Dr Anna Goodwin
NZDSOS
Only five per cent of the world adds fluoride to its water. This practice is already banned in Europe and will soon be banned in the USA. It is not done in China, Russia, or India. It is indeed very concerning that our Ministry of Health and Director General of Health have turned a blind eye to a recent landmark ruling, 24 September 2024, in a US Federal Court which is reported as follows:
Judgement from: Senior Judge Edward Chen wrote, “the Court finds that fluoridation of water at 0.7 milligrams per liter (“mg/L”) – the level presently considered “optimal” in the United States – poses an unreasonable risk of reduced IQ in children…the Court finds there is an unreasonable risk of such injury, a risk sufficient to require the EPA to engage with a regulatory response.
“In all, there is substantial and scientifically credible evidence establishing that fluoride poses a risk to human health; it is associated with a reduction in the IQ of children and is hazardous at dosages that are far too close to fluoride levels in the drinking water of the United States… Reduced IQ poses serious harm. Studies have linked IQ decrements of even one or two points to, e.g., reduced educational attainment, employment status, productivity, and earned wages.”
Can we really afford to intellectually disadvantage our children relative to the rest of the world? Is it really a choice between them having either a ‘bright smile’ or a ‘dim wit’? The answer is unequivocally ‘no’.
Historical Background
The history of water fluoridation began in 1901 when Frederick McKay noted that the children in a city in Colorado had a lot of brown spots on their teeth, but their teeth were resistant to caries. This observation was attributed to a naturally high level of calcium fluoride in the water. In 1931 Dr Henry Trendley Dean discovered that when calcium fluoride was maintained at less than 1.0 ppm the spots, then known as “dental fluorosis”, did not appear in children. Grand Rapids Michigan was the first US city to begin the artificial fluoridation of its municipal water supply in 1945. Grand Rapids did not use calcium fluoride, but a variation of fluorosilicic acid derived from mining waste (as used in New Zealand’s fluoridation program).
Dental caries were already declining throughout the (un-fluoridated) world due to the widespread use of topical fluoride-containing toothpaste during that time. Dr Dean did not account for the use of toothpaste when he attributed the 60 per cent decline in dental caries to the artificial fluoridation of the Grand Rapids water supply. I can find no record that he forbade the city of Grand Rapids from brushing their teeth during the interval of the study.
On the basis of this poorly conducted study, a mining waste product became a common additive to community water supplies in the USA and a few other outlying Westernized countries like New Zealand. This was very convenient for the mining industry, which cannot lawfully dump this waste product in any natural waterway, because it is so toxic. One might ask if this process evolved to actually benefit pediatric dental health or the mining industry? One would hope that the safer and more stable calcium fluoride would have been used if it were truly about helping our children with their dental health. This does not seem to be the case for the last 70+ years of the fluoride debate.
A Wee Chemistry Lesson
It is important to note that calcium tightly binds fluoride and forms its most stable compound. ‘Free’ fluorine is very unstable, corrosive and seldom found in nature. It is the most electronegative element on the periodic table (as many will recall from chemistry class). When unbound to calcium, fluoride is known to act as a free radical and damages chromosomes, causes endocrine disruption (thyroid and pineal gland), causes coronary spasm, decreased mentation, skeletal fluorosis, and osteoporosis. Of course it is the ‘dose that makes the poison’, but calcium fluoride is broadly recognized as the most stable and safest form of fluoride.
Sodium fluoride is the compound in our toothpaste. Although much safer than the fluorosilicic acid that the Director General wishes to put in our water, it is customary not to swallow fluoride-containing toothpaste because it is still frankly toxic, especially to children. It is now known to most scientists outside of New Zealand, that it is the topical use (toothpaste and mouth rinses), rather than the ingestion through our water, that is protective from dental caries.
We have no actual requirement for fluoride in our bodies. Are New Zealanders more hardy than 95 per cent of the world’s population? She’ll be right. Right? Are our much vaunted scientists and public health policy makers just smarter than the rest of the world that is now abandoning this process?
Our NZ public health experts seem to be relying upon outdated and conflated medical propaganda to justify public policies that should be left in the dustbin of history. The Director General, which is not a position that is accountable to the public, has claimed the authority to impose extortionate taxes upon the people of New Zealand through our various elected councils if water fluoridation with fluorosilicic acid (mining waste) is not implemented throughout the country. We will be forced, through our rates, to purchase this waste product and purchase the infrastructure for its containment, dispersal, and monitoring.
Is this actually a nod to the mining industry or to our kids? Are they laughing at us for being so scared of ‘baby bottle tooth decay’ that we will voluntarily pay to poison ourselves?
Once fluoride is in the water supply, ostensibly being given as a medical intervention to prevent dental caries, the individual dose cannot be controlled.
Indeed, Judge Edward Chen spent most of deliberation considering the risk assessment process, emphasizing the importance of aggregate exposures. “Fluoride may also be ingested through, e.g., tea, fish, toothpaste, and commercial food and beverage made with fluoridated water.”
New Zealand authorities are yet to undertake risk assessment, let alone consider aggregate exposures and the long-known fact that babies and children consume more by body-weight than adults. This is borne out in the New Zealand data showing children have higher urinary concentrations.
Fluoridated drinking water meets the criteria for medication without consent whether or not our corrupted court system agrees. Formula-fed infants are particularly vulnerable and derive no benefit whatsoever because they don’t even have teeth. Fluorosilicic acid is a toxic mining-waste product that is contaminated with cadmium, lead, arsenic, and other heavy metals. Like the rest of the world, we do not need it.
Director General Sarfati, in apparent willful blindness, has refused to allow the extension requested recently by Tauranga Mayor, Mahe Drysdale, and the Tauranga council pending a judgement from the High Court, as recently reported by the BOP Times. At the same time Sarfati has spent nearly a year sitting on a direction which requires that she take time to decide in each case, whether the direction was a reasonable limit on the right to refuse medical treatment.
Unfortunately the judge turned around and stated she could effectively push out her decision, but still order councils to fluoridate, which is exactly what she has done.
In effect, Dr Sarfati said ‘F- you Tauranga’ – while ignoring her own obligations. Will the High Court consider the recent USA Federal Court judgement which acknowledges the latest and most extensive scientific data? Or will we proudly wave our fluoridiocracy flag, with dumb kids at our sides, talk about the rugby, and salute our loving public policy makers and thank them for their vast intellectual superiority over the rest of the world?
Dr Anna Goodwin, FRACP
Retired oncologist
Advocate for safe air, water, food, and medicines
Actions you can take:
- Contact Dr Sarfati, Director General of Health, and let her know fluoride presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health and must be stopped now. Her email is: diana.sarfati@health.govt.nz.
- Contact your local council and councillors.
- Present in person at your local council meeting.
- See the Fluoride Free NZ website for further information and link here to the US Federal Court ruling.
- Rally supporters and speak out now.
This article was originally published by New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out With Science.
