From: mark williams [email protected][nl]to: [email protected][nl]to: 
[email protected], [email protected], [email protected][nl]subject: ADD 
Visiting Expert-Fluoride [PARA]Central Nervous System Damage from 
Fluorides[PARA]Phyllis J. Mullenix, Ph.D. September 14, 1998 [PARA]It was 
1982 when fluoride was first brought to my attention as a substance in need 
of investigation. At that time, I was in the Departments of Psychiatry at 
Boston's Children's Hospital and Neuropathology at the Harvard Medical 
School. My studies focused on detection procedures for neurotoxicity, and 
they typically considered a variety of environmental and therapeutic 
agents, i.e., radiation, lead, amphetamine, phenytoin, nitrous oxide. Dr. 
John Hein, then Director of Forsyth's Dental Infirmary for Children in 
Boston, was interested in neurotoxicity studies and invited me to continue 
this research at Forsyth and to apply it to substances used in dentistry. 
Fluoride was prominent on his list. [PARA]Five years lapsed before our 
investigations of fluoride began. The delay was due to time spent on 
technological improvements, specifically development of a computer pattern 
recognition system for the objective quantification of behavior in an 
animal model. In early June of 1986, the Forsyth Dental Center was noted 
for this achievement in the Wall Street Journal and the Boston Herald, and 
applications of our research grew. The new technology enabled us to study 
the clinically recognized neurotoxicity associated with the treatment for 
childhood leukemia. Simultaneously, we started investigations of fluoride, 
the "safe and effective" treatment for dental caries. [PARA]Initially, the 
fluoride study sparked little interest, and in fact we were quite anxious 
to move on to something academically more exciting. Using an animal model 
developed for the study of dental fluorosis, we expected rats drinking 
fluoride-treated water would behave the same as matching controls. They did 
not. The scientific literature led us to believe that rats would easily 
tolerate 175 ppm fluoride in their drinking water. They did not. Reports in 
the literature indicated that fluoride would not cross the blood brain 
barrier. But it did. Prenatal exposure to fluoride was not supposed to 
permanently alter behavioral outcome. It did. Like walking into quicksand, 
our confidence that brain function was impervious to fluoride was sinking. 
[PARA]Our 1995 paper in Neurotoxicology and Teratology was the first 
laboratory study to demonstrate in vivo that central nervous system (CNS) 
function was vulnerable to fluoride, that the effects on behavior depended 
on the age at exposure and that fluoride accumulated in brain tissues. The 
behavioral changes common to weanling and adult exposures were different 
from those after prenatal exposure. Whereas prenatal exposure dispersed 
many behaviors as seen in drug-induced hyperactivity, weanling and adult 
exposures led to behavior- specific changes more related to cognitive 
deficits. Brain histology was not examined in this study, but we suggested 
that the effects on behavior were consistent with interrupted hippocampal 
development (a brain region generally linked with memory). 
[PARA]Establishing a threshold dose for effects on the CNS, in rats or 
humans, was not the intent of this initial investigation. Yet, one fact 
relevant to human exposure emerged quite clear. When rats consumed 75-125 
ppm and humans 5-10 ppm fluoride in their respective drinking waters, the 
result was equivalent ranges of plasma fluoride levels. This range is 
observed with some treatments for osteoporosis, and it is exceeded ten 
times over, one hour after children receive topical applications of some 
dental fluoride gels. Thus, humans are being exposed to levels of fluoride 
we know alters behavior in rats. [PARA]We concluded that the rat study 
flagged potential for motor dysfunction, IQ deficits and/or learning 
disabilities in humans. Confident as we were, the data were only one piece 
of the puzzle, the overall picture was still emerging. Soon thereafter we 
learned of two epidemiological studies (Fluoride, 1995-1996) from China 
showing IQ deficits in children over-exposed to fluoride via drinking water 
or soot from burning coal. A recent review (International Clinical 
Psychopharmacology, 1994) listed case reports of CNS effects in humans 
excessively exposed to fluoride, information that spans almost 60 years. A 
common theme appeared in the reported effects: impaired memory and 
concentration, lethargy, headache, depression and confusion. The same theme 
was echoed in once classified reports about workers from the Manhatten 
Project. In all, our rat data seem to fit a consistent picture. 
[PARA]Information linking fluoride and CNS dysfunction continues in 1998. 
[PARA]1) A recent study in Brain Research demonstrated that chronic 
exposure to fluoride in drinking water of rats compromised neuronal 
(hippocampal) and cerebrovascular integrity (blood brain barrier) and 
increased aluminum concentrations in brain tissues.[NL]2) Masters and 
Coplan have reported (International Journal of Environmental Studies, in 
press) that silicofluorides in fluoridated drinking water increased levels 
of lead in children's blood, a risk factor that predicts higher crime 
rates, ADD and learning disabilities.[NL]3) Luke at the International 
Society for Fluoride Research (ISFR) meeting in August reported that 
fluoride accumulated in the human pineal gland, as much or more so than in 
bones and teeth, and the pineal gland's melatonin biosynthesis pathway is 
affected by fluoride.[NL]4) Also at the ISFR meeting, I reported that the 
fluorinated steroid (dexamethasone) disrupts behavior in rats to a greater 
degree than does the nonfluorinated steroid (prednisolone). This finding 
matched results just completed in a study of children receiving steroids as 
a part of their treatment for childhood leukemia. Dexamethasone, compared 
to prednisolone, further reduced IQ, specifically impairing reading 
comprehension, arithmetic calculation and short-term working memory. 
[PARA]Exposure to fluoride goes well beyond that in our drinking water, 
toothpastes and mouth rinses. Fluoridation of water dictates that it is in 
food and processed beverages. Pesticides such as cryolite also increase 
fluoride content of foods. The trend toward fluorinating pharmaceuticals 
increases fluoride exposure via medication. Fluoride, in various compounds, 
plays a heavy role in occupational exposures and for people living in close 
proximity to industry, i.e., aluminum, steel, brick, glass, petroleum, etc. 
With exposure so common, we can no longer afford to ignore potential CNS 
consequences of fluoride. [PARA]I would be happy to answer questions about 
any of the above material. [PARA]Phyllis J. Mullenix, Ph.D. [NL]September 
14, 1998
        





   For the whole incredible story, if you have several hours of reading 
time to spare:   http://www.trufax.org/fluoride/fluorides.html

James Osbourne Holmes
[email protected]


-----Original Message-----
From:   Mary [SMTP:[email protected]]
Sent:   Wednesday, September 22, 1999 10:11 AM
To:     [email protected]
Subject:        Re: CS>Interesting experiment... Tap water...

I used to be a schoolteacher and we had to "feed" the kids their fluroide
every day.

I wonder if they still do that?

I had no idea it was toxic and just did as I was told......

I used to put it copiously on my own teeth......!


>"James Osbourne, Holmes" wrote:
>>
>> Re: tap water:  Do a search for "fluoride"  at www.trufax.org
>>
>> Hideous; does not help teeth.
>


--
The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver.

To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message to:
[email protected]  -or-  [email protected]
with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line.

To post, address your message to: [email protected]

List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>