Programas, recursos y técnicas de educación emocional

By far the most common source of additional fluoride intake comes from beverage consumption. Beverages which contain fluoridated water in- clude reconstituted juices, punches, popsicles, other water-based frozen desserts and carbonated beverages. Studies have shown that soft drink consumption in the U.S. has increased markedly over the last two decades, not only among teenage boys from 15-17 years of age, but among 1-2 year old children. Statistics show that in Canada soft drink consumption increased by 37 percent from 1972 to 1981.²³ The increase in soft drink consumption coincided with a decrease in the consumption of milk, thereby increasing the overall fluoride intake. A number of stud- ies reveal that the dramatic increase in beverage consumption, coupled with fluoridation of municipal waters constitutes a potential health haz- ard.²⁴ Prolonged exposure to fluorides may actually increase rather than diminish the incidence of tooth decay. Enzymatic damage related to enamel mineralisation creates a parotic tooth far more susceptible to caries than would otherwise be the case.²⁵

In a major study of adverse effects of fluoride, Yiamouyiannis and Burk reported in 1977 that at least 10,000 people in the U.S. die every year of fluoride-induced cancer. In the introduction to their work 17 research papers are cited which demonstrate the mutagenic effects associated with fluorides.²⁶ There is now side consensus within the scientific community that the mutagenic activity of a substance can be regarded as an important indication of its potential cancer-causing activity.

Since those provocative studies over a decade ago, a vast scientific lit- erature has continued to accumulate which strongly indicates that the practice of fluoridating municipal water supplies is dangerous. In 1983 an Australian dental surgeon, G. Smith, reported a number of studies which suggest that there is now a serious risk to the public of fluoride overdose.

He argues that "the crucial argument does not concern the fluoride lev- el in a community water supply per se, but rather whether fluoridation increases the risk that certain people develop, even for a short time, levels of fluoride in the blood that can damage human cells and systems."²⁷

In 1985 another Australian scientist, M. Diesendorf, drew attention to the discovery of a whole new dimension to the health hazards associated with the ingestion of fluorides. Sodium fluoride, for example, had been found to cause unscheduled DNA synthesis and chromosonal aberrations in certain human cells.²⁸ Other recent studies purport to reveal the actual mechanism by virtue of which fluoride can disrupt the DNA molecule and the active sites of the molecules of many human enzymes.²⁹

When all is said, it is manifestly clear that the time has come for a seri- ous and comprehensive review of the policy which mandates the compul- sory fluoridation of our municipal water supplies. Such a review will no doubt require a multi-faceted approach in which reliable research investi- gations can be integrated with a philosophy of health education to assist their implementation. Through education it may be possible to appreciate that within nature itself are important patterns of design for an overall pro- gramme of health. In nature, for instance, fluorides are typically found in decidedly insoluble forms which are relatively safe. By deliberately inter- vening to make nature's insoluble forms of fluoride soluble we transform a relatively harmless natural substance into a concentrated and highly toxic substance which can then be indiscriminately dispersed throughout the environment as a poison. The subtle constellation of health clues which nature provides in respect of fluorides is further illustrated by the simple but elegant mechanisms of breastfeeding. Breastfed infants are actually protected from receiving more than extremely low concentrations of fluoride in breast milk by an inbuilt physiological plasma/milk barrier against fluoride.³⁰ There is much about health to learn from nature, but to do so we must be more concerned to join with nature in partnership than to stand back from nature to subdue and manipulate it.

Whether the fluoridation campaign must be indicted in the light of the evidence as one of the major public hoaxes perpetrated this century, is a judgement best reserved for the reader. Whatever the judgment, it is incon- testable that the prevention of tooth decay is not the bottom-line of the flu- oridation debate when the panacea has become the poison.

For more information on artificial fluoridation, we recommend to readers:

The Australian Fluoridation News, GPO Box 935G, Melbourne, Vic, 3001. This is a bi-monthly publication, which costs $15 per annum.

REFERENCES

1. N.I. Sax, Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, 2nd ed. (New York: Reinhold Publishing Corp., 1963), p. 1187.

2. L. Hodges, Environmental Pollution, 2nd ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1977), p. 64.

3. G.S.R. Walker, Fluoridation—Poison on Tap (Melbourne: Glen Walker Publisher, 1982), p. 40.

4. H.T. Dean, "Studies on the Minimal Threshold of the Dental Sign of Chronic Endemic Fluorosis," Public Health Rep, 50:1719-1729, 1934.

5. Walker, op. eit. p. 115.

6. D. Stevenson, "Fluoridation, Panacea or Poison?," Simply Living Mag- azine, Vol. 3, #6 (1988), p. 102.

7. G. Caldwell and RE. Zanfagna, Fluoridation and Truth Decay (Cali- fornia: Top-Ecol Press, 1974), p. 7.

8. Ibid.

9. W. Varney, Fluoride in Australia (Sydney: Hale & Iremonger, 1986), p. 14.

10. Walker, op. cit. p. 159.

11. Ibid.

12. Caldwell and Zanfagna, op. cit. p. 8.

13. B. Burt, Chem & Eng News (22 October 1979), p. 6.

14. G.L. Waldbott, Fluoridation: the Great Dilemma (Kansas: Coronado Press Inc., 1978).

15. D. Sherrell, Chem & Eng News (7 January 1980), p. 4.

16. J.R. Lee, Chem & Eng News (28 January 1980), pp. 4-5.

17. Walker, op. cit. p. 156.

18. Varney, op. cit.

19. Stevenson, op. cit. p. 103.

20. Ibid. p. 104.

21. Committee on Food Protection, Food and Nutritional Board National Research Council, Toxicants Occurring Naturally in Foods (Wash- ington, DC: National Academy of Science, 1973), pp. 12-14.

22. Walker, op. cit. p. 308.

23. J. Clovis and J.A. Hargreaves, "Fluoride Intake from Beverage Consumption," Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 16:14, 1988.

24. J. Mann, M. Tibi, and H.D. Sgan-Cohen, "Fluorosis and Caries Prevalence in a Community Drinking Above-Optional Fluoridated Water," Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 15:293-294, 1987.

25. Ibid. p. 295.

26. J. Yiamoyiannis and D. Burk, "Fluoridation and Cancer. Age- Dependence of Cancer Mortality Related to Artificial Fluoridation,"

Fluoride, 10:102-123, 1977.

27. G. Smith, "Fluoridation—Are the Dangers Resolved?," New Scientist (5 May 1983), p. 286.

28. M. Diesendorf, "Fluoride: New Risk?," Search, 16, nos. 5-6:129, 1985.

29. Ibid.

30. Smith, op. cit. p. 287