowering the IQ of children. It turns out that the announcement was little more than a public relations stunt to curtail the massive wave of activism that followed the findings.
Makes one wonder what is really going on when there is sufficient evidence for many countries to ban the fluoridation of drinking water, yet other governments and organizations persist in poisoning the public, apparently deliberately.
Source article linked here.
Related articles
- (“Sodium fluoride is currently added to the water supply of many cities worldwide, despite extreme opposition… “) ~ Fluoride Linked to #1 Cause of Death in New Research (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
- Can Fluoride Calcify Your Arteries? (truthsupport.wordpress.com)
- Water Fluoridation War: Government Admits Dangers, Experts Speak Out (tipggita32.wordpress.com)
- Flouride accumulates in Pineal gland (thebovine.wordpress.com)
- (Corrected) Action Alert: Pro-fluoride fanatics pushing Pinellas Park, Fla., commission to reinstate water fluoridation (mybetter4you.wordpress.com)
- Fluoride: They’ve Known the Dangers All Along (ldpaszli.org)
The GOLDEN RULE 
What most people don’t understand is that the combination of natural fluoride found in food products like black tea and artificial fluoride found in our water supplies means that most people ingest 5+ parts per million of fluoride per day.
The growing body of litterateur that supports this finding is astonishing. One peer review study that comes to mind was from Valdez-Jimenez, et al. who published an article in the Neurologia Journal (June 2011). They found that the prolonged ingestion of fluoride may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system. They also concluded that fluoride can be toxic by ingesting one part per million (ppm), and the effects are not immediate, as they can take 20 years or more to become evident.
In most countries, the amount of fluoride added to drinking water is around 4 parts per million.
Those of us who are exposed to fluoridated drinking water probably get around 5+ parts per million of fluoride everyday!!!
Welcome, Andrew. Your contribution is very much appreciated.
Your website is a great adjunct to this site.
Your Globalist theme is right on! My readers and I will gain much useful information.
The ‘FilipinoCupid’ ad is distracting but in reasonably good taste, so I will still include your blog on my World Issues links.
[Those of us that are no longer young, can dream 🙂 ]
Come on people, this study was NOT about water fluoridation at all nor did it say fluoride stimulates arteriosclerosis, rather in this study the radioisotope f-18 (note NOT the sodium fluoride used in water) was injected into patients because it it used to look for abnormalities in the bone (as it binds to calcium) normally signally possible cancer, in this case however the researchers thought they could uses f-18 as a tool in the future to predict heart disease risk by imaging the calcium build up. They were investigating this possibility by examining how well the F-18 bound to to the calcium deposits. And it turns out it works well, f-18 may in fact be useful to image arteriosclerosis and predict risk. But the study did NOT , and i cant stress this enough, again, NOT show that fluoride causes arteriosclerosis. It was a study about how to image arteriosclerosis with a radioisotope.
In fact the are numerous studies showing that properly appropriate fluoride consumption is associated with REDUCED RISK OF HEART DISEASE through reduced dental infects (bacteria in the blood from bad teeth has been shown to cause heart problems). Visit my blog for further explanation and links to those studies.
http://skepticalvegan.wordpress.com/
and Andrew, Valdez-Jimenez research is all about areas of the world with excessively high levels of NATURAL FLUORIDE, many many times the suggested limits. But if you read is actual paper he clearly concludes that the current recommendation of .7 ppm (NOT 4) is safe and beneficial. Just one more example of people not bothering to read the original study and rather jumping to the conclusion that fits their preconceived beliefs.
Re the post referenced study: Thanks for your comments.
They indicate that some overreaction and a degree of misinformation has occurred.
Nevertheless it is fair to leave the article stand, together with your comments, given that the study you refer to has this conclusion – “CONCLUSION: sodium [¹⁸F]fluoride PET/CT might be useful in the evaluation of the atherosclerotic process in major arteries, including coronary arteries. An increased fluoride uptake in coronary arteries may be associated with an increased cardiovascular risk. (my bold emphasis)
Also its title is “Association of vascular fluoride uptake with vascular calcification and coronary artery disease.”
Re Andrew’s comment: I will offer him the chance to respond.
Repeating, your comments are appreciated. To have posts go unchallenged might mean they are not read at all, or that they are above criticism. The former, disappointing to me, the latter, surprising.
Hi Ken and skepticalvegan,
There is way too much to cover in this debate, however I will respond to two quotes from skepticalvegan.
1) “In fact there are numerous studies showing that properly appropriate fluoride consumption is associated with REDUCED RISK OF HEART DISEASE through reduced dental infects (bacteria in the blood from bad teeth has been shown to cause heart problems)”
A: Your assumption, as stated as fact, is that the “controlled” ingestion of fluoride will reduce heart disease. Although there may be valid arguments that in a “CONTROLLED” environment, ingesting the perfect amount of fluoride may achieve reduced gum disease and other oral health issues that can result in heart disease. In the real world, we are exposed to fluoride from both human induced and naturally occurring fluoride everyday.
These dental effects can be simply eliminated by a diet change and therefore we don’t need our water to be medicated to achieve the same result.
2) “and Andrew, Valdez-Jimenez research is all about areas of the world with excessively high levels of NATURAL FLUORIDE, many many times the suggested limits. But if you read is actual paper he clearly concludes that the current recommendation of .7 ppm (NOT 4) is safe and beneficial. Just one more example of people not bothering to read the original study and rather jumping to the conclusion that fits their preconceived beliefs.”
A: Firstly, I never quoted the recommended figure from Valdez-Jimenez. The “4” I was quoting was a representation of the average fluoride levels many fluoridated catchments contain. The average levels of fluoride in water catchments is generally way to high and above .7ppm. In fact, Valdez-Jimenez recommend fluoride levels of 1ppm as being excessive.
Now, add the total fluoride from water catchments plus the fluoride from coffee, soups, beer, soft drink, bottled water (yes, some bottled water contains fluoride), processed cereals, processed juice, tea, wine, cigarettes and you have DAILY excessive consumption of fluoride
Also, Valdez-Jimenez claim that it can take 20 years or more for the effects of fluoride to become evident.
Thanks Andrew.
Pingback: e-Prescribe.biz