Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Harveys of Halifax

Experts changing minds on fluoride

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 30 September 2009
Gajoubert
France
Dr Hardy Limeback, associate professor and head of preventive dentistry, University of Toronto who was previously for water fluoridation in 1999 changed his views after reading the available scientific papers.

He gives a long list of reasons why
he is now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water – and they are the very same reasons thousands of non-qualified opposers have been giving for many years, having read the scientific data for themselves.

There is an increasing number of highly–qualified experts who, after looking at the scientific information for themselves and questioning the "safe and effective" assurances given by a few governments, are now against water fluoridation.

The first reason Dr Limeback gives for his change of mind and opposition is the use of hydrofluosilicic acid. It is very costly to dispose of safely and is industrial toxic waste from smokestack scrubbers of the phosphate fertiliser industry being used to fluoridate water supplies.

This toxic waste has not been tested for safety for consumption as a medicine.

Dr Limeback also points out that there are so many exposures to fluoride-containing products nowadays through prescribed drugs, pesticides, soft drinks as well as tea, toothpaste, tobacco and countless other products most people will already now have too much exposure to fluoride without it being added to tap water.

My observations are fluoride is added to tap water for medical treatment only and is not to make water safer to drink as with chlorine, so it is a medication or drug.

I think it is still illegal to medicate anyone against their wishes which is what happens to many when fluoride is added to tap water.

Just about every open vote from the public on water fluoridation in the UK has ended with an overwhelming majority against, often over 75 per cent saying no.

Edward Priestley



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 30 September 2009 9:33 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Halifax
 
Prev
1
Next
1

jwillie6,

Lafayette, Louisiana, USA 30/09/2009 13:04:57
Dr. Limeback is truly an expert on fluoridation. In addition to being a dentist and Head, Preventive Dentistry, University of Toronto, he has a PhD degree in biochemistry. Go to (www.fluoridealert.org) .and read his letter entitled "Why I am now officially opposed to adding fluoride to drinking water"
He was the principal research advisor to the Canadian Dental Asociation for over 10 years in promoting fluoridation. His letter is an apology to other dentists and the public.
Over 140 Research studies listed, including:
Increased risk of bone cancer -- 13 studies
Lead, arsenic, radium contaminants causing toxic water -- 10 studies
Link with fluoride and cancer -- 12
Fluoride causes birth defects -- 5
Fluoride affects the immune systems -- 12
Fluoride is neurotoxic (brain, nerves, lowering IQ) -- 11
Etc.
Also see the petition signed by over 2600 professionals opposing fluoridation.
2

Barry Von Leotard,

30/09/2009 14:02:19
Anti-flouride-bot jwillie6 thanks for that.
3

ooooarrrrr,

30/09/2009 15:25:18
Or for a different view see
http://www.bfsweb.org/facts/sof_effects/f_sof_effects.htm
4

jwillie6,

30/09/2009 16:50:36
Interestingly the following article by a dentist published in the main dental association journal came out yesterday and again shows that fluoridaation does not improve tooth dacay rates. Notice how many $ millions New York is spending for nothing but decreased health.
"JADA Study Proves Fluoridation is Money down the Drain"
(http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/jada-study-proves-fluoridation-is-money-down-the-drain-62572357.html)
NEW YORK, Sept. 29, 2009 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --
Children's cavity rates are similar whether water is fluoridated or not, according to data published in the July 2009 Journal of the American Dental Association by dentist J.V. Kumar of the NY State Health Department(1), reports NYSCOF.
In 2008, New York City spent approximately $24 million on water fluoridation ($5 million on fluoride chemicals)(1a). In 2010, NYC's fluoride chemicals will cost $9 million(1b).
5

Rod Munch,

30/09/2009 19:55:46
What worries me most about this is poster #1's point that flouride can lower IQ.

This is Halifax. Can we get any stupider (sic)?
6

Titus Groan,

Herb Rush 30/09/2009 20:20:05
Why go to the bother and expense of adding fluoride to the water supply when a bit of dental hygiene and sensible eating will do the trick?
7

Peter Avinou,

01/10/2009 12:55:48
So why didn't this expert have the sense to read up first?
Do these people realise the damage they do to serious research on these matters when they publish their unfounded opposing opinions?
8

Rob Reynolds,

01/10/2009 16:41:04
Poster 6. Yes! That's the point! You see, this has been kicked off by our wonderful Labour Govt. which has changed the law, Water Act 2000, I think. Health authorities now have responsibility for dental health, they must look at ways to improve it in young (note use of bureaucratic terms "health inequalities"). The easiest way is to fluoridate, according to current Govt. thinking.

Of course, a Dept. of Health van could go round mixy and ovenden, several white coated individuals jumping out, grabbing any kid, removing their sweets and giving them a 5 min tooth brush up. This would be cheaper and more effective in the long run. That plus a huge tax hike in the sugar industry. But sugar cane is soaring in price on the markets anyway. Enjoy your mars bars while you can!!!
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.