Burned by our drinking water? (Hydrofluoric acid: The burn thatkeeps on burning until...)

BURNED BY OUR DRINKING WATER?

See HOLY STOMACH ACID, BATMAN! Below.



Paul Connett, PhD, please see QUESTIONS below.

HYROFLUORIC ACID: THE BURN THAT KEEPS ON BURNING

Hydrofluoric acid hurts when it burns - and hurts as it KEEPS burning -
under the skin...until it finds an ion like calcium...

According to Charles Stewart, MD, FACEP:

"[T]he fluoride leaches calcium from all available tissues, a process that
can cause decalcification of bone and systemic hypocalcemia."

Steve B. Harris, MD indicates that a rather small hydrofluoric acid burn can
kill. (See below.)

Apparently calcium will put out the fluoride fire/burn on the skin - but
once the fluoride fire goes THROUGH the skin - it keeps burning - which
requires INJECTIONS of calcium...

See FULLER EXCERPT Charles Stewart, MD, FACEP "Chemical Injuries to the
Skin"...below.

INTERESTING: "Many household aluminum brighteners or rust removal
agents..contain [hydrofluoric acid]..."


BURNED BY OUR DRINKING WATER?

Hydrofluoric Acid vs. Fluoride Ion

QUESTIONS for Paul Connett, PhD...

Paul: Steve B. Harris, MD (quoted below) says rather emphatically that
fluoride ION is not absorbed by the skin. Is this true? IF TRUE, does this
mean that fluoride ion is not absorbed AT ALL - that "only" the hydrofluoric
acid (HF) is absorbed via the outside the body?

Does fluoride ion pass into the body INTERNALLY - or (again) is it "only"
the hydrofluoric acid that gets through gut/intestinal and lung/respiratory
epithelium? See your FAN/FAQ Question #8 quoted below...

Steve says: "At a pH of 5.5 (the lowest you're likely to get in tap
water)...the log of the ratio of F- to HF is [pH-pKa] which is 5.5-3.5 = 2,
so there's 100 times more flouride ion F- than there is HF. And since the
flouride ion concentration is 1 part per million, that means the HF
concentration is one part in a 100 million or 0.01 ppm..."
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/
alt.conspiracy/msg/6c12710cf650e9fc?

"FLUORIDATION" APPEARS TO ME TO BE AN EXTREMELY LOW CONCENTRATION (0.01 ppm)
HYDROFLUORIC ACID CHEMICAL BURN INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OUR BODIES...

The body puts out the fluoride fire in its tissues using calcium...

Again quoting Charles Stewart, MD, FACEP:

"[T]he fluoride leaches calcium from all available tissues, a process that
can cause decalcification of bone and systemic hypocalcemia."

Regarding fluoride skin absorption...

You say in your Fluoride Action Network/FAN (my comments are interspersed
#####)...

Question #8: If I take a shower with fluoridated water, will the fluoride
enter through my skin?

FAN has yet to see any direct evidence to verify this concern. If you are
aware of any such evidence, please let us know.

#### Paul, I don't know how direct his evidence for HF getting in - but
Steve is pretty direct about saying that fluoride ION does NOT pass through
the skin.

##### Paul/FAN continues...

It is important to keep in mind, however, that the extent to which fluoride
makes its way through the skin depends to a large extent on the acidity of
the water. It is clear, for instance, that fluoride in highly acidic water
can enter the skin.

#### This accords with what Steve B. Harris, MD wrote - though - again - he
says only hydrofluoric acid gets through.

#### Paul/FAN continues...

It is unclear, though, whether fluoride in water with a neutral acidity,
such is the case with most tap water, can do the same thing...

#### This must be the answer to my INTERNAL fluoride absorption question.
The fluoride that is of so much concern to anti-fluoride activists MUST be
absorbed by gut/intestinal and lung/respiratory epithelium because if it's
"only" hydrofluoric acid that is absorbed - simply consuming only neutral pH
drinking water would solve most of the problem, right?

##### Paul/FAN concludes...

One issue that warrants further research, however, is the extent to which
hot water may facilitate the passage of fluoride through the skin via the
opening of the skin's pores. FAN is aware of no evidence supporting or
negating this possibility.
http://www.fluoridealert.org/faqs.htm#Q8

HOLY STOMACH ACID BATMAN!

STOMACH ACID IS GOING TO YIELD MORE HYDROFLUORIC ACID FROM TAP WATER...

I just found this on Paul's FAN website:

"Ingested fluoride is transformed in the stomach to hydrofluoric acid, which
has a corrosive effect on the epithelial lining of the gastrointestinal
tract. Thirst, abdominal pain, vomiting, and diarrhea are usual symptoms.
Hemorrhage in the gastric mucosa, ulceration, erosions, and edema are common
signs."
SOURCE: Environmental Protection Agency. (1999). Recognition and Management
of Pesticide Poisonings. 5th Edition. (Available online)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/gi/

Hydrofluoric acid attacking the GI tract is going to burn through tissue
till it finds calcium or some other ion, right?

Fortunately, there's plenty of calcium in most diets and in most bodies...

And the fluoride makes it into bone - but those hip fractures...

I'd still like to know whether fluoride (the ion) passes through
gastrointestinal cells...


CANCER

I wonder how "fluoride" (hydrofluoric acid?) causes cancer...

I've been wondering about this more because this month (June 2005) the
Environmental Working Group is saying there is maybe more bone cancer in
boys from fluoridation. How does THAT work?
http://ewg.org/issues/fluoride/20050606/index.php

Our own Environmental Protection Agency/EPA fired Dr. William Marcus, PhD
for saying stuff like...

"Fluoride is a carcinogen by any standard we use. I believe the EPA should
act immediately to protect the public, not just on the cancer data but on
the evidence of bone fractures, arthritis, mutagenicity and other effects."
*- Dr. William Marcus, PhD, EPA scientist writing in the Food and Water
Journal, Summer, 1998
http://aquasafe.us/AquaSafe-Action.htm

In 1992, Dr. Marcus got fired by EPA...

In 1994, because he sued, Dr. Marcus got his EPA job back...
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/...p/marcus2.html

WHAT IF THE FLUORIDE POLLUTERS GOT BUSY?

What if they started an anti-fluoride campaign designed to make sure
fluoridation ended "nicely" - without district attorneys and attorney
generals PROSECUTING the rather obvious mass battery?

Why aren't the most prominent anti-fluoride protesters mentioning the fact
that common law indicates that it is a CRIME to medicate without consent?

More on this below.

WHAT IF THE MOST PROMINENT ANTI-FLUORIDE ACTIVISTS ARE WORKING FOR THE
FLUORIDE POLLUTERS?

Why the silence about the common law/crime aspect?

In May 2000 the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) was formed by a coalition of
activists and scientists from 12 countries (see:
http://www.fluoridealert.org). FAN's goal is to end fluoridation and
minimize exposure to fluoride. FAN's founding members include the late David
Brower; Teddy Goldsmith; Michael Colby; Gar Smith; Terri Swearingen; the
union representing professional employees at EPA headquarters; and Dr. Hardy
Limeback, Canada's leading dental authority on fluoridation who in 1999
apologized for having promoted fluoridation for 15 years.

In 2000, there was also the Masters and Coplan "It's the lead/arsenic - use
pure sodium fluoride stupid" study.

(Anti-fluoride protesters are in effect telling courts that fluoridation can
be made much BETTER - by using "pharmaceutical grade" fluoride. See the very
end of this post.)

In 2001, there was the QUILES faucet fraud, rubberstamped by the Florida
Supreme Court...

A FLUORIDE FUNNY...

Even if it were to be proven that fluoride CURES cancer, common law
indicates it is the crime of battery to administer it without consent

ATTENTION PAUL CONNETT, PhD...

I mention this "fluoride funny" again Paul, because you repeatedly ASK if it
is OK to mass medicate without consent in your famous 50 REASONS essay.

When I telephoned last year to ask why you were silent about the fact that
common law indicates medication without consent is a CRIME - you went silent
and gave me the email address of QUILES attorney Doug Balog who - citing
QUILES - told me that the medication without consent is NOT a crime.

(At the end of our conversation last year, since the UCLA chemistry
department had not contacted you regarding my $1000 donation to you to get a
UCLA chemistry professor to your conference, you asked if you could use my
$1000 donation to UCLA to bring others to your first annual anti-fluoride
extravaganza - and I said yes - and you later told me that my $1000 helped
get Virginia Brown to the affair. As you may know, Virginia supports you in
your silence. I discuss Virginia further below.)

I think it rather incredible Paul that when I brought up the common law
indicates it's a CRIME notion - you initially said there is no money for
attorneys.

As I noted for you last year - if (SINCE) it's a crime - it means FREE
attorneys!

The California Supreme Court wrote in the 1993 case of Daniel
Thor v. The Superior Court of Solano County 93 C.D.O.S. 5658:

"The common law has long recognized this principle: A physician who
performs any medical procedure without the patient's consent commits a
battery irrespective of the skill or care used." [Thor at 5659]

It's a SLAM DUNK - and we can use HUMOR to educate the public until those
FREE ATTORNEYS (district attorneys) finally take action.

It IS pretty funny that it looks like its been a CRIME all along!

See LAUGH it out of the water! (also: Virginia heard from Paul Connett?)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3604

It's getting the FREE ATTORNEYS to prosecute that is the trick - and the
best way to do that is to start TALKING about the common law/crime aspect.

So why the silence, Paul?

NOTE: Steve B. Harris, MD recently said (rather arrogantly) in response to
my notion that medication without consent is a crime:

"Without enforcement, there is no law. Without law, there is no
crime...These are elementary principles. Get an adult to explain them to
you."
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3663

If no one talks about the common law/crime aspect there will be no
enforcement.

Paul, do you agree with QUILES attorney Doug Balog who promotes the Florida
Supreme Court's 2002 rubberstamping of QUILES?

Do you agree with the QUILES argument that fluoridation is not medication
because Florida cities are fluoridating faucets, not bloodstreams?

Why have you not attacked the QUILES faucet fraud?

Why are you still silent about the fact that common law indicates that
medication without consent is a crime?

Since you ASK in your 50 REASONS essay whether medication without consent is
OK.

Why not amend your 50 REASONS essay and mention the common law/crime notion
- and the QUILES faucet fraud?

In regard to these latter questions Paul, did you get any of my emails?

See for example: Virginia's apology - it's a start (copied to Paul Connett,
PhD)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3616

Copied to: Paul Connett, PhD via , ,


VIRGINIA BROWN, PRESIDENT OF PINELLAS (FLORIDA) CITIZENS FOR SAFE WATER/CSW

Virginia recently wrote on the Yahoo Fluoride Discussion Group:

I think Paul Connett would be the one to answer these scientific
questions, though I am not sure that he is highly educated in
Naturapathic expertise. I know that chlorine will enter your body
through your dipped finger immediately! From what we received the
toxins in the hydroflurosilicic acid are absorbed both through the
skin, and the vapors from the hot shower as we breathe, more than 50
%. I do not have the reference for that in front of me. I would have
to look the references up to validate that.As a naturapath student, I
know that everything we put on the skin is absorbed and enters the
bloodstream. Most people haven't got a clue, including some
scientists! I don't think they put the 2 plus two together to realize
the way the body works. I think it is just a lack of awareness. I do
not know of substances that are not absorbed when placed on the skin.
Certain substances clog the pores,certain oils. Olive oil does not
clog the pores. You could ask Paul about this. He may or may not know
the answers to every point, but may know some on the science and
chemistry aspect.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fluoride/message/2271

Virginia,

I am not sure to whom you were responding. I did not recognize your
"science of things" subject line as being from a previous poster and you did
not include any text from a previous post.

Maybe you were responding to me?

I did post recently about Fluoride Skin Absorption - here is the URL...
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3663

You mentioned asking Paul Connett, PhD about "the science and chemistry
aspect."

As you may remember, Paul Connett, PhD is silent about the CRIME aspect -
and you support Paul in his silence...

See again: Virginia's apology - it's a start (copied to Paul Connett, PhD)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3616

Inspite of Paul's silence about the crime aspect, I have asked him about
fluoride skin absorption... See above.

Debra Lynn Dadd (author of Home Safe Home dld123.com) found research
evidence that fluoride is absorbed through the skin...

She responded to my post:

"I did quite a bit of research about flouride skin
absorption when I was writing the new edition of
my book Home Safe Home (dld123.com). I did find
evidence that it is absorbed through the skin. I
would have to dig up that research. But I had
thought for years that it was not absorbed and
apparently it is."

Again, Steve B. Harris, MD says rather emphatically that fluoride does NOT
pass through the skin - because it is an ION - but that hydrogen fluoride
does pass through the skin - the more acidic the water the more hydrogen
fluoride available to pass through the skin.

See Steve's COMMENT below.

------ Forwarded Message
From: "Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com"
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Newsgroups:
alt.conspiracy,misc.health.alternative,sci.med,tal k.politics.medicine,alt.sk
incare.acne
Date: 18 Jun 2005 18:48:16 -0700
Subject: Fluoride Skin Absorption

The lack of information regarding the absorption by skin is
particularly disturbing as recent research has uncovered hundreds of
papers in the European literature regarding the use of fluorides as
effective anti-thyroid medication, including bath therapy. Between 1932

and 1962 Gorlitzer von Mundy cured over 650 patients suffering from
hyperthyroidism (over-functioning thyroid gland) effectively with baths

containing hydrogen fluoride (HF). After first conductiong over 1500
trials on mice and tadpoles, he prescribed 20-minute full baths
containing 30 ccm of concentrated HF per 200 liters of water.
Temperature was mostly 36º Celsius.It took on average 15 baths to
completely cure the patients, who also gained 20 kg of weight as a
result. He warned that such treatment should only be applied to
hyperthyroid patients, for to apply such measures to euthyroid (normal)

people would surely lead to hypothyroidism.


COMMENT:

Flouride (F- ion) is not absorbed through the skin, since it's an ION.
However, the study above was done using HF (hydrofluoric acid) which
is a well-known and very insidious weak acid, precisely BECAUSE it
stays undissociated to a large extent at pH's lower than its pKa of
3.5, and thus presents significant amounts of undissociated HF. This
molecule is lipid soluble and DOES pass through skin and tissues, where
it causes all kinds of damage by complexing with Ca+2. This is why a
concentrated HF burn to only 2% of your body (a 5 or 6 inch square
patch on your chest, say) can be FATAL. It doesn't happen in an hour or
even a day. But you're dead all the same if you don't get very painful
and specific treatment.

A bath in which 20 grams of HF is added to 200 L of water would give
you a pH of about 3, and only about a quarter of the HF would ionize to
F- and H+. The rest would remain as HF, and be available for skin
absorption at a concentration of approximately 4 mM, or perhaps a bit
less (I'm too lazy to do the exact quadratic). That's 80 mg/L or 80 ppm
of HF undissociated. Not fatal, but (as the article indicates) enough
body flouride absorption to have systemic effects.

By contrast, at a pH of 5.5 (the lowest you're likely to get in tap
water) things are quite different. Now the log of the ratio of F- to HF
is [pH-pKa] which is 5.5-3.5 = 2, so there's 100 times more flouride
ion F- than there is HF. And since the flouride ion concentration is 1
part per million, that means the HF concentration is one part in a 100
million or 0.01 ppm. Compare with 80 ppm in the medicinal bath. You
could expect HF concentrations in tabwater therefore only 1/8000th or
so of the low pH HF therapeutic baths. And I suppose a correspondingly
smaller effect. But you cannot say that NONE will be absorbed.

SBH

NOTE: I am assuming that Steve's "hydrogen fluoride" is the same as
hydrofluoric acid. My chemistry is shaky, I'm embarrassed to say...

Charles Stewart, MD, FACEP says "fluoride ions may enter" in "Chemical
Injuries to the Skin":

"...fluoride ions may enter the body through the skin or any mucous
membrane, including the respiratory and gastrointestinal system. Damage is
not due to the hydrogen ion but results from release of toxic fluoride
ions."
http://www.hypertension-consult.com/...xtbook/124_che
micalinjuries.htm

NOTE: Charles says fluoride "ions" enter the skin but then he says that
"damage results from release of toxic fluoride ions" - which indicates to me
(in accord with Steve's words) that fluoride ions do NOT pass through the
skin...


HYDROFLUORIC ACID: THE BURN THAT KEEPS ON BURNING...


Apparently calcium puts out the fluoride fire on skin - but once the
fluoride fire goes THROUGH the skin - it keeps burning - which requires
INJECTIONS of calcium...


FULLER EXCERPT Charles Stewart, MD, FACEP "Chemical Injuries to the Skin"...


Hydrofluoric Acid Burns
HF is used in the glass and semiconductor industries as an etching agent, in
the plastic industries for production of various plastic materials, and as a
solvent for uranium. Many household aluminum brighteners or rust removal
agents also contain HF.22,23

[Citing 22. Flood S. Hydrofluoric acid burns. Am Fam Physician
1988;37:175-182; and 23. Trevino MA, Herrmann GH, Sprout WL. Treatment of
severe hydrofluoric acid exposures. J Occup Med 1983;25:861-863.]

General Principles. From a clinical toxicology perspective, HF is important
because it can produce extensive tissue damage, even at low concentrations.
Moreover, it can result in potentially lethal systemic manifestations.
Although HF causes caustic injury to the skin, it is less caustic than
hydrochloric or sulfuric acids. Solutions containing HF in a concentration
greater than 50% will produce immediate pain and apparent tissue
destruction. HF solutions with a concentration in the range of 20-50% will
produce clinical signs of injury within hours of exposure. On the other
hand, injuries will not be apparent for up to 24 hours with solutions of
less than 20%.23-29 Finally, fluoride ions may enter the body through the
skin or any mucous membrane, including the respiratory and gastrointestinal
system. Damage is not due to the hydrogen ion but results from release of
toxic fluoride ions.

From a pathophysiological point of view, fluoride ions cause a breakdown in
all calcium-dependent reactions in the cell membrane,30 a process that
results in liquefaction necrosis of the skin and subcutaneous tissues.
Without specific treatment, damage will progress over many hours, because
the fluoride ions are not neutralized by the normal body defenses against
acids or bases. Because the salts continue to be bioactive, the fluoride
ions must be inactivated by combining them with other cations, including
calcium and magnesium, which will form insoluble and nontoxic salts with
fluoride anions.31 All other salts are soluble and dissociate completely,
thereby permitting continued diffusion of ions into the tissues. In
addition, it should be stressed that if calcium is not available from an
exogenous source, it will be leached from the patient's bony calcium
deposits, a process that can produce life-threatening hypocalcemia.

Presentation. Topical exposure to HF is associated with extensive skin
damage, including deep tissue destruction. Most exposures involve the skin,
eyes, respiratory tract, or oral mucosa; even rectal exposure has been
documented.32 The initial presentation usually consists of pain at the site
of the exposure, which is uniformly described as excruciating, particularly
after exposure to solutions with greater than 20% concentration. Regional
nerve blocks may be required for relief. Local erythema and edema also may
be present.

As the injury progresses, erythema and edema progress to blanching. Bullae
denote a more severe burn that requires aggressive treatment. A grossly
necrotic area may develop with subsequent tissue sloughing and a very slowly
healing lesion. In severe cases, bone injury may be present and severe
decalcification may be noted. HF burns have caused systemic hydrofluorosis
with subsequent death.33-35

Initial Treatment. Immediately after exposure, the affected area should be
flooded with copious amounts of water at low pressures. All clothing and
shoes can be removed in the shower to decrease the possibility of further
contamination to both patient and staff. If there is evidence of skin
damage, including erythema, the assumption can be made that the skin has
been penetrated by fluoride ions, which will require inactivation. It is
equally appropriate to assume that all skin spills are still contaminated
and that the patient will develop additional injury if these areas are not
treated.

Before proceeding with decontamination, the physician must ensure that he or
she is adequately protected against HF exposure. Either butyl rubber or
nitrile gloves and apron are recommended and should be worn. Shoe covers
will decrease both ³tracking² and contamination. All contaminated clothing
and bedding should be placed in heavy plastic garbage bags and labeled.

The involved skin should be copiously flushed with running water while
further preparations are in progress. In particular, nail beds and skin
folds must be scrupulously cleansed. All bullae and vesicles should be
aspirated to remove fluoride-containing fluids. Care must be taken not to
spill the aspirate on any other part of the skin. Finally, the lesions
should be debrided.

Topical Agents. After the area has been flooded with water for at least 30
minutes, any remaining fluoride ions can be ³fixed² with the application of
magnesium oxide, calcium chloride, or calcium gluconate solutions or topical
ointments. Unfortunately, there is no convincing evidence that any of the
these compounds produce significant tissue penetration. Despite all of the
manufacturers' claims, the inactivated complex with fluoride in deep tissues
simply will not be formed if the solution or ointment doesn't penetrate
deeply enough to bind with free fluoride ions.36 Consequently, once the
fluoride has penetrated the skin, topical agents generally will no longer be
effective.

If calcium chloride or gluconate gel is used, however, the residual fluoride
will combine with the calcium and probably will neutralize any residual
fluoride still on the skin.37 This reaction will produce insoluble calcium
fluoride which precipitates and clouds the clear gel. These cloudy areas
mark neutralization of fluoride deposits,30 which prevent further damage,
making topical therapy worthwhile even if deep penetration into tissue fails
to occur.

Local Infiltration. After debridement of lesions, 10% calcium gluconate can
be injected into the burn to further bind the fluoride ions. This slow and
painful process deposits calcium directly into the tissues and eventually
provides pain relief.

About 0.5 mL of solution should be injected intradermally for every square
centimeter of tissue damage. The injection is extended about 0.5 cm into the
margins of the burn to bind ions that may have already migrated to this
distal location.22,23,25,26 To ease the pain of injection, a 27- or 30-gauge
needle should be used and the area should be infiltrated slowly.
Unfortunately, the volume of calcium gluconate that can be administered is
limited to only 0.5 cc per injection. This severely restricts the amount of
calcium that can be injected therapeutically at one sitting. Recurrence of
the pain is an indication of further fluoride ion migration and necessitates
an additional injection. Caution is advised, however, because multiple
injections may contribute to local tissue ischemia. Calcium chloride is
corrosive and should not be used for local infiltration.38

Intra-arterial Infusion. Intra-arterial calcium may provide better
distribution and less tissue distention than injections into the burn. The
arterial catheter should be placed in the distribution system. Arterial
infusion of calcium may provide relief from burns to the fingertips without
loss of either nail or distal finger.39,40 Calcium may be infused as either
the gluconate or chloride over four hours.41 If the patient complains of
continued pain, additional calcium may be infused.

Dressings and Topical Agents. After the injection of calcium, the area may
be covered with a topical agent. Topical agents that have been used include
calcium gluconate or chloride gels and soaks, magnesium oxide gel, paste, or
soaks, and benzethonium and benzalkonium chloride soaks. Magnesium oxide
dressings are less expensive and easier to obtain but are not as effective
as calcium-based dressings.26,27 Calcium chloride soaks may also be used.
Some authors recommend 2.5% calcium gluconate in a gel vehicle, but further
clinical trials are indicated before advocating this more costly therapy.28
A mixture of 2.5-5.0% calcium gluconate in KY jelly may be used as an
inexpensive alternative.29

Some authorities also recommend the use of quaternary ammonia compounds such
as Hibiclens or Zephiran. These ammonia compounds have a dubious effect upon
fluoride skin poisoning.23,42 They may also tend to irritate sensitive skin
tissues like the face or eye.

HF can rapidly penetrate the nail bed and destroy the underlying nail bed
and matrix. Infiltration of calcium ions into the subungual spaces is
extremely painful and may cause vascular compromise in the restrictive space
between nail and nail bed. When ungual areas are involved in a HF burn, the
affected nail must usually be excised under regional anesthesia. Removal of
the nail will allow regeneration after the injury.

The wound must be inspected frequently to determine whether there is any
further damage. Recurrence of pain is an indication for reinspection and
reinjection. A fluoride burn should always be reinspected at 24-hour
intervals, no matter how small or innocuous it seems. Surgical debridement
may be necessary to prevent continued necrosis or if the exposure is in an
inaccessible area.32

Systemic Complications. (See Table 3.) Skin burns with HF may be associated
with significant systemic absorption of fluoride ions. Systemic toxicity can
also occur with ingestion of sodium fluoride and inhalation of HF vapors.43
As earlier noted, the fluoride leaches calcium from all available tissues, a
process that can cause decalcification of bone and systemic hypocalcemia.

Table 3. Signs of Acute Systemic Fluoride Toxicity
Hypotension
Bradycardia, followed by tachycardia
Prolongation of the QT interval
Ventricular fibrillation (often intractable)
Respiratory depression
Pulmonary edema
Seizures
CNS depression
Carpopedal spasm or tetany (not often found)
Hypocalcemia, hypomagnesemia
Coagulation disorders (rare)

The precipitous drop in serum calcium has been implicated in
fluoride-induced sudden death and may be more life-threatening than the burn
damage.34,44 The first sign of hypocalcemia is a profound bradycardia with a
prolonged QT interval, which usually occurs within 30-45 minutes after
exposure.

Accordingly, patients who are suspected of having this complication should
be admitted to a telemetry unit to monitor for QT prolongation and possible
dysrhythmias, as ventricular fibrillation may soon follow. This dysrhythmia
may respond to high doses of intravenous calcium and surgical excision of
the burn wound.45 Death may also be caused by respiratory distress due to
airway edema.46 Several authors have reported use of massive doses of
calcium salts for relief of hypocalcemia.47 If there is evidence of systemic
fluorosis or the possibility of inhalation injury, the patient should be
admitted to the hospital and observed for at least 24 hours. Monitoring of
liver function studies, renal function studies, electrolytes, and serial
serum calcium levels is indicated .23

Ocular Injuries. HIT solution or vapor in or around the eye causes more
extensive damage than other acids in similar concentrations. Deep
penetration and liquefaction necrosis make HF especially destructive to the
eye. Eye burns should be treated with immediate and copious irrigation
immediately after exposure. A Morgan contact irrigating lens is well suited
for this procedure. Eyelid spasm may be decreased by use of tetracaine or
other ophthalmologic anesthetic solutions.22 Following this irrigation, a l%
calcium gluconate solution in isotonic sodium chloride can be used as drops
and instilled every 2-3 hours.23 Other authors feel that only irrigation
with water, isotonic saline solution, or magnesium chloride solutions
offered therapeutic benefit.24,48 Prompt ophthalmologic consultation is
essential.
http://www.hypertension-consult.com/...xtbook/124_che
micalinjuries.htm

END FULLER EXCERPT Charles Stewart, MD, FACEP "Chemical Injuries to the
Skin"...

A few last notes for Virginia Brown, President, Pinellas Citizens for Safe
Water/CSW...

Again, you wrote:

"I think Paul Connett would be the one to answer these scientific questions,
though I am not sure that he is highly educated in Naturapathic [sic]
expertise."

I am not sure what naturopathy has to do with anything - other than the fact
that naturopaths - like toxicologists and many others - are no doubt
interested in the absorption of toxic substances.

Virginia, last year you assured me that you would bring up at CSW meetings
the fact that common law indicates that medication without consent is a
battery - in children battery is child abuse - but you didn't.

This year, you supported Paul Connett, PhD in his silence about common law
indicating that medication without consent is a battery.

See again: Virginia's apology - it's a start (copied to Paul Connett, PhD)
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/3616

This year you said you would discuss the QUILES faucet fraud at your next
CSW meeting.

Did you at least discuss the QUILES faucet fraud at your recent CSW meeting?

I saw where Tom Nocera's "pro-pharmaceutical grade mass battery" lawsuit got
a lot of attention at your recent (June 18?) CSW meeting.

As I've previously noted: The fluoride polluters must LOVE it when
anti-fluoride protesters sue to get PURE "pharmaceutical grade" fluoride
into their drinking water.

The attorney in the Escondido, Calif. Lawsuit actually says in his brief
that the lawsuit is not about fluoridation!

Yeah, go for mass battery with the pure stuff with Tom Nocera¹s lawsuit -
and hope that Pinellas County can¹t afford the pure stuff.

But what if that ³pure stuff² strategy was ³canned-in-advance² to give
anti-fluoride protesters something ³constructive² to do to keep their minds
ON Paul Connett¹s favored VOTE-IT-OUT strategy and OFF the fact that common
law indicates that fluoridation without consent is a CRIME * mass battery?

Again Virginia, did you at least discuss the QUILES faucet fraud at your
recent CSW meeting?

For anyone who hasn't read the QUILES faucet fraud...

See Florida fluoride is for faucets * not people!
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/
misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/864b9d151f31e678

Alternate URL: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group...t/message/2667

Thanks for reading everyone.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo
Hillsboro, Oregon


This email will be posted for global access in the Google usenet archive.

Search http://groups.google.com for "Burned by our drinking water?
(Hydrofluoric acid: The burn that keeps on burning)"