Waking Times has published a shocking expose on fluoride which draws from a 1997 article, “Fluoride, Teeth, and the Atomic Bomb,” meant for the Christian Science Monitor, who never published it. The authors, Joel Griffiths and Chris Bryson, discovered that: “Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production…millions of tons…were essential for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons throughout the Cold War.”
World War 2 era documents revealed that fluoride was the most significant health hazard in the US A-bomb program, for workers and for communities around the manufacturing facilities.
“Much of the original proof that fluoride is safe for humans in low doses was generated by A-bomb program scientists, who had been secretly ordered to provide ‘evidence useful in litigation’ [against persons who had been poisoned by fluoride and would sue for damages]… The first lawsuits against the US A-bomb program were not over radiation, but over fluoride damage, the [government] documents show.”
They found that evidence of adverse effects from fluorides had been suppressed by the US Atomic Energy Commission.
A 1944 Manhattan Project memo stated: “Clinical evidence suggests that uranium hexafluoride may have a rather marked central nervous system effect…it seems most likely that the F [fluoride] component rather than the [uranium] is the causative factor.”
In the 1990s, Phyllis Mullenix, the head of toxicology at Forsyth Dental Center in Boston, conducted a series of animal studies which also showed that fluoride was a powerful central nervous system (CNS) toxin.
In a 1997 interview Mullenix discussed her findings. “The study basically found three things. First of all, that if you put sodium fluoride in the drinking water of young animals, that with time – meaning a period of weeks in a rat’s lifetime – they would develop changes in their behavioral patterns. And that pattern change was a hypoactivity pattern. They became slower, ‘couch potatoes’ if you like.
“It was definitely a hypoactivity pattern. And it had a specific pattern to it which was very strikingly similar to the pattern that I had seen in substances or drugs that they used to treat acute lymphocytic leukemia in children, which clinically cause IQ deficits. And when I saw that specific pattern… that I was getting when I exposed animals to radiation or chemotherapy and steroids… that was very striking.
“I also found that if I started the exposure at a little later age, I would get the same pattern, but I would get it at a blood level of fluoride that was lower, even, than the young animals. So it suggested that, in particular females, that the older animal was more susceptible to this fluoride in the drinking water.
“And a part of this whole common theme – what’s happening at different ages – we also did a prenatal study. I wanted to see if I could do one specific exposure in the prenatal situation giving a subcutaneous shot of sodium fluoride at a specific age where a certain part of the brain is developing, if the fetuses of this mother, when they grew up, if they had any type of permanent behavioral damage.
“And we gave the subcutaneous injections to the mother, we gave no other fluoride exposure, and when those pups were born and when they grew up and we tested them, they had a permanent change. And their pattern was this very distinct changes that are compatible with hyperactivity.
“Some people would say, well, doesn’t it seem a little odd that if you gave the prenatal exposure you get a hyperactivity, and if you give a postnatal exposure you get a hypoactivity? That’s not unusual at all because the stage of brain development in the prenatal situation is extremely different from that in the postnatal situation. So there are different regions of the brain that are developing, therefore you’ve got different regions of the brain that are going to be susceptible. So it is not at all uncommon to have the long term outcome be strikingly different.
“Besides the prenatal exposures and the postnatal, the third thing that we wanted to look at was – what were the levels of fluoride in the brain? We had gone back in the literature, and it was said, I think it was Gary Whitford’s studies that had said… that fluoride did not get across the blood-brain barrier and get into the brain to any extent. But I had a problem with that study, because what they did was they took fluoride and they gave an IV injection and then 1 hour later they looked at the levels in the brain.
“But that’s a far different cry from how people really get fluoride, they get it, you know, orally and day-to-day. And so, looking at fluoride levels in brain tissue 1 hour after injecting an IV does not mimic the real world situation at all…
“So we went in with our drinking-water exposure, took out the brains – we dissected the brains in these animals into seven different regions – and then analyzed each region for the fluoride content. Now what we found was that there was major accumulations of fluoride in all the regions of the brain, and that some areas looked like there were greater accumulations than others, that were sex-determinant. That was a very interesting piece of information.
“Just the fact that we could any level of fluoride at all, when we weren’t expecting the brain to accumulate any fluoride, was a very big surprise and very, very disturbing to some people, of all things, that fluoride was accumulating in the brain.”
After Mullenix published her study in the Neurotoxicology and Teratology journal she was fired from the Forsyth Dental Center.
“I cannot get the support or the funding, or even the approval by institutions that this research can go forward,” she concluded in the interview. “There’s simply no money to do it, and no help from the government to go forward with this issue.”
Neurotoxicity of sodium fluoride in rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1995 Mar-Apr;17(2):169-77. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7760776