|
Fluoride is reported as a little more toxic than lead and a little less than arsenic, yet it is allowed to be consumed in parts per million while the other two are allowed in parts per billion. Where's the logic or common sense in that?
This chart shows tooth decay rates are unequivocally in decline equally well in fluoridated countries as in non fluoridated countries. Does this not indicate that there is no benefit to fluoridation, especially using a dangerous toxic waste product like unpurified, untested hydrofluorosilicic acid that also contains lead, arsenic, merccury, chromiun and other toxic pollutants? See the specifications of the contents of this acid as supplied to our City for injection into our water supply
The above chart shows that in the provinces of Québec and Ontario, cavity rates are almost identical, yet Québec had a fluoridation rate of just 6.4% whereas Ontarians were fluoridated at just under 76% over the survey period. Does this not indicate that fluoridation has no impact on tooth decay, considering that the populations of both provinces have comparable populations with equally good socio-economic lifestyles? Unpublished reports for British Columbia and Alberta show comparably similar data.
Since May 18, 2011, over 1 million Calgarians have been fluoridation free, so statistical demographics will begin to change in Alberta, but not with an increase in tooth decay rates as claimed by misinformed medical-dental advocates of fluoridation. What will be showing up, however, is the increase in dental treatments for teeth affected by dental fluorosis, a veritable gold mine for dentists, as tooth decay rates continue to decline. See video #7, #15, #18, #29, #32 and #47 on that aspect of the fluoridation boondogle.
Fluorosis is now endemic in most of the United States. Canadian Dentists report an equally disturbing amount of dental fluorosis that needs their intervention to repair and cover up. Is it not surprising that they would support water fluoridation since it can bring them such substantial income as tooth decay rates decline over time? One dentist in Toronto, Canada, has revealed in a confidential email that it could cost as much as $20,000 CDN (2010 value) to repair such fluorosis depending on the severity.
In Great Britain, it has been calculated that it can cost about £37,000 to repair these most severe cases over a lifetime, while one U.S. estimate has given a value in excess of $50,000 for treatment of teeth as a result of dental fluorosis.
Is that not a great inequity, as opposed to the much vaunted equity claimed by promoters of fluoridation of everybody being equitably treated? If anything, one could say that everyone is being equally mistreated!