Surviving Healthcare
Surviving Healthcare Podcast
We've been fluoridating water since the 1950's. The science is similar to vaccines: they simply forgot to do the all-cause mortality and morbidity studies showing the benefits outweigh the harms.

Yoho note: I’m trying to work in articles about health risks. Many of these are forced on use by industry and/or our government. Fluoride toxicity is significant but a lower risk than factors such as smoking or a bad diet. Fluoride can be managed by using reverse-osmosis water purification such as the Culligan systems or by buying bottled water. This repost from Steve Kirsch’s Substack was originally HERE.

At the AB 2098 event in Sacramento today, Jay Sanders of walked up to me and asked me, “Can I give you a book?”

This is the sort of life changing question that got Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to realize that vaccines aren’t safe.

So after a 10 second hesitation to overcome my cognitive dissonance (<sarcasm on>since as we all know fluoridation must be safe since it is mandated everywhere <sarcasm off>), I said yes, and I ended up with a copy of “The Case against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics That Keep It There.

Nobody likes to admit they made a mistake.

Sound familiar? :) 

In a nutshell, here is what you need to know. 

  1. Trials began in 1945.

  2. It was approved in 1950, before any trials were completed and any comprehensive studies were published.

  3. There is a tiny net benefit to fluoride if it is kept in your mouth and not swallowed. It can slightly reduce your risk of a cavity.

  4. Once you swallow it, the risks strongly outweigh the benefits. IQ drops significantly and other negative health outcomes accrue. It’s not a close call.

  5. In hindsight, it was a stupid intervention. 

  6. It would have been better to have limited fluoride to small doses in toothpaste, mouth rinse, etc, that are then spat out. This provides the benefits of strengthening tooth enamel, without the detriments of deteriorating bones by drinking an unknown dosage. 

  7. But nobody likes to admit they made a mistake! Does this sound familiar?

  8. All large towns “in California” are required to fluoridate (CA Law AB733). There is no federal fluoridation law. 

  9. BUT, almost all large U.S. cities are fluoridated. The ADA is an extremely powerful lobby.

  10. Short term ways to avoid fluoride:

    1. Drink spring water (fresh or bottled)

    2. Drink distilled water (or purified with reverse osmosis)

    3. Use a reverse osmosis filter for drinking water. Note: Culligan home systems are reverse osmosis

  11. Other methods (less recommended)

    1. Use a Berkey filter (you have to get the special fluoride filter). Berkey is much better at filtering F but you have to frequently replace the supplemental fluoride filters. Also, you have to keep the Berkey filters from drying out which makes them more maintenance intensive, however they have lots of happy customers.

    2. Use a 3 stage Clearly Filtered system. However, Clearly Filtered filters rapidly lost their ability to filter out F after the first few fills. They don’t make this clear.

  12. Long term ways to avoid fluoride in your water:

    1. Donate to This is the best long-term investment that helps everyone.

    2. Get your town to stop fluoridating the water. It’s poison. You will have to overcome the same disbelief you get when you tell people the COVID vaccines aren’t safe.

    3. Change the law in your state to outlaw fluoridation. Like vaccines, the science is crystal clear when you look at it; but nobody wants to look at it. After we take down the COVID vaccines, people will hopefully be more receptive to looking at the risk-benefit here.

  13. For more information:

    1. Watch the movie “The fluoride deception” (just 28 minutes)

    2. See

    3. Read the book

    4. Read the amazing comment by AMD

    5. Since the book was published, the strongest studies on F neurotoxicity have come out, including two NIH-funded long-term prospective cohort studies. 

    6. Listen to this eye-opening podcast where Christskis and Rivera, JAMA Pediatrics editors, discover that fluoride is harming our kids brains

    7. FAN v EPA lawsuit


Hi Steve! I have been studying this issue for a long time and I have only drank reverse osmosis water since I was a teenager and first learned about it . A few of the main points follow:

•Fluoride is immensely difficult to filter from water; RO is one of the only reliable approaches--however if you do that you must supplement your diet with magnesium (if you go the spring water route, you need to make sure you do not pick a brand that has high amounts of Fluoride).

•Many industries, particularly the aluminum and phosphate producers produce fluoride as a byproduct of their production process. These industries ran into repeated issues with poisoning or killing workers and the surrounding communities from fluoride gas leaks, so industry concocted the idea of having fluoride be good for the teeth in order to get them out of liability in these lawsuits (since it could be argued in court Fluoride can't be toxic if it is good for teeth). Despite exerting heavy pressure on the FDA, the FDA was not willing to grant them this due to the evidence of harm for fluoride and the absence of benefit from it.

•When the Manhattan project was being conducted, uranium centrifuges did not yet exist, so the only way that was possible to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons was to dissolve it in fluoride and separate the resulting gas by density. The Manhattan project ran into the same issues the previous industries had run into, and on the basis of national security, it was decided that fluoride needed to go into the water so that we could make atomic weapons and win the war. Bill Clinton declassified documents that showed as such (this was first detailed in The Fluoride Deception).

•The best book I have seen that explains the pathologic effects of fluoride is titled "Fluoride the Aging Factor." It essentially makes the case that fluoride at a very low dose disrupts the structures of many proteins in the body due to its high electronegativity interfering with the hydrogen bonds they depend on for their three-dimensional stability. The most common side effect which is observed from this is weakening of collagen in the body, and in areas where individuals have high amounts of fluoride in their water (a few villages in India best showed this pathological process), they age quickly and have a weakened or deformed bone structure. From having looked at this for a while, I do believe that fluoride does long-term damage to the bones of the body (which may also come from Fluoride chemically altering the bones, which in theory is how it "helps" your teeth).

•There is a decent amount of data that shows water fluoridation significantly increases cancer rates (this can be found within fluoride the aging factor).

•There are a variety of endocrine affects that result from fluoride. The primary one is that fluoride weakens the thyroid gland, likely due to the fact the thyroid gland preferentially accumulates iodine, and fluoride substitutes for iodine (a related issue also exists with bromine which is used to bleach most flour). Hypothyroidism is become extremely common in the population (and it's one of the most common issues that integrative medicine practitioners treat and sometimes achieve miraculous results from addressing). One, but not the only, potential cause that has been put forward for this is the fluoride exposure. Additionally, baths in fluoridated water were previously used as a treatment for hyperthyroidism.

• I personally believe the most concerning effects of fluoride are the neuropsychiatric effects. The magnitude of this effect is difficult to quantify (some believe the amounts we are exposed to in the water are sufficient to change individual's minds, others believe higher doses such as those received from fluorinated pharmaceuticals are necessary to achieve that effect). One conspiracy theory that has gone around for a long time is that the Nazis fluorinated the water of the Jewish ghettos in order to make them more submissive and compliant. I spent a while trying to find a primary source for this claim, and I was able to go as far back as someone in the US military saying it was done, but I never was able to find any direct verification this occurred. However, I have seen those effects occur in individuals who have taken fluorinated pharmaceuticals, particularly antidepressants.

•Many of the drugs which appear to have the highest rates of adverse events are ones that have fluoride added onto them. It is specifically for this reason that I always look at the chemical structure of a pharmaceutical before I consider using it. This frequently comes up for me with the antifungal's (some people with mold issues need them) because the cheapest antifungal on the market (fluconazole) is fluorinated and causes reactions in some patients, whereas the other antifungals that do not have this issue are much more expensive (and typically not covered by insurance). The most common fluorinated medicines which caused significant issues for people are the fluoroquinolone antibiotics and the fluorinated SSRI antidepressants (the dose you got from taking a fluorinated medication over the long term is much higher than what you will be exposed to in the water).

Yoho note: Summaries are at About 25 percent of all prescription drugs contain fluoride. These include statins (Lipitor, Crestor, Vytorin, Zetia/Ezetimibe, fluticasone propionate, Celebrex), some antacids (Prevacid), many antidepressants (Lexapro, Prozac), and neuroleptics (Risperdal). The fluoroquinolone antibiotics such as Cipro and Levaquin should be avoided unless there are no other alternatives. They carry a black box warning about some of the toxicities.

And “many newer fluoroquinolones have been withdrawn from the US market because of toxicity when given systemically; they include trovafloxacin (because of severe hepatic toxicity), gatifloxacin (because of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia; it is still available in the US as an ophthalmic preparation), grepafloxacin (because of cardiac toxicity), temafloxacin (because of acute renal failure, hepatotoxicity, hemolytic anemia, coagulopathy, and hypoglycemia), and lomefloxacin, sparfloxacin, and enoxacin.”

Fluorinated steroid creams include dexamethasone, triamcinolone acetonide, betamethasone, and beclomethasone. These are regarded as having little systemic (body-wide) toxicity.

•In general, I am extremely grateful for my lifelong choice to completely avoid non-reverse osmosis water. I am not sure if the health benefits I have received from that choice or directly a result of avoiding fluoride or if it came from something else.

•There is no evidence that fluoride benefits individuals and many have been fighting for decades to get it out of the water supply (with a few successes in recent years!). Additionally, different forms of fluoride are much more toxic than others, and typically the more toxic industrial fluoride waste products are what end up in the water supply rather than sodium fluoride (which is still dangerous enough that it can hospitalize children who swallow too much toothpaste).

•Many believe fluoride disrupts mitochondrial function. When I last looked into this, there was a case for it but there was no solid proof.

•There are a variety of relatively simple measures that can be conducted which do dramatically help dental health but are almost never looked at (dentists have a mass formation around fluoridation being the solution to everything and various high fluoride tooth pastes are often prescribed by them to patients).

•Studies have now shown drinking fluoridated water drops IQ. This could either be due to it causing hypothyroidism or it directly affecting the brain. Sadly, many infant formulas you find at the store are advertised as being fluorinated; that is how far the faith in this practice goes.

•One of the things that is immensely frustrating about public health is how many of their efforts are directed at either giving as many vaccinations as possible or fluorinating as many water supplies as possible. In many ways, the mass formation behind both is nearly identical, and I can't think of any other practices they have a similar devotion to. Additionally, in both cases because of the one size fits all mentality they follow, they never consider the effects of different doses on people and if they can tolerate those doses (many of the issues with vaccines come from individuals getting a dose that exceeds what they can tolerate, the same is true for fluoride exposure; if it is a medical intervention it is not appropriate it to administer it through the water supply--although physicians have used the widespread fluoridation of the water supply to justify other additions such as statins and lithium).

Toby Rogers wrote a poetic article about how much of the toxicity of Prozac is likely related to the fluoride in the molecule.

Sliding doors
I. The Promise In the late 1980s/early 1990s my parents spent a small fortune to send me to what was, at the time, the top-ranked small liberal arts college in the country. While the Ivies train up the future ruling class, small private liberal arts colleges offered something far more alluring…
Read more

Lastly, here is a reader comment by “Citizen Zeus,” who also writes a Substack.

If anyone wants to get the comprehensive scientific case against fluoride BY the ACTUAL EPA scientists over and above the prostituted administrators here is your go-to source. It is a devastating take-down of fluoride that absolutely parallels the Covid vaccines— i.e. NO proven effectiveness and malignant, extreme harms (

Here is what the EPA Union of scientists had to say about fluoridation:

Quoting from a May 1, 1999, statement— “Why U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scientists opposes artificial water fluoridation”—written by William Hirzy, PhD, [Union of Scientists] Senior Vice-President, Chapter 280:

“…our opposition to drinking water fluoridation has grown, based on the scientific literature documenting the increasingly out-of-control exposures to fluoride, the lack of benefit to dental health from ingestion of fluoride and the hazards to human health from such ingestion. These hazards include acute toxic hazard, such as to people with impaired kidney function, as well as chronic toxic hazards of gene mutations, cancer, reproductive effects, neurotoxicity, bone pathology and dental fluorosis.”

“In support of this concern are results from two epidemiology studies from China that show decreases in I.Q. in children who get more fluoride than the control groups of children in each study. These decreases are about 5 to 10 I.Q. points in children aged 8 to 13 years.”

“Another troubling brain effect has recently surfaced: fluoride’s interference with the function of the brain’s pineal gland. The pineal gland produces melatonin which, among other roles, mediates the body’s internal clock, doing such things as governing the onset of puberty. Jennifer Luke has shown that fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland and inhibits its production of melatonin. She showed in test animals that this inhibition causes an earlier onset of sexual maturity, an effect reported in humans as well in 1956…”

“EPA fired the Office of Drinking Water’s chief toxicologist, Dr. William Marcus, who also was our local union’s treasurer at the time, for refusing to remain silent on the cancer risk issue. The judge who heard the lawsuit he [Marcus] brought against EPA over the firing made that finding—that EPA fired him over his fluoride work and not for the phony reason put forward by EPA management at his dismissal. Dr. Marcus won his lawsuit and is again at work at EPA.”

“…data showing increases in osteosarcomas in young men in New Jersey, Washington and Iowa based on their drinking fluoridated water. It was his [Dr. Marcus’] analysis, repeated statements about all these and other incriminating cancer data, and his requests for an independent, unbiased evaluation of them that got Dr. Marcus fired.”

“Regarding the effectiveness of fluoride in reducing dental cavities, there has not been any double-blind study of fluoride’s effectiveness as a caries preventative. There have been many, many small scale, selective publications on this issue that proponents cite to justify fluoridation, but the largest and most comprehensive study, one done by dentists trained by the National Institute of Dental Research, on over 39,000 school children aged 5-17 years, shows no significant differences (in terms of decayed, missing and filled teeth) among caries [cavities] incidences in fluoridated, non-fluoridated and partially fluoridated communities. The latest publication on the fifty-year fluoridation experiment in two New York cities, Newburgh and Kingston, shows the same thing. The only significant difference in dental health between the two communities as a whole is that fluoridated Newburgh, N.Y. shows about twice the incidence of dental fluorosis (the first, visible sign of fluoride chronic toxicity) as seen in non-fluoridated Kingston.”

“John Colquhoun’s publication on this point of efficacy is especially important. Dr. Colquhoun was Principal Dental Officer for Auckland, the largest city in New Zealand, and a staunch supporter of fluoridation—until he was given the task of looking at the world-wide data on fluoridation’s effectiveness in preventing cavities. The paper is titled, ‘Why I changed My Mind About Water Fluoridation.’ In it Colquhoun provides details on how data were manipulated to support fluoridation in English speaking countries, especially the U.S. and New Zealand. This paper explains why an ethical public health professional was compelled to do a 180 degree turn on fluoridation.”

“…mutation studies…show that fluoride can cause gene mutations in mammalian and lower order tissues at fluoride concentrations estimated to be present in the mouth from fluoridated tooth paste. Further, there were tumors of the oral cavity seen in the NTP cancer study…further strengthening concern over the toxicity of topically applied fluoride.”

“So, in addition to our concern over the toxicity of fluoride, we note the uncontrolled – and apparently uncontrollable – exposures to fluoride that are occurring nationwide via drinking water, processed foods, fluoride pesticide residues and dental care products…For governmental and other organizations to continue to push for more exposure in the face of current levels of over-exposure coupled with an increasing crescendo of adverse toxicity findings is irrational and irresponsible at best.”

“We have also taken a direct step to protect the [EPA] employees we represent from the risks of drinking fluoridated water…the union filed a grievance, asking that EPA provide un-fluoridated drinking water to its employees.”

“The implication for the general public of these calculations is clear. Recent, peer-reviewed toxicity data, when applied to EPA’s standard method for controlling risks from toxic chemicals, require an immediate halt to the use of the nation’s drinking water reservoirs as disposal sites for the toxic waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry.”

Other Yoho notes: Dr. Mercola interviewed Dr. Bill Osmunson HERE in December 2020 about the dangers associated with water fluoridation. Dr. Osmunson said that recent studies revealed lower IQs if children were exposed in utero to fluoride. Control groups from cities with no fluoridation had about a standard deviation higher IQs. He described how the litigation to ban fluoride was being stalled.

Update: Rachel Levine, the first openly transgender four-star officer in the armed forces and now Assistant Secretary for Health, recently put the release of a detailed report about fluoride’s toxicity on hold. For more about the associated lawsuit and all the red tape that is being wound around the truth, see THIS reference from January 2023.


Paid subscriptions are flattering, but to best help this work, ask your friends if they would allow you to subscribe them by adding their email below.

About the comments: I know that I am an acquired taste. The friends I cherish are the ones who tell me when I am wrong so I can sharpen my messages against their critiques. The rule here is that you can be be as pushy as you want, but if I suspect you are insincere, I kick you off. It is free speech--sharp sticks are tolerated. When you test my assumptions, we get a chance to learn from each other. As I was writing Butchered by “Healthcare,” I had a wonderful critic (thanks, M!) who treated me like a retarded stepson. She always got the message across, and after I got used to her, I was never offended. You are welcome to do the same.