Dr. AK Susheela, fluoride expert in India reported in a 2010 study in Current Science (pdf) that fluoride avoidance reduced anemia in pregnant women, decreased pre-term births, and enhanced babies’ birth-weight.
From the concluding paragraphs of the study:
Evaluating the background information retrieved from the pregnant women belonging to the sample and control groups is informative in the sense that in the sample group, members of a household are from a minimum of 2 to a maximum of 12. In the control group the maximum number was 7 and not beyond. The income per day varies from a minimum of Rs 83 (US$ 2.0) to a maximum of Rs 500/day (US$ 12.5) in the sample group. In control group, the income was a minimum of Rs 66 (US$ 11.5) to a maximum of Rs 300/day (US$ 7.5). The per capita income in the sample and control groups is a meagre amount. It ought to be noted that the pregnant women never came alone but were accompanied by family members. To and fro transport charges for two at frequent intervals may be beyond the means of the family. It would appear therefore that the cash availability was a deterrent for frequent hospital visits. This would also suggest that there may be constraints in the purchasing power for food as well and is likely to have an adverse impact.
This analysis also brings out the fact that application of intervention and number of visits by the subject for regular antenatal follow-up are interdependent. This means that, even if a particular subject is put under an intervention program, the subject may or may not visit for regular antenatal follow-up. However, for success/ effectiveness of interventions, subject’s number of visits (contacts) for antenatal follow-up should be highly associated with application of intervention. And, we should be expecting this to be so. This clearly indicates that there is a missing link here.
This brings up a question – ‘Are there any specific factors that govern how many times the subject is likely to be present for regular antenatal follow-ups?’ This is tested through a regression analysis. Table 11 depicts a snapshot of factors influencing number of contacts/visits.
It is observed that there is a significant influence of application of intervention on the subject and the locality type where the subject comes from on the number of subject’s visits. Subject’s locality type is observed to be a highly significant factor determining number of contacts by the subject. The negative sign indicates that the number of contacts declines from government locality to a slum area. We further performed a similar analysis only for subjects from the slum areas and, apparently, none of the factors explains any specific influence on the slum dweller’s behavior. There appears to be more for further investigation.
The first factor (application of intervention) throws up a bit of a confusing result to which we do not have a concrete answer at the moment. We could dig deeper into this relationship in a further analysis of our subsequent intervention programs. Though fluoridation of a variety of products is still in vogue in many nations, it is difficult to overlook the high percentage of pregnant women exposed to fluoride ingestion and being anemic in developing countries. A simple procedure of assessing fluoride in urine and Hb levels in women is adequate to introduce interventions for controlling anemia in such high percentage of pregnant women. It is evident from the data reported in this communication that maternal and child under-nutrition and anemia is not necessarily due to insufficient food intake but because of the derangement of nutrient absorption due to damage caused to GI, mucosa by ingestion of undesirable chemical substance, viz. fluoride through food, water and other sources. These aspects have so far been unexplored, and this is the first time such a possibility is investigated and results reported. The findings of this approach in the context of anemia in pregnancy provide a new path for reducing the burden of disabled and mentally challenged children25,27 by reducing percentage of low birth weight babies.
In a small percentage in sample group, though the urine fluoride was reduced, Hb did not rise. Low per capita income and not consuming adequate nutritive diet and possibly other reasons such as low thyroid hormone for nonproduction of adequate RBCs need to be explored. In conclusion, a novel and effective intervention approach therefore has scope for reducing anemia in pregnancy and improve birth weight of babies. Fluoride toxicity, as a risk factor was never considered even in the highly endemic regions for fluoride and fluorosis in India and around the globe. This is the first report dealing with fluoride, pregnancy, anemia, low birth weight babies and the linkages to act upon for the benefit of maternal and reproductive child health programs.
You’re about to discover the shocking truth about how fluoride ended up in your drinking water and how it is really affecting today’s population. Many people aren’t even aware that large amounts of fluoride are being added to the vast majority of the public water supply, and many of those who do know are terribly misinformed about why it’s there and the true effect that it has on our bodies.
When you look at the primary people who were initially involved in mandating water fluoridation, it starts to become quite clear that there is much more to it than trying to strengthen children’s teeth. This book goes into detail about how fluoride ended up in our water, who was involved, the terrifying potential health risks of consuming fluoride in your water, and what you can do to avoid it. Many people have suffered and even died because of fluoride consumption, and my hope is that this book will help the rest of the world wake up to the truth before it’s too late.
In a devastating exposé in the tradition of Silent Spring and Fast Food Nation, investigative journalist Randall Fitzgerald warns how thousands of man-made chemicals in our food, water, medicine, and environment are making humans the most polluted species on the planet. A century ago in 1906, when Congress enacted the Pure Food and Drug Act, Americans were promised “better living through chemistry.” Fitzgerald provides overwhelming evidence to shatter this myth, and many others perpetrated by the chemical, pharmaceutical, and processed foods industries. In the face of this national health crisis, Fitzgerald also presents informed and practical suggestions for what we can do to turn the tide and live healthier lives. Consider this:
- The average American carries a ‘body burden’ of 700 synthetic chemicals
- Chemicals in tap water can cause reproductive abnormalities and hermaphroditic birth
- A 2005 study of lactating women in eighteen U.S. states found perchlorate (a toxic component of rocket fuel) in practically every mother’s breast milk
The water you are drinking may be hazardous to your health! Water is the key to all body functions: Digestion; Assimilation; Muscles; Sex; Senses. This book allows you to examine the facts and learn about the best water for your health. Learn what water is safe to drink and use.
“This Bragg book is a shocker and should be required reading in medical schools, health-related fields, high schools and colleges. It should be read by everyone!”
– Chris Linville, M.D.
When the U.S. Public Health Service endorsed water fluoridation in 1950, there was little evidence of its safety. Now, six decades later and after most countries have rejected the practice, more than 70 percent of Americans, as well as 200 million people worldwide, are drinking fluoridated water. The Center for Disease Control and the American Dental Association continue to promote it–and even mandatory statewide water fluoridation–despite increasing evidence that it is not only unnecessary, but potentially hazardous to human health.
In this timely and important book, Dr. Paul Connett, Dr. James Beck, and Dr. H. Spedding Micklem take a new look at the science behind water fluoridation and argue that just because the dental and medical establishments endorse a public health measure doesn’t mean it’s safe. In the case of water fluoridation, the chemicals that go into the drinking water that more than 180 million people drink each day are not even pharmaceutical grade, but rather a hazardous waste product of the phosphate fertilizer industry. It is illegal to dump this waste into the sea or local surface water, and yet it is allowed in our drinking water. To make matters worse, this program receives no oversight from the Food and Drug Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency takes no responsibility for the practice. And from an ethical standpoint, say the authors, water fluoridation is a bad medical practice: individuals are being forced to take medication without their informed consent, there is no control over the dose, and no monitoring of possible side effects.
At once painstakingly documented and also highly readable, The Case Against Fluoride brings new research to light, including links between fluoride and harm to the brain, bones, and endocrine system, and argues that the evidence that fluoridation reduces tooth decay is surprisingly weak.