Email Us

 first sign of overexposure to fluoride

Dental fluorosis is an irreversible condition caused by excessive ingestion of fluoride during the tooth forming years. It is the first visible sign of overexposure to fluoride.

 fluoride poison rating

Fluorides are slightly more toxic than lead, and slightly less toxic than arsenic.
 - Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products

 so why ask a dentist?

Effects of ingested fluoride not within the purview of dentistry
- California Board of Dental Examiners


The California Code of Regulations, title 22  lists 791 chemicals as "Hazardous Waste." 39 of these are fluoride compounds. Two are used for drinking water fluoridation in Sacramento CA.
#384 Hydrofluosilicic Acid (X,C) and
#674 Sodium Fluoride (X)


Please Note: We do not intend to post every news item here, We recommend joining the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) for the latest news alerts and as your national fluoride news source.
See the Top 20 Fluoride News Stories of 2011


Water Fluoridation - A Roadblock to Greenness?
Feb 14, 2011 - B. Lambert

We keep hearing about our greenness. Here in Sacramento we have a tree program, various recycling programs, and other earth friendly initiatives. But can one policy trump all this? Can a city be truly green when it knowingly adds toxic chemicals imported from China to its drinking water? And to top it all, 99.99% of it is wasted. Lets look at the facts as the Sacramento Department of Utilities has presented them.

Questions came up at a June 22, 2010 Sacramento City Council budget hearing. This resulted in a request for additional information regarding the city's water fluoridation program. On July 1st Marty Hanneman, Director of Utilities sent the Mayor & City Council members a memorandum. It detailed the costs, chemicals used in, and ongoing maintenance related costs among other things, of the Sacramento Water Fluoridation program. This memorandum also highlighted the vast waste inherent in the delivery of the fluoride drug. Members of Fluoride Free Sacramento obtained a copy of this memo.<1>
 Sacramento Water Treatment Plant
The memorandum detailed the approximately $1 million annual cost to the department. Part of this cost is purchasing is the chemicals use, namely Sodium Fluoride & Fluorosilicic Acid. Another aspect is how the corrosive nature of the fluoridation chemicals are literally dissolving away very expensive equipment. This necessitates ongoing costly equipment repairs and replacement of the drug dosing equipment. For example, the E.A Fairbairn Water Treatment Plant currently required a $450 million infrastructure upgrade, and the Sacramento River Water Treatment Plant's fluoridation system will be due for replacement as well in 2014.

Now about those chemicals. The California Code of Regulations, title 22 <2> lists 791 chemicals as "Hazardous Waste," 39 of these are fluoride compounds. The memo lists two of these chemicals that are used for drinking water fluoridation in Sacramento; Hydrofluosilicic Acid and Sodium Fluoride. These are also not to be confused with the pharmaceutical quality fluoride in products, such as toothpaste, and mouthwash. Fluorosilicic Acid is a byproduct of the phosphate fertilizer industry. It contains levels of lead, arsenic and other heavy metals.<3> This is very toxic stuff by any standard.<4> Recent studies of fluoride use indicate a link to bone Chart of  Wasted  Fluoride cancer, bone fractures, thyroid disorder, lowered IQ and more.<5>

With regards to the waste factors involved, consider where the drug ends up. The sole intended target group is defined as children under five years of age. Parents please see note below. According to city calculations, less than 0.009% of fluoridated water produced is potentially consumed by this target group. In other words, over 99.99% of the fluoride is not even used by those that are supposed to need it, but is wasted by watering the lawn, dish washing, flushed down the drain, etc. In the memo, the Mr. Hanneman makes the analogy of taking one gallon of milk, using six drops of it and pouring the rest of the gallon in the sink. This waste process has also been shown to negatively effect life downstream.<6>

The sourcing of the chemicals is also not green at all, as in they are routinely shipped in from China and Japan.

    To recap the whole process: Ship in toxic chemicals from outside the country, then dump it all down the drain.  This is water fluoridation in a nutshell. Is there a green option? You tell me.

Note to parents; For health reasons, babies one year and under are to avoid all fluoride as recommended by the the American Dental Association and the Center for Disease Control.<7>  This would mean avoiding Sacramento drinking water and all processed food and juices, as these are commonly made with fluoridated water.

<2> - & -


Government Admits Fluoride Hurting Children
January 2011

A significant milestone in the fight against fluoride emerged quietly and without much notice from the mainstream media last week. After decades of ignoring research pointing to its dangers and a jingoist like promotion, the government is now calling for a reduction in the amount of fluoride it adds to public water supplies. This decision was based on its negative effect on teeth, described as dental fluorosis. Fourteen years after public health dentists recommended that fluoride levels be reduced to 0.7 ppm (Heller et al.), the Department of Health & Human Services has officially recommended doing so.

Dental fluorosis (white spots on teeth) is the only visible symptom of fluoride overexposure. A recent government report estimated that 41% of adolescents aged 12-15 have dental fluorosis. Because fluoride from water builds up over time in the human body, this reduction will not eliminate the dangers of fluoride. Recent studies indicate a link to bone cancer, bone fractures, thyroid disorder, lowered IQ and more. Further, the reduction of fluoride level may be proof that the warnings from activists, critics and health professionals may be heard after all.

Many of those health professionals who have been blowing the whistle on fluoridation for decades are employees or union contractors of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other governmental regulation agencies. Their objections, based on alarming scientific studies such as the one linking fluoridation with a sevenfold increase in bone cancer for boys, have heretofore been almost wholly ignored, until now. One reason for this government admission, by the way, likely has to do with limiting liability for those harmful effects, or even establishing immunity for districts who adhere to lowering the fluoride standard against future claims to harm.

At the same time, fluoridation chemicals contain levels of toxins like lead & arsenic which are banned by The Safe Drinking Water Act. The lead factor is partially the result of the acidic nature of fluoride which act to leach lead from home plumbing. (see our "Lead" page)

Furthermore, while fluoride is scheduled for reduction in public water supplies, it is still very common and often dangerously concentrated in many processed food and drinks. These sources should be factored in to determine the overall fluoride exposures.

Though the fluoride dangers are significant enough that we need to continue educating and informing our fellow citizens, those who have long spoken out about this issue can cherish one victory on the road to taking back our nation, our lives and our health. Now, with this important government admission, we must push for complete removal of added fluoride from public waters.

FAN's response to the lowering of fluoride in drinking water
January 8, 2011 - Fluoride Action Network

The wheels of bureaucracy grind slowly. Fourteen years after public health dentists recommended that fluoride levels be reduced to 0.7 ppm (Heller et al.), the Department of Health & Human Services has officially recommended doing so.

Fluoride Action Network is concerned that this new level of fluoride in drinking water has been set too high. It neither protects teeth from dental fluorosis, the stated reason for the lowering, nor does it protect the baby's developing brain, an issue not even mentioned by either the CDC or the EPA.

There have now been over 100 studies reporting that fluoride damages animal brain. There have also been 24 studies that have shown an association between exposure to moderate-to-high levels of fluoride and lowered IQ in children (Connett et al.). While some proponents have criticized the methodology of some of these studies, no fluoridated country (except for one small study in NZ) has attempted to repeat them. Ironically, the 24th IQ study (Xiang et al.) has just been pre-published online by Environmental Health Perspectives. This journal is published by the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) which is part of the DHHS. So the DHHS can hardly dismiss this study based upon a weak study design since it was peer-reviewed and deemed suitable for publication by one of its own agencies -- an agency, in fact, that specializes in environmental health research. MORE ...


Parents Warned Against Fluoride in Water
November 2006 - the American Dental Association (ADA) and the Center for Disease Control (CDC) issued a warning to parents of infants.

 warning to Sacramento parents Not only is fluoride ingestion during infancy unnecessary, it can also be harmful - as suggested by a mounting body of evidence linking fluoride exposure during the first year of life with the development of dental fluorosis.

The ADA and others recommend that children under 12 months of age should not consume fluoridated water while babies under 6 months of age should not receive any fluoride drops or pills. This was due to the risk for dental fluorosis, and the lack of demonstrable benefit from ingesting fluoride before teeth erupt.

Fluoridated drinking water contains up to 200 times more fluoride than breast milk (1000 ppb in fluoridated tap water vs 5-10 ppb in breast milk). As a result, babies consuming formula made with fluoridated tap water are exposed to much higher levels of fluoride than a breast-fed infant.

Dental fluorosis is not the only risk from early life exposure to fluoride. A recent review in The Lancet describes fluoride as "an emerging neurotoxic substance" that may damage the developing brain. Other recent studies link fluoride to both kidney and liver damage in children.

In addition, since fluoride was introduced to the drinking water of Sacramento in 2000, numerous studies have linked fluoride to arthritis, bone disease, low IQ, cancer, impaired thyroid function, kidney and liver functions. For more see


20 Questions - Absurdity Of - Books - Budget For - City Contacts - Dentists & Deniers - FAQS - Which "Fluoride?" - HandoutsLinks - Take Action - Sacramento Water Report - News - About Us  


 Back to Top