Johnny Johnson 
Member since Jun 7, 2018


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “In Defense of Fluoridation

NTP......Just stick to this one point. Then we can move on.

NYSCOF, FAN, JW, KS, et al: Isn't there one of you that has a spin on this fantastic and extensive study on fluoride intakes from fluoride in water? You all requested it and hailed this group the greatest thing since sliced bread. I agree that they are all of that and much more!!

Conclusions:

"The NTP research studied rats during their prenatal development through their adulthood. These rats consumed water with three different concentrations of fluoride (0, 10 and 20 ppm) and two different fluoride levels in food: 20.5 ppm (a standard diet) and 3.24 ppm (low-fluoride diet). Although fluoride critics often claim that fluoridation is harmful to the thyroid, the NTP study revealed that thyroid hormone levels were not altered by exposure to levels as high as 10 or 20 parts per million (ppm) of fluoride.

The only side effect found by the NTP study was inflammation of the prostate gland, which was observed only at a fluoride exposure that was far above the level of human exposure by drinking fluoridating water."

So far only the crickets have been singing. How about weighing-in?

Stick to the point.

Cheers,

Johnny Johnson, Jr., DMD, MS
Pediatric Dentist
President of the non-profit American Fluoridation Society, a non-paid group of healthcare professionals dedicated to the dissemination of credibly recognized , peer-reviewed research that has been published in credibly recognized scientific journals.

Posted by Johnny Johnson on 06/12/2018 at 10:30 AM

Re: “In Defense of Fluoridation

Karen Spencer,

Now, I suspect that you are stating that the "NTP animal study, which has a number of issues with questionable design and limitations." is said with you biting your lower lip trying not to laugh at what you're typing. You know that FAN, including you, James, the Connetts, Osmunson, and others were holding your breath for the results to come out. Osmunson even touted that this was the best group in the world to evaluate for neurotoxicity at levels in CWF and up to the EPA maximum fluoride in drinking water in the U.S., 4ppm.https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/cdhp-fluoridation/FAN+Article+-+NTP+Study+(2015).pdf

Please share the human studies that you are quoting which where done in fluoridated communities. I'm certain you've seen the one from Broadbent et al from New Zealand that showed NO IQ changes over their 38 year longitudinal study of people on community water fluoridation (CWF).

References on any health effects of credibly conducted, evidence based, scientific research which has been published in credibly recognized peer reviewed journals:


___________________________________________

___________________________________________

___________________________________________

Warm Regards,

Johnny

Johnny Johnson, Jr., DMD, MS
Pediatric Dentist
President of the non-profit American Fluoridation Society, a non-paid group of healthcare professionals dedicated to the dissemination of credibly recognized , peer-reviewed research that has been published in credibly recognized scientific journals.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Johnny Johnson on 06/11/2018 at 11:00 AM

Re: “In Defense of Fluoridation

James,

One "little" study? The NTP which you refuse to provide a single comment on, because perhaps you can't or aren't being allowed to?

How about the 2006 NRC Review of the EPA Standards on Fluoride in drinking water? Is that a "little" study too? They looked at all of the studies that you refer to and concluded that the only adverse health effect of fluoride in water at 4mg/L (ppm) is severe dental fluorosis. Like the NTP study, there were not IQ changes, mutagenic (aka cancer), thyroid changes or any other bodily systems affected at 6 times what is the fluoride level in community water fluoridation, 0.7ppm. And at 2mg/L (ppm), severe dental fluorosis was virtually zero.

Perhaps you should ask your good friend, Dr. Hardy Limeback, to explain that "little" 2006 NRC Study upon which he participated and signed off on the conclusions of that Committee. Or are you a spokesperson for him?

And the EPA denial of your group's effort to end CWF in the U.S.? Is that a little study too? Can you begin to see how the readers are going to see your replies as a "little" attempt to avoid answering credibly conducted science and evaluations?

If you wish to persist in calling the NTP a "little study", then provide some type of response to it. Humor me. We both know that FAN, NYSCOF, you, Hardy Limeback, or anyone else in your small world of opposition to water fluoridation has a clue as to how to try to discredit this most important study of fluoride on neurotoxic effects that you and your groups pushed for. The results do not jive with your wishes. So, instead of listening to science, you push forward deafening silence on this study. Try speaking with credibility instead of total dismissal of a study which failed to meet your expectations?

Man up, James. Either put up or walk away with your accusations. REAL scientists follow the credibly conducted studies which follow the scientific method show. You are failing to even acknowledge the NTP study and their findings. Quit using your usual tag lines. Try addressing a credible scientific study head-on instead of trying an end around. The truth only hurts once. Give it a noble try. And this ain't football season or some childhood game.

Johnny..........standing by listening for an answer to the NTP study, AND ONLY THE NTP STUDY!

3 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Johnny Johnson on 06/09/2018 at 11:44 PM

Re: “In Defense of Fluoridation

James, your day job aside, just simply address the NTP study the best that you can. Thats all were asking for. Not a diatribe. Keep it simple. You know, like you say that your suggestions on water fluoridation are simple?

The NTP is................

Thats all we want. Something substantive from you, your thoughts and take on what this study showed, didnt show, how it was flawed, or whatever youd like to say. Im not going to be able to sleep well until I get an answer.

Warmly,

Johnny

Johnny Johnson, Jr., DMD, MS
Pediatric Dentist
President of the non-profit American Fluoridation Society, a non-paid group of healthcare professionals dedicated to the dissemination of credibly recognized , peer-reviewed research that has been published in credibly recognized scientific journals.

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Johnny Johnson on 06/09/2018 at 5:22 PM

Re: “In Defense of Fluoridation

No opponent to community water fluoridation has responded to the National Toxicology Programs recent publication stating that there were no IQ changes or organ system impacts of fluoide intakes at levels of community water fluoridation (0.7 milligrams/liter, aka ppm).

You all pushed for this study and proclaimed it would end water fluoridation. However, the results do not support your desires.

Who will step up and give a response to this highest quality study from the opponents camp? How about you, NYSCOF? FAN? James Reeves? Art Spelling?

Johnny Johnson, Jr., DMD, MS
Pediatric Dentist
President of the non-profit American Fluoridation Society, a non-paid group of healthcare professionals dedicated to the dissemination of credibly recognized , peer-reviewed research that has been published in credibly recognized scientific journals.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Johnny Johnson on 06/09/2018 at 10:41 AM

Re: “In Defense of Fluoridation

NYSCOF,
1. The New Zealand (Brough et al. 2015) reference you used is an abstract, not a published study. No credible scientist can draw any conclusions from an abstract. The entire study, having undergone intensive peer-review and published in a credibly recognized scientific journal, can be thoroughly vetted for the findings of the study. However, a sensationalist wanting to write something negative could misinterpret such cursory information.

2. As mentioned by others here, the Mexican study (Bashash et al) DID NOT measure intakes of fluoride of the pregnant mothers. The fluoridated salt used in Mexico contains from 150-250 milligrams of fluoride. Again, the salt intake was not measured. Does everyone use salt on their food? Do some, like my late grandfather, have their food looking white after salting it because he loved salt? These Mexican pregnant moms also drank water that contained up to twice the amount of fluoride that is in community water fluoridation. Additionally, they used fluoridated toothpaste which is a dietary source of fluoride intake. NONE of these intakes were measured.

To compare fluoride in urine of pregnant moms in Mexico to NON-pregnant women in fluoridated communities in Canada and the U.S. is grossly flawed. We know fluoride intakes in moms from fluoridated water. You attempt to make a quantum leap that even a Co-author on the Bashash publication stated, Dr. Angeles Martinez Mier:

1. As an individual, I am happy to go on the record to say that I continue to support water fluoridation.

2. You can also say that if I were pregnant today I would consume fluoridated water, and that if I lived in Mexico I would limit my salt intake.

NYSCOF, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Warmly,

Johnny Johnson, Jr., DMD, MS
Pediatric Dentist
President of the non-profit American Fluoridation Society, a non-paid group of healthcare professionals dedicated to the dissemination of credibly recognized , peer-reviewed research that has been published in credibly recognized scientific journals.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Johnny Johnson on 06/09/2018 at 10:33 AM

Re: “Colorado Brown Stain and Fluoridation

National Toxicology Program:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12640-018-9870-x

FAN was thrilled that it was being done, saying that it would spell the end of water fluoridation. Since its publication, the CWF opposition has been as quiet as a church mouse.

Results: no neurotoxic effects or any effects on 9 areas that were being evaluated. Nada.

Science: credibly conducted, evidence-based, peer-reviewed, and published in credibly recognized scientific journals. The facts are the facts, for better or worse.

Johnny Johnson, Jr, DMD, MS
President, American Fluoridation Society

Posted by Johnny Johnson on 06/07/2018 at 2:32 PM

Extra Extra!

Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.

  • Weekly Update (Thursday)
  • Events This Weekend (Thursday and Friday)

Login to choose
your subscriptions!

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2018 North Coast Journal

Website powered by Foundation