Healthy, Natural Paths to Health

[Harrison]

I’ve been reading & researching alternative therapies since 2002, when my lumbar pain starting getting very serious. Since then, I’ve talked to patients, doctors from many disciplines, university researchers, state and federal officials on a wide range of health topics. From these interactions, I’ve learned a lot and have come to some rather stunning conclusions regarding natural therapies:

- there is most definitely a link between diet and degenerative diseases, including degenerative disc disease (see this link (http://www.adrsupport.org/forums/f50/nutrition-spinal-disc-health-10759/));
- proper nutrition is not only a “best practice,” but it can be a way to cure certain diseases, even some cancers (yup, that’s what I said!);
- almost 60% of Americans are taking medications, but these are usually palliative remedies that adulterate human health, especially the liver and even the endocrine system.

These conclusions are well-documented in literature from experts in both private and governmental sectors. I’ll be referencing and footnoting these sometimes controversial conclusions as I post.

My initial posts will focus on a few things I’ve recently researched: juicing for better health and the detrimental effects of water fluoridation on human health. My hope is that these alternative views help patients consider non-toxic alternatives to find and reach better health.

[Harrison]

Now I know that everyone takes water fluoridation as a foregone conclusion as it is thought the be a good additive to improve dental health. But did you know that:

- That fluoride is not an essential nutrient and is abundant in toothpastes, mouthwashes, juices, (some) bottled water and many other products?
- Many authoritative studies (http://www.fluoridealert.org/statement.august.2007.html) demonstrate detrimental effects of fluoride, including skeletal fluorosis and ironically dental fluorosis?
- Studies that show adverse effects on the thyroid, kidneys, pineal gland et al? That fluoride directly affects how the thyroid functions – even displaces iodine?
- That the CDC stated that 10-12% of Americans are iodine deficient?
- Newer studies show direct correlations between fluoridation and hip osteoporosis?
- That many US cities ban the addition of fluoride to water? That many countries do too? That some cities have performed extensive analysis (http://www.fluoridation.com/naticks.htm) on the detrimental effects of water fluoridation and have unanimously voted against it because of adverse health effects?

Folks, I could go on and on about this, but will simply attach a few documents that summarize the exigent issues on this important topic. If anyone is interested, I can send you the specific filters I use to filter out pesticides, pharmaceuticals and fluoride from our water.

[Harrison]

Attached, find a detailed summary from the lead researcher from the National Academy of Sciences, who studied effects of water fluoridation's on the endocrine system.

Please also note: some spine doctors are now focusing on thyroid and parathyroid health to assess patients' bone metabolism and overall health.

[Harrison]

When I can, I continue to read articles regarding environmental factors that contribute to arthritis and other spinal degenerative diseases. I continue to be amazed with the adverse health effects associated with fluoridated water; more so when I find thousands of research articles describing all the toxic effects on the human body; the brain, nervous system, thyroid, skeleton, GI tract, etc.

Any way, our friends with spine problems in the UK may find this old paper rather interesting!

_______________________________

The LANCET: Fluoride Studies in a Patient wtih Arthritis
Paper by Cook 1971
The LANCET

October 9, 1971

FLUORIDE STUDIES IN A PATIENT WITH ARTHRITIS

A high intake of fluoride (F-) is known to cause severe skeletal fluorosis, but the actual fluoride intake required to produce fluorosis is unknown. I have shown that tea-drinking in Britain causes a high intake in both children and adults, maximum intakes in children surveyed reaching nearly 6 mg. daily in unfluoridated areas and nearly 7 mg. daily in fluoridated areas. (1) It is possible that fluoride intake from tea may be sufficient to cause fluorosis, and I report here a case which gives some evidence for this.

A woman of 55 had been crippled by arthritis for about 25 years. 12 years ago she moved to a higher water-fluoride area because she understood it was healthy for teeth and bones. The water contained 0.67 p.p.m. fluoride. She was a heavy tea-drinker, and sought my help after reading an article by me in a lay magazine. Blood calcium, magnesium, and inorganic phosphorus, obtained by her local doctor, were normal. X-rays from the local hospital showed spinal disc degeneration but no obvious signs of fluorosis; some discs showed possible signs of osteoarthritis, and there were some exostoses. I carried out fluoride-balance studies on her fluid intake and urinary excretion, the diet remaining unchanged throughout the investigation. She was drinking 3-4 pints of tea daily, and fluoride intake, measured with a specific fluoride electrode, reached over 9 mg. daily. The following results were obtained:

(table omitted; see entire article here (http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/bone/fluorosis/arthritis/cook1971.html).)

On Nov. 11, 1970, she was examined and re-X-rayed by Dr. J.T. Scott, of the Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology. He confirmed the longstanding disc degeneration, and stated that, in his opinion, her case did not appear suggestive of fluorosis.

If this patient was indeed suffering from the effects of high fluoride intake, it could not be diagnosed radiologically. It is noteworthy that the urinary excretion of fluoride, before tea-drinking stopped, was in the range of 1.5 to 2.0 ppm, which according to Machle and Largent (2) is indicative of fluoride retention.

Little more than 3 months after stopping tea-drinking she reported that pain had diminished to the point where she was almost able to do without analgesics, and that mobility had increased so that she had been able to take on a job as representative, involving a considerable amount of walking. The improvement continued, and after 6 months she reported that she was virtually free of pain, and considered she could do without drugs. In July, one year after stopping tea-drinking, she reported that further improvement had apparently ceased, but there had been no deterioration and she was able to do without pain-killing drugs except in emergency.

Possibly some cases of pain diagnosed as rheumatism or arthritis may be due to subclinical fluorosis which is not radiologically demonstrable.

H.A. Cook
Scientific Committee for the
Study of Fluoridation Hazards
14 St. Albans St.
London S.W.1.

Also see: Fluoride & Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (www.fluoridealert.org/health/bone/fluorosis/arthritis/dish.html)(DISH)

[Harrison]

Finally, some progress...better late than never:

U.S. Wants to Reduce Fluoride in Drinking Water

Officials Call for Lower Fluoride Levels to Prevent Dental Problems Due to Excess Fluoride

U.S. Wants to Reduce Fluoride in Drinking Water (http://www.webmd.com/oral-health/news/20110107/us-wants-to-reduce-fluoride-in-drinking-water?page=2)

An excerpt:

"...The effects of excess fluoride aren't just a dental concern, says Houlihan. Some data suggest that excess fluoride may also be linked with skeletal bone damage, she says, and possibly hormone disruption. "It has also been deemed an emerging neurotoxin."

Are you guys reading this stuff? Is it making sense? Helping?! ;)

[Harrison]

Is Fluoride Really As Safe As You Are Told?

Is Fluoride Really As Safe As You Are Told? 2/2/02 (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2002/02/02/fluoride-safety-part-one.aspx)

[Lillyth]

Can I just say I love you? I have been posting about these things for years and everyone just calls me a conspiracy wacko. Fluoride is bad news and, in your drinking water, it does nothing for your teeth at all. Hitler put in the water supply to make the Jews more docile. And no. I'm not making that up. There is no earthly reason for it to be in our water supply.

Oh, and if you really want something to blow your mind, go watch the trailer for Raw in 30 Days. They took six diabetics INCLUDING A TYPE ONE DIABETIC and CURED THEM in 30 days of eating only raw foods. As in Diabetes GONE. Pretty cool, and really does confirm how important it is for us to eat well.

Keep fighting the good fight brother!

[Harrison]

Bebe, love right back at you!

Sadly, as you know, the research identifying the destructive role of fluoride on the body, particularly the endocrine system (THYROID!) is well documented. Even Dr. Max Gerson figured this out in the 1950s, and showed how fluoride (et al) disrupts hundreds of enzymes in the thyroid -- and even displaces iodine. See the previous topics and attachments for the corroborating research performed by the National Academy of Sciences.

There is so much fluoride in toothpaste, we are advised to call Poison Control if we swallow it. And why do we allow the state to poison our water? It's crazy. :rant: We are "wacko" if we drink this poison!

[Harrison]

Here's the link that Lillyth suggested:

::. RAW FOR THIRTY .:: (http://www.rawfor30days.com/)

Raw food can be your way to good health. Simple concept, though may be hard to swallow for many...

:sulkoff:

[Lillyth]

Lemme tell you story. (Please read that in your best Natasha and Boris bad cartoon Russian accent). :laugh:

When I was 13 I went to my local dentist. I was living in the tiny town of Yountville, CA. When I was 13 I was the same height and weight as I am now, roughly. This will become important later on. The dentist did whatever it was he was supposed to do to me (don't remember what it was, and it's not important anyway).

After he was all done, his assistant came in, put a small cup down in front of me and said, "Here ya go!" then walked out. Now mind you, she did NOT tell me to rinse with it and spit it out. So picked up the cup and swallowed the WHOLE THING. Yes. I drank the ENTIRE cup of fluoride. At this point, I started to feel kind of ill. The assistant came back in and I told her I wasn't feeling good. Somehow (things are kind of fuzzy) she sussed out that I had swallowed the entire cup of fluoride. Now, did my dental professionals rush me to the ER or Poison Control like they should have? Noooooooooo... Did they call my father? Noooooooooooooooo... What did they do? They sent me home. On my own. After all, it was only two and a half blocks.

I don't really remember how I even got home. I recall, about a quarter of a block after leaving the dentist's office shaking, being dizzy (so dizzy I had to hold on a fence so I could even walk straight), walking like the worst impression of a drunk person you can imagine, then violently vomiting into the ground and promptly blacking out.

Now, here is the response protocol: "If you or your loved one are experiencing any life-threatening or other
emergency symptoms, including fainting, convulsions, difficulty breathing,
swelling, heart irregularities, or any other very frightening symptom,
and/or if you know that there has been some immediate, heavy fluoride
exposure, such as a child drinking a fluoride rinse or a lot of toothpaste:
IMMEDIATELY CALL YOUR NEAREST POISON CONTROL CENTER AND/OR
BRING TO THE NEAREST EMERGENCY ROOM! DO NOT HESITATE!"

Now mind you, I was the size of a full grown adult. What the hell would this do to a CHILD?

I had all of those symptoms. :Dead: All of them. Yet, we put this crap in our water. I am so very clear after that experience that fluoride is a POISON. If you swallow it, you are supposed to call POISON Control. Hello? This would indicate it is a what? A POISON.

To recap: I shook, my heart went all wonkey, I blacked out after vomiting, I don't even know how I got home. Only a poison can do that to you.

Oh, and did I mention I have thyroid issues? Coincidence? I think not.

[Lillyth]

Here's the link that Lillyth suggested:

::. RAW FOR THIRTY .:: (http://www.rawfor30days.com/)

Raw food can be your way to good health. Simple concept, though may be hard to swallow for many...

:sulkoff:

Yeah, I love the part where the 400 lb. diabetic who is walking with a cane says he "can't take it" anymore and leaves, even though he was feeling better. He is picked up by his 400 lb. relative, also diabetic and walking with a cane. :wtf:

I LOVE food, am a self admitted "foodie" and I cannot even IMAGINE that anything would be more important than my health. The idea of being that overweight and sick, having someone show me a way I can healthy? How could I NOT stick with it?

While we are on the subject, SUGAR is something to be avoided as well. It actually causes your brain to not notice when you are full. So you eat more because you think you are still hungry, but really, you're not. Not to mention it causes inflammation. As you well know, as spine patients, we really don't need any extra inflammation.

[Harrison]

FLUORIDE: 1 MORE DEADLY GOVERNMENT EXPERIMENT

Exclusive: Dr. Lee Hieb argues risks to your health shouldn't be mandated

Dr. Lee Hieb is an orthopaedic surgeon specializing in spinal surgery. She is past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, a free market medical organization.

A few weeks ago I wrote an article on bioweapons and particularly my fears about smallpox. For me, a terrorist release of smallpox is the most terrifying prospect that should keep every legislator, scientist and attentive citizen awake at night.

But, interestingly, in the comments after the article, the back and forth devolved into a discussion of fluoride in our water. Fluoride? Really?

When I’m talking about an egg-full of virus with the potential of killing 60 percent of the world’s population … well, the answer is yes, fluoride. As it turns out, the readers were paying attention more than I or any member of organized (read: regimented) medicine about the dangers of fluoridation.

Fluorides are naturally occurring compounds that can seep into the water supply from certain rock formations, notably granite deposits. Before man-made inorganic fluorides were introduced into our water supply, researchers measured water around the world for various compounds and decided that just the right level of fluoride was helpful in preventing dental cavities. Too little fluoride: cavities. Too much fluoride: fluorosis, or mottling and discoloration of teeth, and abnormalities in overall bone formation. It seemed that the optimum amount was about 1 ppm (part per-million). Dentists, especially the American Dental Association, hailed this discovery as a great boon to childrens’ teeth everywhere and recommended cities adopt policies of fluoridating water to the correct level.

My father, Martin Deakins, M.D., Ph.D., D.D.S., was an early pioneer in dental research on the chemistry of teeth enamel and wrote numerous papers on the benefits of fluoride. He and his partner developed the first fluoride toothpaste – called ChildDent – but unfortunately lost the race to the patent, so I am continuing to work for a living. Ah, well. He was instrumental in getting my little Iowa town to begin fluoridation of the water. So it is with great irony that I, an orthopaedic surgeon, am in the position 60 years later of trying to get that decision reversed.

For years, there have been concerns raised whether or not fluoride supplementation increases cancer. No one can sort out the conflicting literature on the subject – certainly not I. But multiple agencies including the International Agency for Research on Cancer (of the World Health Organization), the U.S. Public Health Service and the British National Health Service basically conclude that the risk is unknown, asserting that some studies raise concern.

Interestingly, in a systemic review in 2000, the NHS commented, “Given the level of interest surrounding the issue of public water fluoridation, it is surprising to find that little high quality research has been undertaken.”

It is, of course, impossible to prove a negative with ultimate certainty. But the above statement suggests that the lack of safety data is troubling to some.

In 2006, a partial report released from a Harvard study showed that osteosarcoma was slightly more prevalent in boys exposed to fluoridated water, but not girls. The numbers barely reached statistical significance but take on more verisimilitude given that the same, sex-linked disparity was noted in animal studies – i.e. more male rats than female rats got osteosarcoma with fluoride exposure.

Confounding many of these epidemiological studies is the fact that artificially added inorganic fluoride is much more damaging to living tissue (not to mention corrosive to pipes) than organic, naturally occurring fluorides. And when measuring only the absolute levels of the fluoride anion, studies wind up comparing apples to oranges.

It is my experience and belief that, in the history of science and medicine, one very good study, one smart guy who looks at things in a logical way, is more apt to be right than a ton of studies that have to be mathematically analyzed for significance. Perhaps the most outspoken of the qualified opponents to fluoridation is Dr. Dean Burke, Ph.D, a co-founder of the National Cancer Institute and its head of the cytochemistry division for many years. Instead of measuring fluoride levels around the country, and instead of looking at one particular type of cancer, he and some colleagues examined overall cancer rates in cities after fluoridation.

It is worth quoting him at length: “We took the ten largest cities that had been fluoridated and compared with the ten largest cities that had not been fluoridated. The fluoridation didn’t start until 1952 to 1956 and has been continued ever since in the fluoridated group. Between 1940 and 1952 these two groups were identical, could not be distinguished on this curve. but from 1952 on, the curves have been continually widening to the point that there’s now a difference of approximately 35,000 a year. There’s no question about the data or our particular arrangement of it. The data is from government sources, which any high school student can look up and confirm. Nearly all of the fluoridation-linked cancer deaths are found to begin at the age of about 45 and then steadily increase with age. This situation is sharply different from the increased cancer deaths resulting from cigarette smoking, asbestos or hormones given to expectant mothers where a lag of 15 to 30 years is common. Increased death rates due to fluoridated water commence within a few years after initiation of fluoridation with marked continued increase thereafter.”

It is also true that when fluoridation began, there were few other sources of fluoride, but today we have fluoride dental rinses (at home at school and professionally), we use fluoride toothpaste, eat processed foods and drink exotic teas and wines with naturally occurring fluorides.

Dr. Albert Burgstahler, of the University of Kansas estimates the average adult daily intake today at 2-3 mg a day, at or above the “safe dose” of 1.5 to 2mg a day. An oral dose of 3 mg a day, as reported in the Canadian Medical Association Journal 50 years ago by Dr. William Costain, created ill effects in every test subject – effects ranging from bladder irritation to mental disturbance.

Too often in medicine we accept treatments that clearly benefit one body system at the expense of another. Due to specialization, we are ignorant of the problems that a targeted treatment may have caused somewhere else in the body.

Given the dramatic effects of fluoride in reducing cavities, the American Dental Association still pushes fluoridation unqualifiedly. But as far back as the 1940s the AMA had its doubts.

In October 1944, a JAMA editorial discussing known and unknown risks of fluoridation concluded, “We cannot afford the risk of producing such serious systemic disturbances in applying what is at present a doubtful procedure intended to prevent development of dental disfigurements.”

Ultimately, this is not a question of science, but of freedom. Most municipalities control the water supply totally for its population – you can’t sink your own well. So if the city politicos decide to add something, be it fluoride or anything else, most people cannot choose to avoid exposure. The poor are more apt to be harmed by this because they often cannot afford bottled water or a reverse osmosis system (which does eliminate fluorides in the water).

Again, Dr. Burke was eloquent when he stated on Canadian radio, “There have been almost as many excess deaths associated with fluoridation as the sum total of all American military deaths since the founding of the USA in 1776. Now that’s an awful burden for the pro-fluoridationists to bear if they can come to see that they have been responsible for this.”

Although I think he is probably right, whether Dr. Burke’s number is totally accurate is beside the point. The moral responsibility is the same. Given the sometimes murky and fleeting nature of “truth” in science, the decision to take fluoride for dentition, or not to take fluoride should be left to the individual. Oral fluoride tablets are available, so putting it in the water is not the only option. We should work to remove it from our public water supply and to avoid going down this road again when the next bright idea comes along.

Sorry, Dad.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/fluoride-1-more-deadly-government-experiment/print/

[Lillyth]

What a great article! I am SO reposting that!

Also, if you would like to check the fluoride status of YOUR city, check here: International Anti-Fluoridation Database (http://www.just-think-it.com/the-f-db.htm#CA)