The disappearing Fluoride ion.

A few years ago I sent this document about fluoridation to the city, which can be viewed  here.

It pretty well outlines most of the violations that the city is doing, by adding it to our drinking water. I gave it to the city manager of the water department and it found it’s way to a lady who works at the health unit. Her response to adding hydrofluorosilicic acid which they call fluoride, is below.


” Mr. Allan ……,

We have received a request from Mr. N. Benkovich, Manager of Water and WasteWater Services of the City of Greater Sudbury, to reply to your request for information on studies that demonstrate that HFSA does not cause harm when ingested.

It is important to note that hydrofluorosilicic acid is not ingested in its pure form. In the concentrated form, as it would be in manufacture and use before dilution, this acid deserves care and respect to ensure safe handling. However, when dissolved at very low concentrations in pH-regulated water we are no longer dealing with the concentrated original substance. Haneke and Carson (2001)write: “In water, fluorosilicic acid readily hydrolyzes to hydrofluoric acid and various forms of amorphous and hydrated silica. At the concentration usually used for water fluoridation, 99% hydrolysis occurs and the pH drops to 4.2. As pH increases, hydrolysis increases. At the pH of drinking water, the degree of hydrolysis is ‘essentially 100%’ (Crosby, 1969; Urbansky and Schock, 2000)”, meaning that essentially none of the original compound remains. Put another way, if one were to analyse the water for hydrofluorosilicic acid, it would be below the detection limit, only its ionic constituents would be detectable. It must be emphasized that a fluoride ion is identical to every other fluoride ion, regardless of its source, so its source is not relevant with respect to its toxicological study. Toxicology is used in the regulatory process in the context of a risk assessment framework that typically has four components:

1. hazard identification (qualitatively, can a chemical cause an adverse health effect in humans?),

2. dose-response evaluation (quantitatively, what is the relationship between the dose and the incidence or severity of adverse health effects in the exposed population?),

3. exposure assessment (what is the amount of chemical to which humans are exposed?), and

4. risk characterization (predicting the frequency and severity of effects in the exposed population).

Mathematically, risk is a function of the magnitude of a hazard and the probability of its occurrence. Put another way, risk is a function of hazard times exposure. Therefore, given the complete hydrolysis of hydrofluorosilicic acid in pH controlled drinking water, the equation, risk = hazard x exposure, is essentially zero times zero. One has to ask a different question, and that is “what is the risk of fluoride ions at the concentration of 0.7 ppm?” This question has been answered, allowing us to state that for drinking water fluoridation at 0.7 ppm safety (and effectiveness) has been sufficiently demonstrated, the Health Canada guidelines being one of many high-level reviews of evidence for this conclusion.

Sincerely, Charlene Charlene Plexman


Dental Health Program Clinical and Family Services Division


They say bullshit baffles brains and I was kind of dumb founded with this response, because the way it reads is: “don’t worry be happy, because the fluoride basically disappears (dissociates)”. One minute it’s there, then poof like magic, it’s gone.

Fact is, at the time my understanding of how this chemical actually works was pretty limited. Since then, I spent more time researching and finally put this site together once I got it.

So what are we dealing with?

First of,


Fluoride is any combination of elements containing the fluoride ion. In its elemental form, fluorine is a pale yellow, highly toxic and corrosive gas. In nature, fluorine is found combined with minerals as fluorides. It is the most chemically active nonmetallic element of all the elements and also has the most reactive electro-negative ion. Because of this extreme reactivity, fluorine is never found in nature as an uncombined element.

Fluorine is a member of group VIIa of the periodic table. It readily displaces other halogens—such as chlorine, bromine and iodine—from their mineral salts. With hydrogen it forms hydrogen fluoride gas which, in a water solution, becomes hydrofluoric acid.


Basically fluorides are any element that binds with the fluorine ion. The fluorine ion does not exist in nature by itself. We are being led to believe that they are using calcium fluoride which occurs naturally in water; however, that type of fluoride has never been used for fluoridation. Instead what is used over 90 percent of the time are silicofluorides, which are 85 times more toxic than calcium fluoride. Calcium fluoride is also less bio-available to the body.

Here the issue of  water fluoridation is discussed by Floyd Maxwell, a Chemical Engineer  He will give you a Chemical Engineer’s perspective. His web site,, has the article that this video is based on, at



This is what we know about certain types of fluorides.

William Hirzy, PhD former chief chemist for the EPA and former President of the Union of Professional Employees of the EPA

“Sodium fluoride is a registered rat poison and roach poison. It has been a protected pollutant for a very long time.


So toxic is the fluoride added to drinking water that, according to Hirzy, if one were to take a dose of it about half the size of that “500 mg vitamin C tablet you take in the morning, you’d be dead long before the sun went down. When you’re talking about something with that kind of potent toxicity,” he says, “it’s unrealistic to think that the only adverse effect it has is death. It must be doing something intracellularly to cause these effects.”
As evidence that the government has known for over sixty years that fluoride is a health hazard, Hirzy quoted from an article, “clear back in 1934 in which the American Dental Association plainly treats the subject very matter-of-factly. It calls fluoride a general protoplasmic poison.

So called pharmaceutical grade fluoride is nothing more than rat and insecticide poison




Here  is a newspaper clipping from 1918 of a news story that claims Sodium fluoride as an insecticide kills insects upon contact. serveimage-7


Stop Giving Fluoride Toothpaste to Children. You are poisoning them.



The Merk Veterinary Manual states that “FLUORIDE IS A CELLULAR POISON”

Overview of Fluoride Poisoning


By Barry R. Blakley, DVM, PhD, Professor, Department of Veterinary Biomedical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan

Fluoride exposure from the environment has been associated with natural contamination of rock, soil, and water or from industrial waste or smelting processes. Fluoride compounds have been added to human water supplies at concentrations of ~1 mg/kg to reduce dental caries. This recommendation is not universally accepted……


……. Acute fluoride exposure at high concentrations will cause corrosive damage to tissues. In contrast, chronic exposure, which is seen more frequently, causes delayed or impaired mineralization of bones and teeth. The solubility of fluoride correlates generally with the degree of toxicity. Fluoride is known to interact with various elements, including aluminum, calcium, phosphorus, and iodine. Fluoride is a cellular poison that interferes with the metabolism of essential metals such as magnesium, manganese, iron, copper, and zinc. Because bacterial metabolism may be affected in a similar manner, this attribute accounts for the use of fluoride in dental hygiene products. Soluble fluoride is rapidly absorbed; ~50% is excreted by glomerular filtration. More than 95% of the fluoride that is retained is deposited in the bones and teeth, forming hydroxyapatite after the interference with calcium metabolism and replacement of hydroxyl ions. At low levels of fluoride exposure, the solubility of the enamel is reduced, resulting in protection. At higher levels of exposure, the enamel becomes dense and brittle. If exposure occurs during pregnancy, developing bones and teeth are severely affected. Faulty, irregular mineralization of the matrix associated with altered ameloblastic, odontoblastic, or osteoblastic activity ultimately results in poor enamel formation, exostosis, sclerosis, and osteoporosis.

What many people call pharmaceutical grade fluoride “sodium fluoride” is actually not widely available, so most of the water fluoridation “product” used is in fact a toxic waste by product that comes from the phosphate industry. It is  called Hydrofluorosilicic acid

Hydrofluorosilicic acid is the most corrosive chemical agent known to man: it is derived from toxic gases produced in the manufacture of phosphoric acid and phosphate fertilizers; it contains lead, mercury, arsenic, and high concentrations of radionucleides; it is also the chemical agent most used for water fluoridation in the United States and Canada.

Because the industrial grade fluosilicic acid is a toxic waste by-product recovered from chimney pollution scrubbers (“scrubber liquor”), the volume of contaminants is profoundly influenced by the method of manufacture and the quality of raw materials used.


William Hirzy, PhD former chief chemist for the EPA and former President of the Union of Professional Employees of the EPA

If this stuff [silicofluoride] gets out into the air, it’s a pollutant; if it gets into the river, it’s a pollutant; if it gets into the lake, it’s a pollutant; but if it goes straight into your drinking water system, it’s not a pollutant. That’s amazing!”

The solution to pollution is dilution”



The answer to pollution is to dispose of it in our drinking water. Great idea don’t you think? NOT.

Screenshot from 2017-12-30 17:38:09 See the full document HERE


It is classified as:
“dangerous good” by Transport Canada, “hazardous substance” by Environment Canada, “persistent, bio-accumulative & toxic” by Canadian Environmental Protection Act a “class one hazardous waste” by US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).           It is tanked untreated and shipped to municipalities as a “fluoridating agent”

This product is in fact illegal to dump into the environment anywhere. Except our drinking water.

HFSA is classified as an Inorganic Fluoride* which makes it illegal to dump it in the environment as per:
Canadian Environmental Protection- List of Toxic Substances (Schedule 1) #40 Inorganic Fluorides:


If it dissociates in the drinking water and is no longer harmful, then why is it illegal to dump it in the environment ANYWHERE?  Because they are lying to us. It’s not true.

What does the material safety data sheet say? Is the water fluoridation product safe to use?


The manufacturer’s MSDS of the Hydrofluosilicic acid used here clearly warns that hydrofluosilicic acid, what is being called “Fluoride”, causes harm contrary to what everyone is being told.

It says: under: Other Health Effects


Fluoride is a bone seeker, and excessive amounts will produce weakening and degeneration of the bone structure. Chronic exposure may cause excess accumulation of fluorine (fluorosis) in the teeth and bones. Severe fluorosis in children weakens tooth enamel resulting in surface pitting. After prolonged high intake in adults bony changes occur characterized by hardening or abnormal density of bone (osteosclerosis), benign bony growths projecting outward from the surface of the bone (exostoses) and calcification of ligaments, tendons, and muscle attachments to bone. Ingestion and skin contact may cause an abnormal reduction of blood calcium (hypocalcemia) and kidney damage since fluorides precipitate calcium stored in the body. There may also be heart, asthma, nerve, intestinal and rheumatism problems. (1,3,4)


So, what we have here is called disclosure, just like pharmaceutical TV commercial, as to what health effects can be expected if this ingested. Why do manufacturer’s do this? To avoid liability when these health issues occur and they do. Basically, they say, “we told you so”.

So who gets to see this? Definitely not the consuming public. This information has in fact been suppressed by key people in governments at all levels, especially by  those  working in the health departments. They are the ones who are pushing this on an unsuspecting public, who have unfortunately been duped by them, as so many others.


So if the fluorine element is no longer an issue when it is put in the water, then why list all the health issues in the MSDS? Because they are lying to us. It’s still harmful.


In the following video, Peter Van Caulart Dip. A.Ed., CES, CEI
VP & Director Environmental Training Institute
made a Presentation to Brantford City Council on Water Fluoridation.

He explains how we ingest only 1% of the water that is fluoridated and that 99% goes back into environment.

Consider this. Based on what Mr. Van Caulart said:


For every 100 trucks brought into each city, 99 of them go back directly into our waterways as less than 1% is ingested. 

Thus the water fluoridation process is basically nothing more than an ongoing major chemical spill.


We drink about 1% of the water and the remaining 99% ends up in the rivers and lakes. Our drinking water supply is being used as waste disposal site to skirt environmental laws. We are being lied to again.


Fluoridation: The Fraud of the Century

Fluoridation is not about “children’s teeth,” it is about industry getting rid of its hazardous waste at a profit, instead of having to pay a fortune to dispose of it.

Only calcium fluoride occurs naturally in water; however, that type of fluoride has never been used for fluoridation. Instead what is used over 90 percent of the time are silicofluorides, which are 85 times more toxic than calcium fluoride.
They are non-biodegradable, hazardous waste products that come straight from the pollution scrubbers of big industries. If not dumped in the public water supplies, these silicofluorides would have to be neutralized at the highest rated hazardous waste facility at a cost of $1.40 per gallon (or more depending on how much cadmium, lead, uranium and arsenic are also present). Cities buy these unrefined pollutants and dump them–lead, arsenic and all–into our water systems. Silicofluorides are almost as toxic as arsenic, and more toxic than lead.1, 2


The Hazards of Water Fluoridation. Synergy Soup

The fluoride ion only hypothetically exists as an entity in an ideal solution of purified water — and tap water is far from pure H2O. All clinical research with animal models is done using 99.97% pure sodium fluoride and double distilled or deionized water. Among the thousands of clinical studies about fluoride, not one has been done with the pollution concentrate or typical tap water containing fluorides.

Synergy Soup

The fluorosilicic acid is also contaminated with small traces of arsenic, cadmium, mercury, lead, sulfates, iron and phosphorous, not to mention radionuclides. Some contaminants have the potential to react with the hexafluorosilicate radical and may act as complex ionic compounds. The biological fates and toxicokinetic properties of these complex ions are unknown.

The reality of artificial water fluoridation is so complex that determining the safety of the practice may be impossible. Tap water is chemically treated with chlorine, soluble silicates, phosphate polymers and many other chemicals. In addition, the source water itself may contain a variety of contaminants.

The addition of a fluoridation agent can create synergized toxicants in a water supply that have unique toxico-kinetic properties found only in that particular water supply. Consequently, any maladies resulting from chronic ingestion of the product likely would be dismissed as a local or regional anomaly unrelated to water fluoridation.

Technically, artificially fluoridating drinking water is a violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Under statutes of the SDWA, federal agencies are forbidden from endorsing, supporting, requiring or funding the practice of adding any chemicals to the water supply other than for purposes of water purification.


Synergistic Toxicity

What most people fail to understand is that when chemicals enter the body, they don’t remain isolated. You may get chemicals entering the body from different sources at different times. But as they work their way around the body some may combine with other chemicals which can have devastating effects, as the experiments below shows. What kind of impact can this have on an unborn or newborn child?

“And combination of substances in toxicology can be greater than the sum of its parts. “With lead and mercury, for instance, a  toxicity rating of 1 for each mercury and lead equals not 2, but 60 when combined.”—Hal Huggins

Toxics can make each other more toxic.

“A small dose of mercury that kills 1 in 100 rats and a dose of aluminum that will kill 1 in 100 rats, when combined have a striking effect: all the rats die.

Doses of mercury that have a 1 percent mortality will have a 100 percent mortality rate if some aluminum is there.”




Varner and associates appear to have found TOXIC SYNERGISTIC ACTION between FLUORIDE and ALUMINIUM in drinking water. This has now been made a part of PUBLIC RECORD in the US FEDERAL REGISTER as of December 4, 2000.

Promoters of fluoridation can no longer get away with the “unequivocal statement” that fluoride is a “free ion” in water”, OR that “it completely dissociates and doesn’t react with other minerals in drinking water.”

Following the Varner, et al aluminium fluoride studies in which 80% of the experimental rats died before the end of the experiment the United States Environmental Protection Agency was sufficiently alarmed to push the National Toxicology Program (NTP) to do further research.

Varner and associates appear to have found TOXIC SYNERGISTIC ACTION between FLUORIDE and ALUMINIUM in drinking water. This has now been made a part of PUBLIC RECORD in the US FEDERAL REGISTER as of December 4, 2000.

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) concurs with the EPA and has formally called for NTP to commission studies.


For the first time, synergistic action is officially acknowledged, along with the fact that FLUORIDE in the water COMBINES WITH OTHER MINERALS.


Water Fluoridation: A Violation of Human Rights, the Health Care Consent Act and the Nuremberg Code




Now this piece below was actually put together by the people from Fluoride Free Windsor and they debunk this theory, that fluoride dissociates in water. The whole idea is ridiculous because as noted above, fluorine does not exist in nature unless it is bound to another element.


We Don’t Need Safety Studies

The Ontario Safe Drinking Water Act states nothing is permitted into drinking water that is in contravention of a prescribed standard. Safe water advocates, and anyone that takes an in-depth look, knows that fluoridation chemicals are in contravention of a prescribed standard. Standard NSF60 requires toxicology studies and those studies have never been done.  This is confirmed by Health Canada, former WUC CAO John Stuart, and by the presentation made by former Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Heimann.

Public Works employees continue to advise councils that the chemicals used in fluoridation do meet the standard, without providing any evidence that they do.

Windsor Utilities Commission report, June 25, 2012 section 3. Toxicology

Why we have Standard 60 as a safety protocol:

Screen Shot 2019-02-01 at 1.49.04 PM

Further, the WUC report claims that 1) Health Canada has the required tox studies (but they do not as linked to above) and 2) that we don’t need them anyway because of hydrolyzing and dissociation.

Admittance that fluoridation chemicals do not meet Standard 60:Screen Shot 2019-02-01 at 1.41.37 PM

Interestingly, the Ontario Safe Drinking Water Act says nothing can be added to the water that hasn’t met a prescribed standard, it doesn’t exempt things from being added because under some conditions that thing dissociates and it even goes so far as to state that dilution of the thing is no defence to adding the thing to the public’s drinking water.

Dissociation and Hydrolyzing Makes Contaminants Disappear!

WUC Report from June 2012, 3. Toxicology, con’t:

Screen Shot 2019-02-01 at 2.15.16 PM

Or does it…

How does the water provider ensure dissociation remains under conditions outside the water plant?  The pH, temperature and fluoride concentration can change from what is measured at the water plant to what is found at the tap, in infant formula, in the human stomach. But that’s not all…

Debunking the claim that no safety tox studies are required because of dissociation:

Click to see the full presentation on Debunking Dissociation. We’ve pulled out a few images to highlight how important it is that we have safety tox studies done.

debunking dissociation pg1

Finney is the study referenced in the WUC report above that claims we don’t need safety studies because of dissociation. Why didn’t they consider the Westendorf study? Why are they relying on studies that use purified versions of fluoride and water that isn’t the same chemistry as municipal tap water?

debunking dissociation pg2

Fate Of Fluorosilicate Drinking Water Additives, Urbansky, 2002, indicates that re-association may occur. And in, A new perspective on metals and other contaminants in fluoridation chemicals, Mullenix points to further concerns about the toxicity of post dissociated compounds.

debunking dissociation pg3

debunking dissociation pg4

So we need SAFETY STUDIES after all…

The regulatory standard requires safety tox studies and dissociation is not a good enough reason to bypass this Safe Drinking Water Act requirement.

The Ontario Safe Drinking Water Act exists to protect all of Ontario’s municipal water drinkers from contaminants. Putting an untested, unregulated contaminant, silicofluorides, with trace co-contaminants of arsenic, lead and mercury, into the drinking water supply is not permitted, nor should it be.


It’s not just fluoride in fluorosilicates:



  • Health Canada’s guideline for lead (MAC 0.01 mg/L) has not been re-assessed since 1992, and it states “Exposure to lead should nevertheless be kept to a minimum.”
  • The World Health Organization states that “Lead is a cumulative toxicant that affects multiple body systems and is particularly harmful to young children. Lead in the body is distributed to the brain, liver, kidney and bones. It is stored in the teeth and bones, where it accumulates over time. .. Lead in bone is released into blood during pregnancy and becomes a source of exposure to the developing fetus.  There is no known level of lead exposure that is considered safe”
  • The EPA’s Public Health Goal / Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for lead is zero.  “Definitions:  Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG)—The level of a contaminant in drinking water below which there is no known or expected risk to health. MCLGs allow for a margin of safety and are non-enforceable public health goals.”
  • The (10 parts per billion threshold) is obsolete,” says Dr. Bruce Lanphear, a health sciences professor who specializes in lead exposure in children at Simon Fraser University. “We’ve got science that is conclusive, definitive and evaluated by independent advisory boards but policy hasn’t kept up with that.”  …  Kathleen Cooper, senior researcher and lead expert with the Canadian Environmental Law Association, says there is “incredibly solid evidence to say there is no safe level (of lead).”


Okay, so the dissociation theory has been debunked . Thank you Fluoride Free Windsor for the excellent work.


Water fluoridation violates The Safe Drinking Water Act


Now to add to all of this, is the fact that the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) that everyone uses has in fact been fraudulently set as explained in the following article and video. So technically we have no legally set safety margin, as our safety margins here in Canada is based on the American standard.


EPA Fluoridation Fraud Charged by EPA Scientist in 1991

August 19, 1991The fluoride in drinking water standard, or Recommended Maximum Contaminant Level (RMCL), published by EPA in the Federal Register on Nov. 14, 1985, is a classic case of political interference with science. The regulation is a fraudulent statement by the Federal Government that 4 milligrams per liter (mg/l) of fluoride in drinking water is safe with an adequate margin of safety. There is evidence that critical information in the scientific and technical support documents used to develop the standard was falsified by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Environmental Protection Agency to protect a long-standing public health policy.  EPA professionals were never asked to conduct a thorough independent analysis of the fluoride literature. Instead, their credentials were used to give the appearance of scientific credibility. They were used to support the predetermined conclusion that 4 mg/l of fluoride in drinking water was safe.

Ethical misconduct by EPA management included the following: they ignored the requirements of the law to protect sensitive individuals such as children, diabetics or people with kidney impairment. Contrary to law, they made the criteria for considering health data so stringent that reasonable concerns for safety were eliminated. Data showing positive correlations between fluoride exposure and genetic effects in almost all laboratory tests were discounted. By selective use of data, they fit science to the desired outcome. They reported to the Administrator data demonstrating that dental fluorosis was an adverse health effect, but then hid this information from the pubic when the Administrator decided to call dental fluorosis a “cosmetic” effect. The National Institute for Dental Research had warned EPA that admitting dental fluorosis was an adverse health effect would be contrary to the long standing policy of the Public Health Service that fluoridation at 1 mg/l is totally safe.  EPA had already admitted in the Federal Register that objectionable dental fluorosis can occur at levels as low as 0.7 mg/l.



Corruption and Scientific Fraud at the EPA. How it affects water fluoridation safety standards everywhere.


Now lets see what 3 scientist have to say about how small an amount of chemical it takes to affect our health.

From a Swedish documentary about the chemical cocktail that enters our body from food, drink and pollution

Is fluoride an endocrine disruptor?


Now lets see what a toxicology site states about the following

Comparative Toxicogenomics Database

Fluorine Compounds
These diseases are associated with Fluorine Compounds or its descendants.


These diseases are associated with Arsenic or its descendants.

These diseases are associated with Lead or its descendants.


Bottom line is we are being lied to by the people whom we have entrusted with  providing us with safe drinking water. They are adding toxic chemicals which have known health affects even in minute amounts. Most people that are doing this are ignorant of the facts, but there are a select few that know and are doing this for money.

Money makes the world go round, so money talks and people can be bought.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s