OTHER WELL-RESPECTED SCIENCE THE NEW SCIENCE SHOWS FLUORIDE IS NOT SAFE There are strong Canadian connections with most of the following studies. Christine Till, who was the lead author of both the Green and Till studies, teaches at York University; Bruce Lanphear (co-author of the Green and Till studies), an American citizen who teaches at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver; and Howard Hu, the lead author of the Bashash studies, who did his research at the University of Toronto for many years. Kids and Cavities: Is It Time to Rethink Children’s Dental Health? : Tooth decay is surging among children globally, even with an increasing number of kids eating healthier and brushing regularly. Emerging research suggests maternal nutrition, toxin exposure and gut health — as well as overexposure to fluoride — are factors in oral health. Prenatal and childhood exposure to fluoride and cognitive development: findings from the longitudinal MINIMat cohort in rural Bangladesh : There are indications that fluoride exposure considered to be beneficial for dental health may not be safe from a neurodevelopmental perspective. Urinary fluoride concentrations measured prenatally and during childhood (child urinary fluoride concentrations above -0.47 on the log2 scale (corresponding to 0.72 mg/L) were associated with lower cognitive abilities, especially perceptual reasoning and verbal abilities, in Bangladeshi children. January 2025 - Fluoride Exposure and Children’s IQ Scores : This systematic review and meta-analysis of 74 cross-sectional and prospective cohort studies, which included three Canadian studies, found inverse associations between fluoride exposure and children’s IQ scores. The quality of individual studies, also called risk-of-bias, was independently evaluated using the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) Risk of Bias Rating Tool. In the 22 low risk-of-bias studies, the association between fluoride exposure and IQ was inverse, even when exposure was restricted to <1.5 mg/L fluoride in drinking water, as well as <1.5 mg/L fluoride in urine. November 2024 - Community Water Fluoridation a Cost–Benefit–Risk Consideration : The authors compared the economic value of dental caries averted by community water fluoridation to the costs of treating the harms of fluoridation. They determined that fluoridation is not cost-effective when the cost of harm (the cost of treating cosmetic dental fluorosis and lower wages due to developmental neurotoxicity) is included. They concluded that all streams of evidence should be considered for policy evaluation, including: lack of individual choice, risks, desired dosage, total exposure, jurisdiction, research quality, environmental justice, ethics, alternatives, and lack of a cost–benefit. October 2024 - Does adding fluoride to water supplies prevent tooth decay?: Researchers from the international Cochrane Network reviewed the scientific literature to evaluate the effects of initiation or cessation of community water fluoridation (CWF) on dental caries and they concluded that CWF may lead to a slightly greater reduction in decayed, missing and filled teeth (DMFT) and a slightly greater increase in the proportion of caries‐free children, but with smaller effect sizes than pre‐1975 studies. They found insufficient evidence to determine the effect of cessation of CWF on caries and whether water fluoridation results in a change in disparities in caries according to socioeconomic status. July 2024: PKC-θ is an important driver of fluoride-induced immune imbalance of regulatory T cells/effector T cells – This Chinese study explored the mechanism of fluoride interference in the immune system and the key indicators of fluoride-induced immune damage. It represents the first evidence suggesting that Protein Kinase C-θ (PKC-θ) may be the key to immune imbalance in the body under fluoride exposure. May 2024: Maternal Urinary Fluoride and Child Neurobehavior at Age 36 Months – This study published in JAMA Network Open found that prenatal fluoride exposure may increase the risk of neurobehavioral problems among children living in an optimally fluoridated area in the United States. A 0.68 mg/L increase in maternal urinary fluoride during pregnancy was associated with nearly double the odds of borderline clinical or clinical neurobehavioral problems. February 2024: Grandjean, Hu, Till et al . Dose dependence of prenatal fluoride exposure associations with cognitive performance at school age in three prospective studies - This study merged data from a prospective Odense Child Cohort (OCC) with results from two previous birth cohort studies from Mexico and Canada to characterize fluoride’s dose-effect relationship, and found a statistically significant association between urine-fluoride and IQ. The study concluded that pregnant women and children may need protection against fluoride toxicity. January, 2024, The LOTUS Study – With 6.4 million study subjects, this is the largest fluoride study ever conducted . Its aim was to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of water fluoridation for adults and adolescents. Over 10 years, people receiving optimally fluoridated water experienced only a 2% reduction in the number of decayed, missing, and filled teeth, compared to those whose water was not fluoridated. The study found NO meaningful benefit to water fluoridation , nor any compelling evidence that water fluoridation reduced social inequalities in dental health. [ WATCH VIDEO -1:37 minutes ] January 2024: Fluoride exposure and thyroid hormone levels in pregnancy – This is the first study to investigate sex differences in the association between fluoride exposure and maternal thyroid hormone levels in pregnancy. It found that 1 mg/L increase in urinary fluoride was associated with a 35% increase in thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) among women pregnant with girls . Urinary fluoride concentration is an objective biomarker of short-term fluoride exposure. It allows for more precise estimates of fluoride intake from multiple sources. *The MIREC Study, which started in 2007, is an ongoing study to examine the effects of prenatal exposure to environmental chemicals on the health of pregnant women and their infants. November 2023: Systematic review of epidemiological and toxicological evidence on health effects of fluoride in drinking water – This Canadian study identifies both dental fluorosis and reduction in children's IQ scores as key endpoints for establishing a health-based value (HBV) for fluoride in drinking water. The authors state that neurodevelopmental cognitive effects may warrant special consideration in determining HBV. They suggest a “point of departure” of 1.56 mg/L for fluoride in drinking water for establishing a reference dose and public health safety guidelines, based only on the lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) for moderate and severe dental fluorosis. They do not address the potential impact on IQ scores. September, 2023 – A study by University of Calgary researchers found “poorer inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility” in preschool children whose mothers were pregnant during times when the water was fluoridated in Calgary, Canada. The authors said their tests measured “executive function deficits [that have been] consistently associated with behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders such as ADHD, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), intellectual disability, and specific learning disorders” . Executive dysfunction disrupts the ability to manage thoughts, emotions, and actions, including the ability to pay attention, solve problems, listen, and multitask. June 2023: Expert panel meeting on the health effects of fluoride in drinking water – Health Canada engaged six experts to consider scientific evidence on fluoride exposure, dental fluorosis, and potential effects on neurocognitive development in children. They were also tasked with providing scientific recommendations for Health Canada to consider in deriving a health-based value for fluoride in drinking water. A supporting statement in the summary report notes that several studies have raised concerns regarding the potential neurocognitive effects of fluoride at community exposure levels and that some of these studies suggest adverse effects at lower exposure levels than those that cause dental fluorosis. The experts stated that the science concerning neurocognitive effects and fluoride is rapidly evolving, and consideration should be given to new studies as they become available. Till et al., April 2023 – Professor Christine Till and PhD student Meaghan Hall found an association between fluoride exposure from tap water and hypothyroidism in pregnancy. They say this latest study may explain an earlier study looking at maternal fluoride exposure in pregnancy and lower IQ in boys. “The findings are concerning because hypothyroidism is a known cause of brain-based disorders in children,” says Till. Hall and Till say they hope that policy makers will consider this new research when evaluating the safety of community water fluoridation November 2022 – Evaluation of water fluoridation in Cumbria UK: the CATFISH prospective longitudinal cohort study : The aim of the CATFISH (Cumbrian Assessment of Teeth a Fluoride Intervention Study for Health) study was to address the question of whether or not the addition of fluoride to community drinking water, in a contemporary population, led to a reduction in the number of children with caries and, if so, is this reduction cost-effective. It concluded that the prevalence of caries and the impact of water fluoridation was much smaller than previous studies have reported. June, 2021 – Well-designed prospective cohort studies funded by both the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [NIEHS] in the USA as well as Health Canada, have shown a loss of IQ and increased symptoms of ADHD in offspring when pregnant women are exposed to fluoride at doses commonly experienced in fluoridated communities in Canada (Bashash, 2017, 2018 and Green, 2019). The consequences are shocking! According to Dr. Philippe Grandjean, from Harvard University, “Fluoride is causing a greater overall loss of IQ points today than lead, arsenic or mercury” , as detailed in this risk analysis . February, 2021 – Fluoride exposure and duration and quality of sleep in a Canadian population-based sample: This study examined associations between fluoride exposure and sleep outcomes among older adolescents and adults in Canada. It found that fluoride exposure may contribute to sleeping less than the recommended duration. Fluoride from dietary and environmental sources may concentrate in calcium-containing regions of the body such as the pineal gland. The pineal gland synthesizes melatonin, a hormone that regulates the sleep-wake cycle. Till et al., 2020 have shown a large reduction in IQ when children were bottle-fed as babies in communities which were fluoridated, compared with babies who were bottle-fed in non-fluoridated communities. According to Linda Birnbaum, Ph.D., former Director of the U.S. NIEHS (2009-2019) and two leading public health researchers (Bruce Lanphear, MD, MPH, and Christine Till, PhD) who authored two key fluoride-IQ studies (Green, 2019 and Till, 2020), ingestion of fluoride during pregnancy confers no dental benefit to the fetus, so this is a situation where risks are being taken for no proven benefit ( see their editorial published in Environmental Health News, Oct 7 2020 ). An important well-conducted study from Sweden has shown an increased prevalence of hip fracture in post-menopausal women associated with long term exposure to natural fluoride at levels in water in the same range as Canada fluoridates its water [ Helte et. al., 2021 ] . This is very serious because, as you probably know, hip fractures in the elderly are debilitating, costly to treat, lead to a loss of independence and often shortens the life of those impacted. This finding also underlines the fact that fluoride can impact our health over a whole lifetime of exposure. These icons will reveal the following scientific studies from the years 2000 and 2015: A letter from the chair of the advisory panel for the year 2000 British York Review followed by the complete review which at the time was considered the most rigorous and respected scientific review on the effects of water fluoridation. A summary of the year 2015 Cochrane review on the effects of water fluoridation. NOTE: The Cochrane Review, the 2000 York Review, and the 2006 US National Academies of Sciences National Research Council's 3.5 year review are the only independent systematic reviews ever done on the scientific research looking at the effects of fluoride in drinking water. This makes these reviews the most rigorous & least biased. Further descriptions about systematic reviews are offered on the Making Sense of the Science page. Chair of Advisory Panel for York Review Summary Cochrane Review (2015) Making Sense of the Science From 2015 to current: Brenda Staudenmaier is a Plaintiff in the US lawsuit against water fluoridation and maintains on her website fluoridelawsuit.com a “sampling” of the scientific studies and reports relevant to water fluoridation published since the US Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) 2015 recommendation to lower the fluoridation target to 0.7 ppm. fluoridelawsuit.com

BABY FORMULA & FLUORIDATED WATER The icon provided on Fluoride Formula Calculations shows on page 1, how babies fed formula mixed with fluoridated water receive amounts of fluoride that exceed the Canadian Dental Association’s daily limits, and far surpass amounts of fluoride found in breast milk. Pages 2 and 3 of this document provide the formulas, and references needed for making the calculations on page1. Fluoride Formula Calculations

INCONSISTENCIES & CONTRADICTIONS The 1st three Icon links from this page lead to highlighted documents from the Canadian Dental Association (CDA), American Dental Association (ADA), and the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) demonstrating inconsistencies & contradictions about the safety of fluoridated water. NOTE: Fluoridating water = chemically raising the fluoride levels in a population’s water to 0.7 ppm = 0.7 mg/l = .23mg in a regular glass of water (333ml) = pea size amount of toothpaste Since the 1970's, US & CND residents have been ingesting increasing amounts of fluoride whether their water is fluoridated or not. These increasing levels of exposure are due to: The widespread availability of fluoridated toothpaste, mouthwash, & other fluoridated dental products. Increased fluoride levels in conventionally grown & especially processed foods & drinks with some products now containing as much as 9 times the amount of fluoride in fluoridated water . As seen in the icon links provided, US & CND dental & public health associations acknowledge processed food & drink sources of fluoride when discussing risks of over exposure to fluoride with fluoride supplements & baby formula mixed with fluoridated water, yet completely ignore or dismiss these other sources of fluoride when promoting water fluoridation. What is even more contradictory are the guidelines for dosage monitoring, & the need to acquire consent that dentists must follow when they are advising parents about the safe use of fluoridated toothpaste, mouthwash, & oral supplements, but then pay no attention to dosage monitoring or consent when insisting that municipalities fluoridate public water. For example, a pea size amount of regular fluoridated toothpaste contains the same amount of fluoride as a regular glass of fluoridated water (0.23 mg) , yet between pages 3 & 5 in the doc linked here, the CDA states that a child under the age of 3 must not be given any fluoridated toothpaste or at most a rice grain amount of toothpaste . The CDA also states that children under 3 should not be given any fluoridated mouthwash rinses, & as for fluoride supplements, the CDA and ADA stipulate that babies under 6 months can not be given any amount, & children between 6 months & 3 years can be given no more than 0.25 mg of fluoride per day & only if they are in a non fluoridated region with no access to fluoridated toothpaste . Yet somehow it's safe for babies in fluoridated regions to absorb levels of fluoride that far surpass fluoride levels in recommended amounts of toothpaste or 0.25 mg supplements when they are bottle fed with fluoridated water, & eventually through any water they drink or foods & drinks their parents prepare for them with fluoridated water. Canadian Dental Association US Centers for Disease Control Baby Formula & Fluoridated water Baby Toothpaste Regular Toothpaste Fluoride Supplements

CONTACT US SEND Success! Message received SafeWaterCalgary@gmail.com

CANADIAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION The icon on this page leads to an official Canadian Dental Association (CDA) document demonstrating contradictions between the CDA's claim that fluoridated water is safe and the CDAs guidelines for daily fluoride exposure limits from toothpaste, mouth rinses and oral supplements to protect against children developing dental fluorosis . In the first pages, fluoridating water is endorsed as a safe way of reducing tooth decay. CDA Official Web Documents NOTE: Fluoridating water = chemically raising the fluoride levels in a population’s water to 0.7 ppm = 0.7 mg/l = .23mg in a regular glass of water (333ml) = a pea size amount of toothpaste. Then on pages 3 and 4, guidelines to minimize exposure to fluoride from fluoridated toothpaste, mouthwash and oral supplements are incongruous with the idea that it is safe to increase everyone's — and especially children's — overall daily dose of fluoride through fluoridating water. The dosage .05 to .07 mg fluoride per kg per day is provided as a blood level of fluoride from all sources that the CDA states must not be exceeded to protect against the development of dental fluorosis. When you do the math, the following are examples of children and people whose fluoride levels would exceed the CDA’s daily limits if the water they drink and prepare food with is fluoridated to .7ppm = .7 mg/l = .23mg in a regular glass of water. Formula fed babies whose formula is mixed with fluoridated water. Children who regularly consume industrially grown & especially processed foods & drinks that now contain significant levels of fluoride due to: The common use of phosphate fertilizer that has increased since the '70s. The common use of fluoride-based pesticides that has been increasing since the '70s. The processing of foods and drinks with fluoridated water that has been increasing since the '80s. Boxed cereals processed in fluoridated regions, mechanically deboned chicken, tea, especially bottled ice tea and white grape juice are examples of foods that published analysis have shown to contain 6 to 9 times the amount of fluoride found in fluoridated water. NOTE: The Canadian and American dental associations' guidelines for prescribing oral fluoride supplements is even more contradictory as it stipulates that babies 6 months and younger cannot be given any amount of fluoride and children between 6 months and 3 years of age can be given no more than 0.25 mg of a fluoride supplement per day. This level of fluoride is far below what children, especially formula fed babies, receive when their water is fluoridated to 0.7 ppm = .7 mg/l = .23mg per regular glass of water (333 ml) . Fluoride supplement prescription guidelines also emphasize that fluoride supplements are only for children living in unfluoridated regions with naturally low levels of fluoride. Dentists must also assess the child's overall exposure to fluoride from toothpastes, foods and drinks before prescribing fluoride supplements to ensure that their prescription does not lead to fluoride over-exposure and, like school fluoride rinse programs, parents have a choice and the right to consent. None of these considerations are taken into account when dental and medical associations promote water fluoridation policies.

DENTAL FLUOROSIS A Dental Disaster When fluoridation first began, the proponents promised the American public that the only and worst risk from the program was that something less than 10% of children might have a few faint white spots on their ‘cavity resistant’ teeth which many would find adds an attractive sparkle. Also of note, the researchers in the early fluoridation trials treated African American children differently from the outset, writing that it was common knowledge that Negros have stronger teeth more resistant to decay. It didn’t take long for those involved to realize that something was very wrong, but their reaction per 1962 memo that noted high rates of fluorosis that was doubled in the African American children emphasized protecting the fluoridation program. As both the numbers of Americans and percentage of the population drinking fluoridated water swelled, dental fluorosis also grew, disproportionately and with worse severity in Black and Latino populations. Dental fluorosis is a defect in the tooth due to cell death during the formative stages. Those with dental fluorosis have higher bone fractures as well as higher rates of learning disabilities. Dental fluorosis is the visible evidence of similar defects due to cytotoxic effects that occur in bones and brains during critical periods of development, i.e. prenatal, infancy and early childhood. Dental fluorosis is also a leading indicator of higher dental costs as these unattractive and brittle teeth will require costly veneers and crowns in young adulthood. Per 2011-2012 NHANES figures released in 2017, one in five (23%) American teens have brown mottling and perhaps pitting on at least two fluorosed teeth due to childhood exposure. RESOURCES 2005 CDC MMWR: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5403a1.htm “Prevalence of enamel fluorosis has increased in cohorts born since 1980.” 2010 CDC Report: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db53.pdf “(All levels of) dental fluorosis were higher among adolescents aged 12–15 in 1999–2004 than in 1986–1987.” 2015 “Agua Potable o Veneno” (part 2 of 3): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGswvGZPL-M Ethnic Breakdown: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5403a1.htm#tab23 2017 Dental fluorosis is result of apoptosis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5770627/ 2018 Increase: http://jdh.adha.org/content/92/1/23 Conclusion : “There was a difference of 31.6% in dental fluorosis prevalence between 2012-2011 when compared to data from 2002-2001 in adolescents aged 16 and 17 years. The continued increase in fluorosis rates in the U.S. indicates that additional measures need to be implemented to reduce its prevalence.” May 23, 2018

Write to City Council to request a moratorium on fluoride being added to Calgary's water A short personalized letter is best to send to your Councillor, or a version of the letter below. (Email addresses and distribution lists provided below) Hello Mayor and Councillors: I reside in the community of ____________, in Ward ___. Please put an immediate moratorium on the reintroduction of water fluoridation to Calgary’s public water. Fluoride and artificial water fluoridation are neither safe, effective nor ethical. When added to public water, there is no control over dose, and fluoride is not needed for a single body function. It is fast becoming common knowledge that fluoride reduces children's IQ and as a result, dozens of municipalities in North America have ceased the practice base on the recent US court ruling and several recent medical journal publications. You cannot guarantee that fluoride is safe and effective for everyone. I look forward to your response. Sincerely, Call for an immediate moratorium on water fluoridation in Calgary Mayor and Council Members Email Distribution List – Calgary david.duckworth@calgary.ca , themayor@calgary.ca , Kim.Tyers@calgary.ca , Jennifer.Wyness@calgary.ca , Andrew.Yule@calgary.ca , DJ.Kelly@calgary.ca , Raj.Dhaliwal@calgary.ca , John.Pantazopoulos@calgary.ca , Myke.Atkinson@calgary.ca , Nathaniel.Schmidt@calgary.ca , Harrison.Clark@calgary.ca , Andre.Chabot@calgary.ca , Rob.Ward@calgary.ca , Mike.Jamieson@calgary.ca , Dan.Mclean@calgary.ca , Landon.Johnston@calgary.ca BCC: safewatercalgary@gmail.com Phone calls to 311 or the clerk's office are logged, call and express your concerns. They will ask your community name or Ward number. Calgary also has an online contact submission form with an option to send to all wards . Alternatively - send the email to cityclerk@calgary.ca & ask to distribute to the Mayor and all City Councillors (BCC: safewatercalgary@gmail.com ) Email Distribution List – Strathmore pat.fule@strathmore.ca , melissa.langmaid@strathmore.ca , debbie.mitzner@strathmore.ca , jason.montgomery@strathmore.ca , denise.peterson@strathmore.ca , richard.wegener@strathmore.ca , brent.wiley@strathmore.ca BCC: safewatercalgary@gmail.com Email Distribution List – Airdrie peter.brown@airdrie.ca , darrell.belyk@airdrie.ca , tina.petrow@airdrie.ca , al.jones@airdrie.ca , candice.kolson@airdrie.ca , heather.spearman@airdrie.ca , ron.chapman@airdrie.ca BCC: safewatercalgary@gmail.com Phone Airdrie Mayor's Office 403.948.8820 Email Distribution List – Chestermere sdean@chestermere.ca , krandhawa@chestermere.ca , mgrant@chestermere.ca , rnarayan@chestermere.ca , jsandboe@chestermere.ca , rschindler@chestermere.ca , robw@chestermere.ca BCC: safewatercalgary@gmail.com Phone Chestermere Mayor's Office 403-207-7073

FLUORIDE 101 CITATIONS “Fluoride, when used in the...prevention of disease in man or animal, is a drug that is subject to Food & Drug Administration (FDA) regulations.” Sources: FDA letter to Congress, Dec 21 2000 [ FDA-1963 ] FDA Dec 2001 [ FDA-2000a ] “Fluoride is no longer considered an essential factor for human growth and development.” “The FDA does not list Fluoride as an essential Nutrient.” Sources: National Research Council [1989] Letter from the Food & Drug Administration, October 1990 [ FDA-1990 ] “The emerging picture from all risk assessments conducted on fluoride is that there exists a narrow margin between the recommended intakes for the prevention of dental caries and the upper limits of exposure.” Source: Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks Critical Review of Any New Evidence on the Hazard Profile, Health Effects, and Human Exposure to Fluoride and the Fluoridating Agents of Drinking Water. [accessed on 22 February 2016]. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/environmental_risks/docs/scher_o_139.pdf “It is important to recognize that a relatively narrow margin of safety may exist for the development of dental fluorosis among children consuming fluoridated drinking water or consuming fluoride supplements.” Sources: American Academy of Family Physicians Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks Critical Review of Any New Evidence on the Hazard Profile, Health Effects, and Human Exposure to Fluoride and the Fluoridating Agents of Drinking Water. [accessed on 22 February 2016]. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/environmental_risks/docs/scher_o_139.pdf “In light of the collective evidence on various health end-points and total exposure to fluoride, the committee concludes that EPA’s MCLG of 4mg/L should be lowered.” Source: National Research Council; Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA's Standards [2006] https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11571/fluoride-in-drinking-water-a-scientific-review-of-epas-standards “Virtually all authors have noted that some children could ingest more fluoride from toothpaste alone than is recommended as a total daily fluoride ingestion.” Sou rces: Levy SM, Guha-Chowdhury N. [1999]. Total fluoride intake and implications for dietary fluoride supplementation. Journal of Public Health Dentistry 59: 211-23. [ Abstract on pubmed ] D.G. Pendrys, J.W. Stamm [February 1, 1990]; Relationship of Total Fluoride Intake to Beneficial Effects and Enamel Fluorosis Journal of Dental Research 69(Spec 155):529-538 [ JDentRes69-1990 ] Examples of mild dental fluorosis – BMC Public Health Study Sou rces: Peered review Study: BMC Public Health 201212:366 “Quantitative light fluorescence (QLF) and Polarized White Light (PWL) assessments of dental fluorosis in an epidemiological setting.” http://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-12-366 [From the study above] “These changes can result in dental fluorosis, which in its mildest forms presents as areas of white striations following the developmental lines of enamel.” Ref: 5. Thylstrup A, Fejerskov O: Clinical appearance of dental fluorosis in permanent teeth in relation to histologic changes. Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1978, 6 (6): 315-328. “41 % of American teenagers have some form of fluorosis.” Sou rce: NCHS Data Brief No 53 Nov 2010 Prevalence and Severity of Dental Fluorosis in the US, 1999-2004 (data) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db53.htm “Fluoride’s predominant effect is posteruptive and topical.” Sou rce : Center for Disease Control (CDC) https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5014a1.htm “We are unaware of data… about the additional protection from tooth decay that could result [from consumption of fluoridated drinking water].” So u rce : In a May 15, 2012 letter to Senator Barbara Boxer, the CDC wrote: “We are unaware of data . . . about the additional protection from tooth decay that could result from [intakes greater than 10 micrograms/day of fluoride].” See: www.fluoridealert.org/uploads/cdc-2012.pdf “The optimum fluoride intake for babies under 6 months of age is just 0.1 mg PER DAY.” So u rces : The National Research Council Most recent reviews on fluoride dosage seem to indicate that “nil” is the consensus on proper dose for infants; http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/Infant-Warning-Overview.pdf Fluoride Supplement Dosage Schedule [2010], Approved by the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs For infants 0-6 months, the schedule indicates “none” as the recommend dosage of fluoride supplements regardless of levels of fluoride in the drinking water, see image below; “Significant IQ loss at just 0.9 ppm among children with iodine deficiency.” Source: Developmental Fluoride Neurotoxicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Anna L. Choi, Guifan Sun, Ying Zhang, and Philippe Grandjean Environmental Health Perspectives on July 20, 2012, The Harvard Study can be found here . “To which extent this risk applies to fluoridation in Wichita or Portland or elsewhere is uncertain, but definitely deserves concern.” Source: Dr. Philippe Grandjean, the senior scientist who authored the Harvard review; “Chemical brain drain should not be disregarded. The average IQ deficit in children exposed to increased levels of fluoride in drinking water was found to correspond to about 7 points — a sizable difference. To which extent this risk applies to fluoridation in Wichita or Portland or elsewhere is uncertain, but definitely deserves concern.” Ref: Dr. Grandjean’s website: www.braindrain.dk/2013/02/fluoridated-water-and-brains/ “97% of Western Europe Do Not drink fluoridated water” Source: Wikipedia: “Out of a population of about three-quarters of a billion, under 14 million people (approximately a mere 2%) in Europe receive artificially-fluoridated water.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoridation_by_country#Europe Wikipedia’s source: http://www.bfsweb.org/one-in-a-million

FLUORIDE SUPPLEMENTS Dentists cannot prescribe any amount of a fluoride supplement to babies 6 months or younger and a maximum of 0.25 mg of a fluoride supplement to babies between 6 months and 3 years. Fluoridated water = 0.7ppm = 0.7mg / l = 0.23 mg fluoride in a regular glass of water (333 ml) , which means that fluoridated water results in bottle fed babies, children and people of all ages ingesting amounts of fluoride that surpass the daily limits of fluoride supplements that Canadian and US dentists can prescribe to people living in non-fluoridated areas. As the CDA and ADA texts stipulate, before a US or Canadian dentist can prescribe fluoride supplements, the dentist must first: Assess their patients dental caries risks (diet, oral hygiene habits, etc.) Ensure that their patient is consuming non-fluoridated water with naturally low levels of fluoride. Assess the patient’s overall daily exposure to fluoride from toothpaste, mouthwashes and foods & drinks. TAKE HOME MESSAGES When dentists or doctors endorse water fluoridation, they are encouraging a practice that results in children and adults receiving more daily fluoride than a dentist or doctor can prescribe in the form of oral fluoride supplements. Contrary to administering fluoride through public water, prescribing oral fluoride supplements requires: Individual assessment of dental caries risk Individual assessment of overall daily fluoride exposure levels Dosage monitoring CONSENT FINAL NOTE People who truly want to swallow daily fluoride can get a prescription and purchase a year's supply of fluoride supplements for as little as $13.

Do you have 5 minutes? - TAKE ACTION You can help us ensure Calgary City Council does not restart artificial water fluoridation. Here's how to take action to ensure that all Calgarians have access to clear running water. From Calgary, Chestermere, Airdrie, or Strathmore, AB or anywhere in the world! SIGN OUR PETITION! WRITE TO and CALL CITY COUNCIL To request a moratorium on fluoride being added to Calgary's water (addresses for Calgary, Airdrie, Chestermere, and Strathmore) Most phone numbers included. 311 is logging calls. Speak to City councilors in person Call for a 10 minute appointment to speak to your councilor, Attend town halls to speak to any councilor and tell them why this is important to you. WRITE TO ALBERTA ENVIRONMENT To Revoke EPEA Approval of Water Fluoridation in Calgary WRITE TO ALBERTA HEALTH To Revoke Alberta Health and AHS Endorsement of Community Water Fluoridation SOCIAL MEDIA share our posts and direct message your friends LIKE AND SHARE OUR FACEBOOK PAGE LIKE AND SHARE ON INSTAGRAM FOLLOW US ON TWITTER SUBSCRIBE TO OUR MAILING LIST PRINT & SHARE OUR FLYER WATER FLUORIDATION BASICS PRINT FLYER: Invitation to sign the petition 6 per sheet - use on car windows, mailboxes, conversation starters Safe Water Calgary is a grassroots movement and depends on everyone's help. Please share this page IT IS TIME TO STAND UP AND PROTECT THE SAFETY OF OUR WATER! Bonus Steps Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Bonus Step UPDATED 03-25 "My attitude is that the world is full of problems created and maintained by humans and some are more universal and dire in effect than fluoridation. But fluoridation is one of the more easily solvable problems and when we solve it we demonstrate that people can take just power into their own hands and make the world a bit better for many if not for all. People need such demonstrations. Then on to the next.” Dr. James Beck, co-author of THE CASE AGAINST FLUORIDE

Join our mailing list Never miss an update Subscribe Now

CANADIAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION The first i con on this page leads to an official Canadian Dental Association (CDA ) document with highlighted sections demonstrating contradictions between the CDA's claim that fluoridated water is safe & the CDA's guidelines for daily fluoride exposure limits from toothpaste, mouth rinses, oral supplements to protect against children developing dental fluorosis . The second icon link is the exact same document without any highlights confirming that the highlighted document has not been changed in any way. In the first pages, fluoridating water is endorsed as a safe way of reducing tooth decay. NOTE: Fluoridating water = chemically raising the fluoride levels in a population’s water to 0.7 ppm = 0.7 mg/l = .23mg in a regular glass of water (333ml) = a pea size amount of toothpaste Then on pages 3 and 4, guidelines to minimize exposure to fluoride from fluoridated toothpaste, mouthwash & oral supplements are incongruous with the idea that it is safe to increase everyone's, and especially children's, overall daily dose of fluoride through fluoridating water. The dosage .05 - .07 mg fluoride / kg / day is provided as a blood level of fluoride from all sources that the CDA states must not be exceeded to protect against the development of dental fluorosis . When you do the math, the following are examples of children and people whose fluoride levels would exceed the CDA’s daily limits if the water they drink & prepare food with is fluoridated to .7ppm = .7 mg/l = .23mg in a regular glass of water. Formula fed babies whose formula is mixed with fluoridated water. Children who regularly consume industrially grown & especially processed foods & drinks that now contain significant levels of fluoride due to: The common use of fluoride based pesticides that has been increasing since the '70s. The processing of foods & drinks with fluoridated water that has been increasing since the '80s. The common use of phosphate fertilizer that has increased since the '70s. Boxed cereals processed in fluoridated regions, mechanically deboned chicken, tea, especially bottled ice tea and white grape juice are examples of foods that published analysis have shown to contain 6 to 9 times the amount of fluoride found in fluoridated water. NOTE: The Canadian & American dental associations' guidelines for prescribing oral fluoride supplements is even more contradictory as it stipulates that babies 6 months & younger cannot be given any amount of fluoride & children between 6 months & 3 years of age can be given no more than 0.25 mg of a fluoride supplement per day . This level of fluoride is far below what children, especially formula fed babies, receive when their water is fluoridated to 0.7 ppm = .7 mg/l = .23mg per regular glass of water (333 ml) . Fluoride supplement prescription guidelines also emphasize that fluoride supplements are only for children living in un-fluoridated regions with naturally low levels of fluoride. Dentists must also assess the child's overall exposure to fluoride from toothpastes, foods & drinks before prescribing fluoride supplements to ensure that their prescription does not lead fluoride over exposure and, like school fluoride rinse programs, parents have a choice & the right to consent. None of these considerations are taken into account when dental and medical associations promote water fluoridation policies. CDA Official Web Documents with Highlighted Sections Same CDA Official Web Documents Without Highlights