Last login: Thursday, January 6, 2011
Responding to Tom Fudge's comments, there is nothing worth 'kidding' about with placing a medicating chemical in a water supply to treat everyone. I work in a city recently fluoridated over a year ago. It has been frustrating to see patients now showing the same signs of fluoride toxicity from drinking water that they were previously warned about if exposed to fluoride at work. The Material Safety Data Sheets produced by the companies warned of fluoride caused skin rashes, abdominal pain, blood noses and breathing problems ( i.e. asthma) etc. that may occur at work even with low level exposure to fluoride.
But just as tobacco interests in the 1940s got doctors endorsing the safety of tobacco, health authorities (including similarly badly informed doctors and dentists) now place this chemical fluoride into the water with the same announcement it has no side effects at all.
Even when tests show patients getting skin rashes and asthma after drinking the same industrial chemical in water (just as they also did when at work at the local aluminum smelter), authorities just blankly continue to repeat the hollow assurances about its safety as history shows the cigarette companies did with their cigarettes.
We have to ask why. Could this just be the business side of water fluoridation to produce a ‘safe ‘ deceptive image for the chemical fluoride to keep sales of this waste going for at least as long as profitable sales were cleverly kept going within the tobacco industry?
January 6, 2011 at 6:19 p.m.
( permalink | suggest removal )
© 2016 KPBS Public Broadcasting