Widespread Contaminants in Drinking Water Across U.S.

Protecting public health shouldn’t be this hard. When it comes to chemical safety, Congress should shift the burden of proof from regulators to manufacturers. A recent survey conducted by researchers at the U.S. Geographic Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found traces of 18 unregulated chemicals in drinking water from more than one third of U.S. water utilities. Of the 21 total chemicals found, researchers discovered among them 11 perfluorinated chemicals, an herbicide, two solvents, caffeine, an antibacterial chemical, a metal and an antidepressant. 

Preliminary findings were presented by scientists at an annual toxicology conference held by the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry last month in Nashville.

Only 91 contaminants are regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act, yet more than 80,000 chemicals are used within the United States, according to EPA estimates. Government and independent scientists have scrutinized thousands of those chemicals in recent decades, and identified hundreds associated with a risk of cancer and other diseases at small concentrations in drinking water.

Regulated chemicals such as fluoride have been added to drinking water supplies for decades without any regard to long-term health. The fluoride added to 90% of drinking water is hydrofluoric acid which is a compound of fluorine that is a chemical byproduct of aluminum, steel, cement, phosphate, and nuclear weapons manufacturing.

According to a study, 50 chemicals capable of interfering with hormones is permitted in packaging in the United States and the European Union.

The American Chemistry Council significantly ramped up its lobbying efforts in 2012, spending more than double its total for any quarter in recent history.

Federal researchers took samples from 25 U.S. utilities from around the nation who voluntarily participated in the study, providing samples of treated and untreated water. Disturbingly, 18 of the chemicals found are not regulated under the Safe Water Drinking Act, meaning utility companies are not required to treat, limit, or even monitor for their presence.

Millions of Americans have been exposed since 2004 to drinking water that did not meet at least one commonly used government health guideline intended to help protect people from cancer or serious disease.

“The good news is the concentrations are generally pretty low,” said USGS research hydrologist Dana Kolpin, PhD. to Environmental Health News. “But,” he continued “there’s still the unknown. Are there long-term consequences of low-level exposure to these chemicals?”

While there is a paucity of data on some of the contaminants, regulated chemicals such as atrazine, metolachlor, triclosan found in drinking water samples have been demonstrably linked to serious human and environmental health problems. Atrazine, for example, is used nationwide to kill broadleaf and grassy weeds, primarily in corn crops. It has been shown to be harmful to humans, mammals, and amphibians even when the amount used is less than the government allows. Atrazine is also associated with infertility, low birth weight, and abnormal infant development in humans. The chemical’s use is widespread, but for agriculture its use in concentrated in the Midwest farmbelt.

There are 700 new chemicals introduced into commerce each year in the United States alone. Many of these chemicals induce cancer and other diseases in the human body, yet every year there are more disease-causing chemicals carelessly approved to further pollute our environment and water supplies.

In addition to atrazine, triclosan, caffeine, metolachlor, perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and nine other perfluorinated compounds, which are used in a variety of industrial processes including production of nonstick or stain resistant products, were found in the drinking water supply. 251 chemicals, bacteria, viruses, and microbes measured were also detected in drinking water of more than a third of the 25 utilities while 113 were found less than a third of the utilities.

This study represents one of the few that documents how common emerging contaminants are in drinking water. Only four of the chemicals detected --the metal strontium, the herbicide metolachlor, PFOS and PFOA-- are now on EPA’s list of chemicals under consideration for inclusion in drinking water standards. They plan to finalize their decision for at least five contaminants on the list sometime next year.

Drinking tap water contaminated with PFOA is a serious health risk. The highest measured levels of PFOA in human blood in the US, other than factory exposures, are in people who have consumed PFOA contaminated tap water in West Virginia and Ohio. These people had PFOA levels in their blood 100 times higher than the levels found in the water, and far higher than the average person in the US.

PFOA is linked to developmental toxicity, immunotoxicity, alterations in the hormonal levels, metabolic disturbances and an elevated risk of cancer.

“We’re hoping through this work the EPA will do a much more intensive contaminant candidate list and develop new methods and requirements for drinking water plants,” said USGS scientist Edward Furlong toEnvironmental Health News.

Unfortunately, regulations that protect U.S. waterways from chemical contamination, including contamination from pesticides, have been attacked by industry groups and Congress. Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), pesticide users who spray over waterways must have a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. However, all that is required is to simply let authorities know what is sprayed and when it is sprayed, so that the public may know what chemicals are used in their waterways. There is no system of enforcement in place to prevent the pollution.

Source: PreventDisease

4 ways to remove fluoride from tap water

Natural Cures Not Medicine

Image: infowars.com

Fluoride has a dubious history starting with the mass fluoridation of people under Nazi rule. In recent years, there has been a push to remove fluoride from the tap water in the US, behind most European countries which have already removed the poisonous chemical from their water supplies.

Most politicians erroneously support fluoridation due to heavy lobbying in favor of the chemical, but more and more activists and consumers are making a stand for their water supply. It may only be a few years until we totally eradicate this twisted fluoridation scheme, but here is one way to remove fluoride and 99.9% of all other contaminants from your tap water: Distillation.

Once you are aware of the negative impact of fluoride on your health—and especially if you live in an area where the water is fluoridated—you will have to decide what to do about it. To complicate matters, fluoride is absorbed through the skin, and by inhalation. Showering and bathing in fluoridated water is also a problem. Fluoride is actually more dangerous when absorbed through the skin and/or lungs because it enters the bloodstream more easily, bypassing the gut where it binds with minerals from food.  When it is not feasible to remove the fluoride from your entire water supply, limiting time in the shower or bath and reducing the temperature of the water helps minimize the amount of fluoride absorbed.

To top it all off, fluoride is difficult to remove from water. Most water filter sales literature avoids the subject. When buying a water filter, you may be comforted by reading that the system you are purchasing removes 95 to 99% of contaminants, but if it does not specifically state that it removes fluoride, you can bet it doesn’t. Fluoride is a very small ion (atomic number 9). It cannot be “filtered” out of water.  At this time, fluoride removal is limited to four main methods discussed below.

How do I get the fluoride out of my water?

1 . Distillation
Distillation is capable of removing just about anything (except volatile compounds) from water.  If you have a distiller, you can remove fluoride. The obvious drawback to distillation is that the process is time and energy consumptive. Distillation also leaves the resulting water empty and lifeless. If you use distilled water you need to add minerals (salts) back to the water. (Read about salt and full-spectrum living water).  You should also consider structuring and energetically enhancing distilled water (returning the life force) using any of the methods in Chapters 11 and 12 of Dancing with Water. (Read about water’s liquid crystalline structure).

Here's a video from our previous post about distilling water to remove fluoride from tap water:


2.  Reverse Osmosis
Reverse osmosis (RO) represents a reverse of normal osmotic processes. It relies on pressure and a semi-permeable membrane to remove contaminants from water. RO can remove between 90 and 95% of fluoride (depending on the efficiency of the system and depending on how well the system is maintained). Contaminants are trapped by the RO membrane and flushed away in the waste water. The process requires between 2 and 4 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of RO water (depending on the quality of the water and the efficiency of the RO unit). Source water with an abundance of contaminants (including hard water) can reduce the efficiency of an RO system and it can shorten the life of the membrane.

Similar to distillation, RO has a good track record for removing almost everything from water. Quality RO systems include pre-filters to remove VOCs (volatile organic compounds), heavy metals, hard water minerals, and other contaminants that reduce the life of RO membranes. And similar to distillation, RO leaves water empty and lifeless. The addition of salts and the re-introduction of life force are necessary to bring RO water back to energetic compatibility with the human body.

3.  Activated alumina
Fluoride is strongly attracted to activated alumina (corundum/aluminum oxide) which has a large surface area with a huge array of tunnel-like pores. For this reason, activated alumina is the most commonly used fluoride removal media today. When used properly, it can remove up to 98% of the fluoride in water while also removing arsenic. The challenges with activated alumina are many. First of all, since the process works by ion exchange, the water must remain in contact with the media for an extended period of time—long enough for the fluoride to be adsorbed by the media. When the flow rate is faster than ¼ gallon/minute, there is not enough time to adsorb all the fluoride in the water. Another difficulty with activated alumina is that the media becomes saturated with fluoride. Depending on the amount of media in the system (how large the filter is) and on the amount of fluoride in the water, systems using activated alumina either need to be recharged or replaced often. The last difficulty with activated alumina is that aluminum is released into the treated water. This effectively trades one problem for another. Some systems address this; others do not.

There are many point-of-use filters that claim to remove fluoride using activated alumina. The problem with most of these systems is that they only work for a short period of time (usually far less than claimed) before they become saturated. The other difficulty is that point-of-use systems do not slow the flow rate enough to provide adequate time for adsorption.  Recent testing of a variety of these filters revealed that few functioned as claimed for more than a few weeks.  Unless the activated alumina can be cleaned and recharged or replaced regularly, and unless the flow rate is slow enough to allow time for adsorption, activated alumina may not be what you are looking for.

There are some “tank” type fluoride removal systems that are capable of working for many years with a backwashing and recharging cycle and an occasional topping off of the media. These systems are often used to remove fluoride from the whole home. Many consisder them the answer to the fluoride problem. They are not. The drawback to this type of system is an environmental problem. Caustic chemicals are required to backwash (sodium hydroxide) and to recharge (sulphuric acid) the media—chemicals that end up in the waste water. And when these “tanks” are eventually replaced, they end up in a landfill, loaded with fluoride, arsenic, lead, mercury and cadmuim.

4.  BC-Carbon
Bone-Char (BC) Carbon has been used for centuries to remove naturally-occurring fluoride from water. It works similar to the way bones in the human body attract fluoride.  Bone contains a porous matrix that is rich in surface ions. These can be readily replaced by fluoride and by some of the other contaminants that arrive along with fluoride (heavy metals).  Bone char effectively removes a number of contaminants.

When used alone, BC-Carbon can remove up to 90% of the fluoride in water. The efficiency of bone char can be improved by adding pre-filters that remove heavy metals and other contaminants before exposure to the BC-carbon. Bone char works best at a slightly acidic pH and may not work as well with hard water. This medium is being successfully incorporated in many systems where cartridges can be replaced as the media becomes saturated. But this method is also not without problems. Obviously, bone char is an organic medium. Medical grade bone char is important to ensure that the bone char itself is clean.

Sources: Natural Cures Not Medicine & dancingwithwater.com

GMO Farming Is Poisoning The World's Drinking Water

Image: Raw For Beauty

Monsanto’s Herbicide Linked To Groundwater Contamination

In a groundbreaking study published in the journal Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry last year, evidence surfaced that glyphosate, the active ingredient in the Monsanto’s patented herbicide Roundup, is flowing freely into the groundwater in areas where it is being applied.1 The researchers found that 41% of the 140 groundwater samples taken from Catalonia Spain, had levels beyond the limit of quantification – indicating that, despite the manufacturer’s claims, glyphosate herbicide does not break down rapidly in the environment, and is accumulating there in concerning quantities.

Why Is Groundwater Contamination An Important Finding?

Groundwater is water located beneath the ground surface, that supplies aquifers, wells and springs.  If a chemical like glyphosate is mobile enough to get into the groundwater and is intrinsically resistant to being biodegraded (after all, it is being used to kill/degrade living things – not the other way around), significant environmental exposures to humans using the water are inevitable. After all, according to the USGS, 88,000 tons were used in the US in 2007 alone.

Keep in mind that glyphosate is considered by the EPA as a Class III toxic substance, fatal to an adult at 30 grams, and has been linked to over 20 adverse health effects in the peer-reviewed, biomedical literature.
This groundwater contamination study adds to another highly concerning finding from March, 2011, published in the journal Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, where researchers found the chemical in 60-100% of all air and rain samples tested, indicating that glyphosate pollution and exposure is now omnipresent in the US. When simply breathing makes you susceptible to glyphosate exposure, we know we are dealing with a problem of unprecedented scale.

In fact, glyphosate’s broad spectrum toxicity has been identified to be one potential cause for the disturbing loss of indispensable food-starter bacteria from soils and cultured foods within certain regions of the world, indicating that GMO farming may be depleting the microbial biodiversity of the soil, and ultimately its ability to remain fertile.

Who Is Responsible For The Groundwater Contamination? 

Monsanto is a multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation, presently dominating the global genetically engineered seed market, with 90% market share in the US alone. It is also the world’s largest producer of the herbicide glyphosate, marketed as “Roundup,” among other brand names.  If you are eating corn and soy, or any of their ten thousand plus byproducts – and it does not have a USDA organic logo – you are getting the Monsanto “double whammy”: the genetic modification (GM) of your health (and gene expression) that follows the consumption of GM food (because we are – literally – what we eat), and ceaseless chemical exposure to glyphosate, as all Monsanto-engineered foods have been designed to be glyphosate-resistant, and therefore are saturated with it.

Is Monsanto’s Herbicide A New Agent Orange?

Roundup is not Monsanto’s first entry into the systemic herbicide market. Monsanto admits it manufactured the herbicide/defoliant Agent Orange from 1965 to 1969, which Vietnam estimated killed and maimed 400,000 people and resulted in the 500,000 children being born with birth defects.

The true devastation caused by Agent Orange was covered up for many years. We may find that Monsanto’s Roundup, and its primary active ingredient glyphosate, may be causing a similar degree of devastation to both environmental and human health under the lidless, though not very watchful eye (as far as business interests are concerned), of our regulatory agencies.

Indeed, glyphosate is a powerful endocrine disrupter. Exceedingly small amounts are capable of mimicking and/or disrupting hormonal pathways, cell receptor sites and signaling. Research culled from The National Library of Medicine links it to 17 adverse pharmacological actions, including carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, neurotoxicty, hepatoxicity, and nephrotoxicity.

Source: Raw For Beauty via Green Med Info

How to harvest drinking water from fog without using electricity

Natural Cures Not Medicine

Image: inhabitat.com

Coming up with ways to find water when the grid is down has become one of the hottest topics in the off thecondensing air into water have proved promising, but have drawbacks such as using a large amount of electricity. They are also too expensive to purchase or build for anyone who isn't rich. I was researching these types of water collection systems when I ran into some information on turning fog into drinking water.
grid community. Many techniques such as

I've compiled as much information about how one would go about building a DIY fog into water collector here in this article. Technical data and know how on this subject is fairly scarce so if you plan on building one at home, some improvisation and experimentation will be needed. We have compiled all the basic steps you will need to take to build one of these water harvesting 'fog traps' for less than a few hundred dollars. An efficient fog collector could produce more than 3 liters of water per square yard of surface area per day in an area with a lot of fog and decent wind!

You will need some screen: usually fine-mesh nylon or polypropylene netting shade cloth. According to research the best cloth to use would be nylon shade cloth or polypropylene netting that provides 30-40% coverage similar to this commonly available greenhouse shade cloth, double layered.

From oas.org

"After testing the efficiency of various mesh densities, the fog collectors used at El Tofo were equipped with netting providing 35% coverage, mounted in double layers. This proportion of polypropylene-surface-to-opening extracts about 30% of the water from the fog passing through the nets."

Next you will have to build posts or a tent like structure to suspend the screen over. Remember that you want the screen to be fairly taut for highest efficiency.  You can use a simple technique that would be similar to making a fence post, then suspend the screen between the posts. You can also make a hoop style structure out of piping or plastic PVC, similar to what you see in the picture posted here:

From oas.org

"Full-scale fog collectors are simple, flat, rectangular nets of nylon supported by a post at either end and arranged perpendicular to the direction of the prevailing wind." 

Finally, you will have to build some kind of trough or gutter at the bottom of the netting to collect the water that has been captured from the fog and then drains into a storage container. The trough will have to be shaped as too take advantage of gravity to collect the water into the storage tank.

From oas.org

Here is an example of a trough or gutter design that can be used 

"As water collects on the net, the droplets join to form larger drops that fall under the influence of gravity into a trough or gutter at the bottom of the panel, from which it is conveyed to a storage tank or cistern. The collector itself is completely passive, and the water is conveyed to the storage system by gravity. If site topography permits, the stored water can also be conveyed by gravity to the point of use. The storage and distribution system usually consists of a plastic channel or PVC pipe approximately 110 mm in diameter which can be connected to a 20 nun to 25 nun diameter water hose for conveyance to the storage site/point of use."

Make sure to secure your fog collector down if needed. If you used the fence post style structure further support may not be needed, but with the PVC style you will need to.

Here is a time-lapse video showing the fog condensing and turning into water:

Example of a simple water storage setup

Once you have to water collected it is ready to use. If you plan on drinking the water you should check the quality of it to make sure it's potable. You can treat or filter the water if needed before you drink it, or perhaps you can use this DIY water distiller that we wrote about that requires no electricity.

This 'fog trapping' is being implemented in many third world countries where water is scarce, but could be used by anyone seeking to have a backup water supply in case of emergencies or to get off the water grid.

How to Make a Water Distiller That Makes Dirty Water Drinkable With Supplies you Already Have

Image: YouTube screen shot

How cool is this, a very simple water distiller that will turn dirty or salty water into fresh, clean, drinkable water with supplies you most likely already have at home. In the video posted below is an example of a small scale system made only using a plastic bowl, a cup, plastic wrap, a rubber band and a rock or weight.

This simple technique can be expanded to be larger to clean much more water if needed. Take this info and keep it in mind, you may need it one day if the water grid goes down or becomes contaminated. This is also a good idea when camping or out in the wilderness to lighten your pack weight.

This mini-distiller is able to remove bacteria, pollutants, salt, fluoride and 99% of other contaminants in your water. The video below shows you how to make this simple yet effective distiller.

Related: How fluoride could harm your health

Solar Seawater Distiller Turns Salt Water into Drinking Water Using Only Sunlight

Italian designer Gabriele Diamanti (@GabDiamanti) has invented Eliodomestico, an eco-distiller running on solar power, to provide safe drinking-water for people in developing countries: a very simple way to produce healthy, bacteria-free water. Eliodomestico is an open source project.

Winner at Core77 Design Award 2012 - social impact category; Finalist at the Prix Émile Hermès 2011 competition.

The Effects of Fluoride on the Thyroid Gland

By Dr Barry Durrant-Peatfield MBBS LRCP MRCS
Medical Advisor to Thyroid UK

There is a daunting amount of research studies showing that the widely acclaimed benefits on fluoride dental health are more imagined than real. My main concern however, is the effect of sustained fluoride intake on general health. Again, there is a huge body of research literature on this subject, freely available and in the public domain.

But this body of work was not considered by the York Review when their remit was changed from "Studies of the effects of fluoride on health" to "Studies on the effects of fluoridated water on health." It is clearly evident that it was not considered by the BMA (Britsh Medical Association), British Dental Association (BDA), BFS (British Fluoridation Society) and FPHM, (Faculty for Public Health and Medicine) since they all insist, as in the briefing paper to Members of Parliament - that fluoridation is safe and non-injurious to health.

This is a public disgrace, I will now show by reviewing the damaging effects of fluoridation, with special reference to thyroid illness.

It has been known since the latter part of the 19th century that certain communities, notably in Argentina, India and Turkey were chronically ill, with premature ageing, arthritis, mental retardation, and infertility; and high levels of natural fluorides in the water were responsible. Not only was it clear that the fluoride was having a general effect on the health of the community, but in the early 1920s Goldemberg, working in Argentina showed that fluoride was displacing iodine; thus compounding the damage and rendering the community also hypothyroid from iodine deficiency.

Highly damaging to the thyroid gland

This was the basis of the research in the 1930s of May, Litzka, Gorlitzer von Mundy, who used fluoride preparations to treat over-active thyroid illness. Their patients either drank fluoridated water, swallowed fluoride pills or were bathed in fluoridated bath water; and their thyroid function was as a result, greatly depressed. The use in 1937 of fluorotyrosine for this purpose showed how effective this treatment was; but the effectiveness was difficult to predict and many patients suffered total thyroid loss. So it was given a new role and received a new name, Pardinon. It was marketed not for over-active thyroid disease but as a pesticide. (Note the manufacturer of fluorotyrosine was IG Farben who also made sarin, a gas used in World War II).

This bit of history illustrates the fact that fluorides are dangerous in general and in particular highly damaging to the thyroid gland, a matter to which I shall return shortly. While it is unlikely that it will be disputed that fluorides are toxic - let us be reminded that they are Schedule 2 Poisons under the Poisons Act 1972, the matter in dispute is the level of toxicity attributable to given amounts; in today's context the degree of damage caused by given concentrations in the water supply. While admitting its toxicity, proponents rely on the fact that it is diluted and therefore, it is claimed, unlikely to have deleterious effects.

They could not be more mistaken

It seems to me that we must be aware of how fluoride does its damage. It is an enzyme poison. Enzymes are complex protein compounds that vastly speed up biological chemical reactions while themselves remaining unchanged. As we speak, there occurs in all of us a vast multitude of these reactions to maintain life and produce the energy to sustain it. The chains of amino acids that make up these complex proteins are linked by simple compounds called amides; and it is with these that fluorine molecules react, splitting and distorting them, thus damaging the enzymes and their activity. Let it be said at once, this effect can occur at extraordinary low concentrations; even lower than the one part per million which is the dilution proposed for fluoridation in our water supply.

The body can only eliminate half

Moreover, fluorides are cumulative and build up steadily with ingestion of fluoride from all sources, which include not just water but the air we breathe and the food we eat. The use of fluoride toothpaste in dental hygiene and the coating of teeth are further sources of substantial levels of fluoride intake. The body can only eliminate half of the total intake, which means that the older you are the more fluoride will have accumulated in your body. Inevitably this means the ageing population is particularly targeted. And even worse for the very young there is a major element of risk in baby formula made with fluoridated water. The extreme sensitivity of the very young to fluoride toxicity makes this unacceptable. Since there are so many sources of fluoride in our everyday living, it will prove impossible to maintain an average level of 1ppm as is suggested.

What is the result of these toxic effects?

First the immune system. The distortion of protein structure causes the immune proteins to fail to recognise body proteins, and so instigate an attack on them, which is Autoimmune Disease. Autoimmune diseases constitute a body of disease processes troubling many thousands of people: Rheumatoid Arthritis, Systemic Lupus Erythematosis, Asthma and Systemic Sclerosis are examples; but in my particular context today, thyroid antibodies will be produced which will cause Thyroiditis resulting in the common hypothyroid disease, Hashimoto's Disease and the hyperthyroidism of Graves' Disease.

Musculo Skeletal damage results further from the enzyme toxic effect; the collagen tissue of which muscles, tendons, ligaments and bones are made, is damaged. Rheumatoid illness, osteoporosis and deformation of bones inevitably follow. This toxic effect extends to the ameloblasts making tooth enamel, which is consequently weakened and then made brittle; and its visible appearance is, of course, dental fluorosis.

The enzyme poison effect extends to our genes; DNA cannot repair itself, and chromosomes are damaged. Work at the University of Missouri showed genital damage, targeting ovaries and testes. Also affected is inter uterine growth and development of the foetus, especially the nervous system. Increased incidence of Down's Syndrome has been documented.

Fluorides are mutagenic. That is, they can cause the uncontrolled proliferation of cells we call cancer. This applies to cancer anywhere in the body; but bones are particularly picked out. The incidence of osteosarcoma in a study reporting in 1991 showed an unbelievable 50% increase. A report in 1955 in the New England Journal of Medicine showed a 400% increase in cancer of the thyroid in San Francisco during the period their water was fluoridated.

My particular concern is the effect of fluorides on the thyroid gland

Perhaps I may remind you about thyroid disease. The thyroid gland produces hormones which control our metabolism - the rate at which we burn our fuel. Deficiency is relatively common, much more than is generally accepted by many medical authorities: a figure of 1:4 or 1:3 by mid life is more likely. The illness is insidious in its onset and progression. People become tired, cold, overweight, depressed, constipated; they suffer arthritis, hair loss, infertility, atherosclerosis and chronic illness. Sadly, it is poorly diagnosed and poorly managed by very many doctors in this country.

What concerns me so deeply is that in concentrations as low as 1ppm, fluorides damage the thyroid system on 4 levels.

1. The enzyme manufacture of thyroid hormones within the thyroid gland itself. The process by which iodine is attached to the amino acid tyrosine and converted to the two significant thyroid hormones, thyroxine (T4) and liothyronine (T3), is slowed.

2. The stimulation of certain G proteins from the toxic effect of fluoride (whose function is to govern uptake of substances into each of the cells of the body), has the effect of switching off the uptake into the cell of the active thyroid hormone.

3. The thyroid control mechanism is compromised. The thyroid stimulating hormone output from the pituitary gland is inhibited by fluoride, thus reducing thyroid output of thyroid hormones.

4. Fluoride competes for the receptor sites on the thyroid gland which respond to the thyroid stimulating hormone; so that less of this hormone reaches the thyroid gland and so less thyroid hormone is manufactured.

These damaging effects, all of which occur with small concentrations of fluoride, have obvious and easily identifiable effects on thyroid status. The running down of thyroid hormone means a slow slide into hypothyroidism. Already the incidence of hypothyroidism is increasing as a result of other environmental toxins and pollutions together with wide spread nutritional deficiencies.

141 million Europeans are at risk

One further factor should give us deep anxiety. Professor Hume of Dundee, in his paper given earlier this year to the Novartis Foundation, pointed out that iodine deficiency is growing worldwide. There are 141 million Europeans are at risk; only 5 European countries are iodine sufficient. UK now falls into the marginal and focal category. Professor Hume recently produced figures to show that 40% of pregnant women in the Tayside region of Scotland were deficient by at least half of the iodine required for a normal pregnancy. A relatively high level of missing, decayed, filled teeth was noted in this non-fluoridated area, suggesting that the iodine deficiency was causing early hypothyroidism which interferes with the health of teeth. Dare one speculate on the result of now fluoridating the water?

Displaces iodine in the body

These figures would be worrying enough, since they mean that iodine deficiency, which results in hypothyroidism (thyroid hormone cannot be manufactured without iodine) is likely to affect huge numbers of people. What makes it infinitely worse, is that fluorine, being a halogen (chemically related to iodine), but very much more active, displaces iodine. So that the uptake of iodine is compromised by the ejection, as it were, of the iodine by fluorine. To condemn the entire population, already having marginal levels of iodine, to inevitable progressive failure of their thyroid system by fluoridating the water, borders on criminal lunacy.

I would like to place a scenario in front of those colleagues who favour fluoridation. A new pill is marketed. Some trials not all together satisfactory, nevertheless, show a striking improvement in dental caries. Unfortunately, it has been found to be thyrotoxic, mutagenic, immunosuppressive, cause arthritis and infertility in comparatively small doses over a relatively short period of time.

Do you think it should be marketed?

Fluoridation of the nation's water supply will do little for our dental health; but will have catastrophic effects on our general health. We cannot, must not, dare not, subject our nation to this appalling risk.

Dr Barry Durrant-Peatfield - obtained his Medical degrees in 1960 at Guy's Hospital London. He left the NHS in 1980 to specialise in thyroid illnesses drawing inspiration from the work of infamous Dr Broda Barnes, at the Foundation that bears his name, Connecticut, USA. He has been a medical practitioner for over forty years specialising in metabolic disorders during which time he became a leading authority in the UK for thyroid and adrenal management. For over twenty years he also ran a successful private clinic and became a nation-wide leading authority on thyroid and adrenal dysfunction, but clashed with establishment medicine in the management of thyroid illness. He is the author of The Great Thyroid Scandal (see opposite page), he currently lectures at nutritional colleges in London as well as conducting his own teaching seminars. Barry will shortly be opening a diagnostic clinic in the UK for thyroid and adrenal disorders where he will provide advice on diagnosis and treatment with special interests in nutritional aspects. For further information contact: Dr B Durrant- Peatfield 36A High St, Mersham, Redhill Surrey, RH1 3EA. Tel: 44 (0)1737 215462 Email: info@drpeatfield.com Web site: drpeatfield.com

References:

L Goldemberg - La Semana Med 28:628 (1921) - cited in Wilson RH, DeEds F -"The Synergistic Action Of Thyroid On Fluoride Toxicity" Endocrinology 26:851 (1940).
G Litzka - "Die experimentellen Grundlagen der Behandlung des Morbus Basedow und der Hyperthyreose mittels Fluortyrosin" Med Wochenschr 63:1037-1040 (1937) (discusses the basis of the use of fluorides in anti-thyroid medication, documents activity on liver, inhibition of glycolysis, etc.).

W May - "Behandlung der Hypothyreosen einschlieblich des schweren genuinen Morbus Basedow mit Fluor" Klin Wochenschr 16: 562 - 564 (1937).

Sarin: (GB: isopropyl methylphosono-fluoridate) is a colorless, odorless volatile liquid, soluble in water, first synthesized at IG Farben in 1938. It kills mainly through inhalation.

Cyclosarin (GF) and Thiosarin are variants. Pennsylvania Department of Health dsf.health.state.pa.us/health/cwp/view.asp?a=171&q=233740

Sarin: (GB: CH3-P(=O)(-F)(-OCH(CH3)2)
Source: A FOA Briefing Book on Chemical Weapons opcw.org/resp/html/nerve.html Gerhard Schrader, a chemist at IG Farben, was given the task of developing a pesticide. Two years later a phosphorus compound with extremely high toxicity was produced for the first time. IG Farben: "...the board of American IG Farben had three directors from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the most influential of the various Federal Reserve Banks. American IG Farben. also had interlocks with Standard Oil of New Jersey, Ford Motor Company, Bank of Manhattan (later to become the Chase Manhattan Bank), and AEG. (German General Electric) Source: Moody's Manual of Investments; 1930, page 2149."

Source: oawhealth.com