Connect with us


Important Facts You Need To Know About Water Fluoridation

by Dr. Mercola

With few exceptions, most other countries do not fluoridate their drinking water,1and for good reason—fluoride is a toxic drug linked with an array of potentially serious health problems.

Yet despite irrefutable evidence of harm, the United States still adds fluoride to municipal water supplies reaching nearly 211 million Americans, including infants, the elderly, and those with chronic health problems.

As of 2012, more than 67 percent of Americans receive fluoridated water,2 up from 66 percent in 2010.3 Of those, more than 11 million people receive fluoride at or above what has been deemed the “optimal” level, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The video above features a recent interview I had with Dr. Paul Connett, director of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), about the health risks of water fluoridation you may have not been aware of.

He also addresses the nature of the propaganda that keeps this foolish practice going, even though it flies in the face of scientific evidence, which shows there are significant health risks, especially for children, while providing no demonstrable benefit.

Why Water Fluoridation Is Utterly Unnecessary

Thanks to a brilliant “marketing campaign” back in the 1940s, the American Dental Association (ADA) has been, and remains, a staunch defender of water fluoridation.

This despite mounting scientific evidence showing that a) ingesting fluoride does not benefit your teeth, and b) even topical application may be largely ineffective.

One groundbreaking study published in the journal Langmuir4 four years ago revealed that the fluorapatite layer formed on your teeth from fluoride is a mere six nanometers thick. To understand just how thin this is, you’d need 10,000 of these layers to get the width of a strand of your hair.

Scientists now question whether this ultra-thin layer can actually protect your enamel and provide any discernible benefit, considering the fact that it is quickly eliminated by simple chewing. They wrote: “it has to be asked whether such narrow… layers really can act as protective layers for the enamel.”

It should be acknowledged that the anti-fluoridation community is divided about the quality of evidence for fluoride’s beneficial topical effects. However, they are unanimous in rejecting any benefit from swallowing fluoride to fight tooth decay plus dozens more that directly link fluoride exposure to reduced IQ in children.

Meanwhile, there are more than 100 published studies illustrating fluoride’sharm to the brain, plus dozens more that directly link fluoride exposure toreduced IQ in children.

In other words, it doesn’t do much (if any) good to swallow fluoride and doing so could be doing significant harm—not just on an individual basis, but also on a societal level.

Fluoride may have sweeping adverse effects on intellectual capacity of the American population on the whole, while also disproportionally affecting already disadvantaged communities. In case you’re still unconvinced that water fluoridation is a bad idea, perhaps the following 10 facts about fluoridation5 will help you reconsider.

10 Facts About Fluoride You Need to Know

1. Most developed countries do not fluoridate their water. More people drink fluoridated water in the US alone than in the rest of the world combined. In Western Europe, for instance, 97 percent of the population drinks non-fluoridated water.

2. Fluoridated countries do not have less tooth decay than non-fluoridated countries. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), there is no discernible difference in tooth decay between developed countries that fluoridate their water and those that do not.

The decline in tooth decay the US has experienced over the last 60 years, which is often attributed to fluoridated water, has likewise occurred in all developed countries—most of which do not fluoridate their water.

3. Fluoride affects many tissues in your body besides your teeth. Many assume that the fluoride in drinking water (or in any other fluoride supplement) will somehow only affect your teeth.

But according to a 500-page scientific review,6 fluoride is an endocrine disruptor that can affect your bones, brain, thyroid gland, pineal gland and even your blood sugar levels. At present, 42 human studies7 have linked moderately high fluoride exposures with reduced intelligence, and over 100 animal studies have shown that fluoride exposure can cause brain damage.

Most striking among these are 30 (out of a total of 32 investigations) that have shown that fluoride lowered the ability of animals to learn and remember. Studies have also demonstrated that fluoride toxicity, caused by overexposure, can lead to a wide variety of health problems, including:


4. Fluoridation is not a “natural” process. While fluoride is naturally occurring in some areas, leading to “naturally” high levels in certain water supplies, this does not make such water safe to drink!

In fact, certain communities with naturally high levels of fluoride in their drinking water are known to have higher rates of health problems associated with fluoride overexposure, such as bone deformities.

Arsenic and heavy metals also occur naturally in the environment, but are still considered water contaminants that must be filtered out in order to ensure safe drinking water. Fluoridation advocates often use the “naturally-occurring fluoride” argument as support for its safety, but clearly such an argument falls flat if you just stop and think about it for a moment.

Moreover, the fluoride added to most water supplies is not the naturally occurring variety but rather fluorosilicic acid—a toxic waste chemical captured in air pollution control devices of the phosphate fertilizer industry. This captured fluoride acid is typically highly contaminated, which may impose additional risks to those already presented by natural fluorides. Elevated arsenic levels, for example, present an increased cancer risk. The fluoride acid may also, under some conditions, increase erosion of lead from old pipes, which presents an added neurotoxic hazard.

A better view of nature’s take on fluoride is the level of fluoride delivered in mothers’ milk. This is remarkably low (averaging 0.004 ppm, NRC, 200, p.40). There is every reason to believe that nature is protecting the baby from the biologically active fluoride ion. Water fluoridation subverts that protection. A bottle fed baby in a fluoridated community is getting about 200 times more fluoride than nature intended.

5. More than 40 percent of American teens show visible signs of fluoride overexposure. According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 41 percent of American children between the ages of 12 and 14 have dental fluorosis.8 Outwardly visual signs of this condition include pitting and discoloration of your teeth, caused by long-term ingestion of fluoride during early tooth formation. In some areas, fluorosis rates are as high as 70-80 percent, with some children suffering from advanced forms.

Dental fluorosis is not “just cosmetic.” It can also be an indication that the rest of your body, such as your bones and internal organs, including your brain, have been overexposed to fluoride as well—you just cannot see the damage in the same way you can see the effects on your teeth. So there’s a high likelihood that if fluoride is having a visually detrimental effect on the surface of your teeth, it’s also damaging other parts of your body, such as your bones…

6. For infants, fluoridated water provides no benefits, only risks. Infants who consume formula made with fluoridated tap water may consume up to 1,200 micrograms of fluoride, or about 100 times more than the recommended amounts. Such excessive fluoride exposure during infancy provides no known advantage to teeth. On the contrary, evidence suggests it could cause significant harm.

Babies given fluoridated water in their formula are not only more likely to develop dental fluorosis, but may also have reduced IQ scores. In fact, a 2012 Harvard University meta-analysis funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) concluded that children who live in areas with highly fluoridated water have “significantly lower” IQ scores than those who live in low fluoride areas. A number of prominent dental researchers now advise that parents should avoid using fluoridated water to reconstitute baby formula.

7. Fluoride supplements have never been approved by the FDA. The fluoride supplements sometimes prescribed to those who are not drinking fluoridated water have not been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the prevention of tooth decay. In fact, the fluoride supplements that the FDA has reviewed have been rejected. So when fluoridating our water for the expressed purpose of benefiting dental health, the water authorities are adding a prescription-strength dose of a drug that has never been approved by the FDA for such a purpose.

8. Fluoride is the only drug added to public water supplies. Fluoride is added to drinking water to prevent a disease (tooth decay), and as such becomes a drug by FDA definition. While proponents claim this is no different than adding vitamin D to milk, fluoride is not an essential nutrient. Water fluoridation is a form of mass medication that denies you the right to informed consent.

9. Swallowing fluoride provides little benefit to teeth. It is now widely recognized that fluoride’s only justifiable benefit comes from topical contact with teeth. Even the CDC has acknowledged this fact, and even here scientists have raised questions about its efficacy, as discussed earlier. What is clear though is that ingesting fluoride offers little, if any, benefit to your teeth.

10. Already disadvantaged communities are disproportionally harmed by water fluoridation. Fluoride toxicity is exacerbated by conditions that occur much more frequently in low-income areas. This includes nutrient deficiencies, infant formula consumption, kidney disease, and diabetes. African American and Mexican American children have significantly higher rates of dental fluorosis, and many low-income urban communities also have severe oral health crises, despite decades of water fluoridation. The very last children in the US that need their IQ lowered are children from disadvantaged families (the main target for fluoridation) as in this respect they already have too many strikes against them


Why Water Fluoridation Is a Scam

Water fluoridation was invented by brilliant schemers who needed a cheap way to dispose of  toxic industrial waste and protect them against future lawsuits from fluoride damage to farms and workers. That fluoride is a toxic waste product is a fact. If a municipality decides to quit fluoridating their water, they have to pay exorbitant sums for toxic waste disposal of the remaining fluoride and would again become vulnerable to lawsuits for worker damage

Back in the mid-1940s, politicians were duped with fraudulent science and endorsements, which is not science. In short, they were sold a “public health” idea in which humans are utilized to filter this poison through their bodies, while 99 percent simply goes down the drain. Adding insult to injury, they now MAKE hundreds of millions of dollars selling this hazardous industrial waste, rather than having to pay for its disposal. In his 2012 article “Poison is Treatment—Edward Bernays and the Campaign to Fluoridate America,”9 James F. Tracy reveals the PR campaign that created this fake public health measure:

“The wide-scale US acceptance of fluoride-related compounds in drinking water and a wide variety of consumer products over the past half century is a textbook case of social engineering orchestrated by Sigmund Freud’s nephew and the ‘father of public relations’ Edward L. Bernays,” he writes. “The episode is instructive, for it suggests the tremendous capacity of powerful interests to reshape the social environment, thereby prompting individuals to unwarily think and act in ways that are often harmful to themselves and their loved ones.”

I highly recommend taking the time to read Tracy’s informative expose on how good PR can trump science and keep you in the dark for decades, lest you dig a bit deeper. The oft-quoted phrase emanating from the CDC’s Oral Health Division that water fluoridation is one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th Century is a classic example of public relations trumping actual scientific data to the contrary.

Avoiding Fluoride Is Important for Optimal Health

No matter which scientific studies you examine or which population trends you view, the only rational conclusion is that fluoride’s health dangers far outweigh the marginal dental benefits it might offer. Dental caries can be effectively prevented with means other than fluoridation (for example read about the ChildSmile program in Scotland), thereby avoiding the adverse effects of fluoride.

It’s important to realize that fluoride is a cumulative toxin, which over time can lead to far more serious health concerns than dental fluorosis (spotting on your teeth). The neurological effects are very disturbing. As mentioned, 42 human studies10 now link fluoride exposures with reduced IQ, at levels in the water as low as 1.26 ppm (Xiang, 2003). We cannot afford to ignore such warnings!

The United States is one of the few remaining developed countries in the world that still fluoridates a majority of its water supply. In yesterday’s newsletter, I featured the documentary Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation. If you missed it, I highly recommend taking the time to view it now. We can eliminate this harmful practice, but it’s going to take people like you to make it happen—so please watch the film to get the cold hard facts, and share it with everyone you know.



This week we launch Fluoride Awareness Week. We set aside an entire week dedicated to ending the practice of fluoridation.

There’s no doubt about it: fluoride should not be ingested. Even scientists from the EPA’s National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory have classified fluoride as a “chemical having substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.” Furthermore, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 41 percent of American adolescents now have dental fluorosis—unattractive discoloration and mottling of the teeth that indicate overexposure to fluoride. Clearly, children are being overexposed, and their health and development put in jeopardy. Why?

The only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of water fluoridation in the first place. Fortunately, the Fluoride Action Network has a game plan to END water fluoridation worldwide. Clean pure water is a prerequisite to optimal health. Industrial chemicals, drugs, and other toxic additives really have no place in our water supplies. So, please, protect your drinking water and support the fluoride-free movement by making a tax-deductible donation to the Fluoride Action Network today.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and visit the links below:

Together, Let’s Help FAN Get to the Finish Line

This is the week we can get FAN the funding it deserves. I have found few NGOs as effective, and none as efficient, as FAN. Its small team has led the charge to end fluoridation and will continue to do so with our help!

So I am stepping up with the challenge. For the fourth year in a row, I will match the funds you give. This year, I believe a $25,000 match is the right thing to do. Please give, and all dollars received up to $25,000 will be matched by Natural Health Research Foundation, which I founded.

On Sunday, December 14th at 5pm (EST), the entire Fluoride Action Network team will be featured on this month’sInternational Fluoride Free Teleconference. The call is free and will provide a year-in-review of the fluoride issue, as well as provide an opportunity for supporters to ask the FAN team questions. So please register today to interact with fellow campaigners from around the world and have your questions about fluoride answered by the experts.

Also please watch the documentary Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation from now until December 19th, that outlines the science behind fluoridation and the effects it has had on entire generations, a select panel of experts show conclusively why there is no logical or rational reason to continue fluoridating our water supply.





Havana Syndrome again? CIA officers are mowed down by a mysterious disease

A CIA officer in Moscow experienced symptoms of the so-called “Havana syndrome” in 2017. This became known to The New York Times with reference to sources in diplomatic circles.

CIA officer Mark Polimepulos, who helped lead covert operations in Russia and Europe, complained about the manifestation of mysterious symptoms. According to the newspaper, in December 2017, he felt severe dizziness, which later developed into a prolonged migraine, forcing him to retire. At that time, Polymerpoulos was 48 years old.

It is noted that such a case was not the only one. Similar symptoms were experienced by the staff of the American ambassadors in Cuba and China in 2016-2018. However, the exact number of cases and the place where this happened is not named. It is alleged that the US diplomats have tried to influence in a similar way around the world.

At the same time, the US State Department was unable to establish an unambiguous reason that caused the “Havana syndrome.” Among other things, it was assumed that the diplomats may have been exposed to an unidentified sound effect.

In 2017, it was reported that, beginning in late 2016, American diplomatic officials and their relatives in Cuba began to complain of symptoms such as hearing loss, nausea, headaches and balance disorder. 

The Associated Press received audio footage of the attack and described the harassing sounds as “the high-pitched sound of crickets combined with fingernails scratching on a board.” Then the American government suggested that Russia or China could be the culprit.

Many victims are still undergoing rehabilitation. Specialists from the University of Pennsylvania performed magnetic resonance imaging and revealed visible changes in the structure of the brain in the diplomatic missions.

Differences were found in 23 men and 17 women who complained of health problems while on diplomatic duties in Havana. Scientists have yet to figure out what causes the unusual symptoms.

Continue Reading


How Russia and the United States nearly started a nuclear war in 1995

The Norwegian meteorological rocket incident remains the only time in history that the Russian president has activated his nuclear briefcase.

On January 25, 1995, Doomsday could have come in the world: the Russian Federation was preparing to launch a nuclear strike on the United States. How did it come about that the states that left the confrontation of the Cold War in the past and had just normalized relations with each other found themselves on the verge of mutual destruction?

The beginning of the war?

The cause of the crisis was an ordinary Norwegian meteorological rocket. Its launch from the small island of Anneia at 7 am local time (10 am Moscow time) towards Spitsbergen caused a stir in Russia. 

Black Brant XII.

Black Brant XII. Legion Media / ZUMA Press

Equipped with scientific equipment to study the aurora borealis, the Black Brant XII was similar in size to the nuclear-powered American Trident D-5 ballistic missile, intended for launch from submarines. In addition, it flew along a trajectory along which, as the Russian Defense Ministry believed, American missiles would fly in the event of a nuclear war. 

In December 1994, Norway informed 28 states, including Russia, about the planned launch, but did not give a specific date, limiting itself to specifying the period: from January 15 to February 10 of the next year. Due to bureaucratic delays, this information did not reach the Russian Missile Warning System, which sounded the alarm.

Decisive minutes

An emergency meeting with the country’s top political and military leadership was convened in the Kremlin. Defense Minister Pavel Grachev, Chief of the General Staff Mikhail Kolesnikov and President of the Russian Federation (as Supreme Commander-in-Chief) Boris Yeltsin had three strategic missile forces control terminals activated – the so-called nuclear suitcases.

Vladimir Sayapin / TASS

The military believed the lone missile could have been fired to create an electromagnetic pulse that knocked out Russian radars and communications systems. Following it, a massive blow could be expected.

For several tense minutes, as leaders watched it flight, it was decided whether Russia would launch a nuclear strike against the United States. 

“Little is known today about what Yeltsin said at the time, given that it could have been some of the most dangerous moments in the entire history of the nuclear era,” The Washington Post journalist, David Hoffman wrote three years after the incident : “They make it clear that the Cold War nuclear readiness system continues to operate, and how catastrophic its consequences could be, despite the fact that the feud between the great powers is already over.”   

The situation was discharged only when it became clear that the rocket had gone towards Spitsbergen (not far from which it fell into the ocean). The nuclear cases have been deactivated. Russian President Boris Yeltsin (center) and Russian Defense Minister Pavel Grachev (right).

Russian President Boris Yeltsin (center) and Russian Defense Minister Pavel Grachev (right). Igor Mikhalev / Sputnik

The incident with bringing Russia’s Strategic Nuclear Forces to combat readiness, soon became the property of the world community. When, four years later, the Norwegians were about to repeat their launch of Black Brant XII and reported this to the Russian Foreign Ministry, the US additionally warned all key Russian military departments about it through their channels. As a result, this time there were no unpleasant surprises. 


Continue Reading


Germany conducted exercises in case of nuclear war

Bundeswehr / Birthe Brechters

The Bundeswehr with partners in the North Atlantic Alliance ( NATO) trained in operations in a nuclear war.

The German army, together with Italian, Belgian and Dutch colleagues, conducted exercises in the event of a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons.

The location of the exercise “Steadfest Noon” was chosen airbase “Nörfenich”, where the tactical squadron of the Luftwaffe 31 “Boelcke” is located. Together with the Luftwaffe of the Bundeswehr, the air forces of other NATO countries, in particular, Italy, the Netherlands and Belgium, took part in the exercises.

According to a report by Bild, the exercise scenario involved training procedures for safely removing nuclear weapons from storage, delivering ammunition and installing them on aircraft. The training flights took place without nuclear weapons, and in parallel with the aviation exercises at the Büchel airbase, where the tactical squadron of the Luftwaffe 51 Immelman is located, the Resilient Guard air defense systems were trained to protect the airfield from air attacks.

The training sites for the Luftwaffe of the Bundeswehr were not chosen by chance, since the Nörfenich airbase is a reserve storage site for the B61, a hydrogen bomb that forms the basis of nuclear weapons of the US strategic nuclear forces. 

Some of this ammunition is stationed at NATO bases in Europe. The exact number of hydrogen bombs that are stored at European sites and which ones are not reported. In Europe, the B61 is carried by Panavia Tornado fighter-bombers (pictured) and General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon fighters.

Recall that the B61 thermonuclear bomb is the main weapon of the US strategic nuclear forces, although it entered service in 1968. Since 2012, a new guided version of the B61-12 has been under development, which will replace all B61 and B83 bombs that have been in service since 1983. It can be used both on strategic bombers and tactical aircraft. About two billion dollars were spent on the development of the 12th modification of the aerial bomb.

Continue Reading