When one considers the seriousness of a possible interference by fluoride on a growing child's pineal gland (and for that matter, elderly pineal glands) it underlines the recklessness of fluoridation. The precautionary principle would say, as would basic common sense, that you don't take these kind of risks with our children for a benefit which, at best, amounts to 0.6 tooth surfaces out of 128 tooth surfaces in a child's mouth (Brunelle and Carlos, 1990, Table 6).

I have a copy of Luke's Ph.D. thesis and would be willing to share it with those who have a serious scientific interest in this issue. The other references cited above can be found in my Statement of Concern which is published on the FAN webpage: http://www.fluoridealert.org/fluoride-statement.htm

Paul Connett

Related:

Please check out this link and sign the petition asking Walmart to stop selling fluoride "Nursery Water" for infants.

Fluoride: Friend or Foe?
by David De Santo

GERMANS & RUSSIANS USED FLUORIDE TO MAKE PRISONERS 'STUPID & DOCILE

The Fluoride Deception: How a Nuclear Waste Byproduct Made Its Way Into the Nation's Drinking Water