This is the alleged magic tooth medicine added to the Region of Peel’s drinking water – never approved as a drug, food additive or nutritional supplement.
[Please Note: This chemical is referred to by many different names (as shown in this Wikipedia entry), which adds to public confusion.]
Further commentary from long-time WF expert Dr. Gilles Parent, of Quebec, January 2019:
(Note that the Region’s current HFSA appears to come from Spain, as per commentary from a competing supplier, see page 3: https://www.ecwa.org/pdf/BoardMeetingMinutes/2018/120_06-14-18%209@@@30%20a.m.%20Board%20Meeting/030_Resolutions/Hydrofluorosolicic_Solvay_Protest.pdf?POP=1)
“The substitution of HFSA from the Phosphate fertilizer companies to the Calcium fluoride named: Fluorite (also called fluorspar). The manufacturing process is identical to the phosphate fertilizer industries, the rock which is CaF2 is treated with sulfuric acid that produce hydrogen fluoride gas (HF) that is captured by a wet process in the de-pollution system that become hydrofluoric acid then mixed with silicate to form HFSA. Fluospar is used for aluminum production.
Fluorapatite, often with the alternate spelling of fluoroapatite, is a phosphate mineral with the formula Ca5(PO4)3F (calcium fluorophosphate).
… it has the same chemical formula (HFSA), only the rock origin is different. Because the rock has less contaminants, the final HFSA is less contaminated. By using this new source of HFSA, the government and the Public Health can pretend it is the natural calcium fluoride, such a statement being scientifically incorrect (fraudulent), and they may affirmed that it is less contaminated. The Public Health have try to fool the Council Fluoridation Committee of Peel by stating they would be utilizing a natural source of fluoride, calcium fluoride instead of stating that they would be utilizing a similar compound from a different source, named fluorite. It is still a byproduct of a mining industry and the sanitary conditions aren’t better than in the phosphate fertilizer companies.
The fact that municipalities are switching to HFSA from fluorspar may be an admission that they were using an excessively contaminated fluoridation product. They had a concern at least to quiet down the opposition to the use of contaminated fluoride. There may also be a political problem, because of the bad press in the State related to serious pollution by the Florida-Alabama phosphate plants, the switch toward fluospar source may be better. Because of the reduction of the production of HFSA by US phosphate fertilizer plants, much of HFSA was imported from China and the quality, contaminants wise, may be more problematic. Distance from China was probably one factor too. Spain is closer.”
Hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFSA, aka fluosilicic acid), is an inorganic, man-made fluoride compound, an industrial waste product (from phosphate fertilizer manufacturing and other processes) and a source of water pollution. See the March 30, 1983 Memo from Rebecca Hanmer, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Water, EPA: http://www.fluoridefreepeel.
HFSA spilled on 401: confirmed
It has been confirmed by multiple sources that it was HFSA that wreaked havoc on highway 401 last winter, killing a truck driver, causing dozens to be sent to hospital due to exposure. This is the exact chemical that the Region of Peel uses to fluoridate our water. Peel’s current HFSA supplier was charged for their involvement in the accident:
https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/hfsa-spilled-on-401-toronto-star-confirmed/
Other spills, and over feeds, of HFSA have occurred. Below is a sample of news reports.
2011 News report: HFSA spill burns holes in parking lot cement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
2017: Orange Water and Sewer Authority… accidental overfeed of fluoride within the water treatment process at the Jones Ferry Road Water Treatment Plant .http://abc11.com/health/orang
Production of HF from H2SiF6, published in Procedia Engineering, 2016:
“With the growing demand for fertilizers and thus more and more production facilities starting up, the need to dispose of the FSA by-product grows… So far, FSA is either sold for drinking water fluorination… However, annual production of phosphoric acid now exceeds 58 million tons per year. Therefore, more than two million tons of FSA …need to be disposed of.”
http://buss-ct.com/up/files/PDFs_fluorine/1-s2.0-S1877705816004446-main.pdf
Excerpts:
13.1. Waste treatment methods
- This material is hazardous to the aquatic environment. Keep out of sewers and waterways.
- Place in an appropriate container dispose of contaminated material at a licensed site.
- Dispose of waste material in accordance with all local, regional, national, and international regulations
Missing Toxicological Information:
- They don’t even know what harm this can do to a human body.
Material Safety Data Sheets for HFSA
SOLVAY Fluorides – Material Safety Data Sheet 
Brenntag Canada Inc – Material Safety Data Sheet
ClearTech – Material Safety Data Sheet
Mosaic – Material Safety Data Sheet
MSDSs for HFSA include not only health warnings but environmental warnings such as: Prevent discharge into waterways and sewers (https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Mosaic-MSDS-HFSA.pdf) and Do not contaminate domestic or irrigation water supplies, lakes, streams, ponds, or rivers (http://www.reviewboard.ca/upload/project_document/EA1011-001_Hydroflosilicic_acid_MSDS.PDF).
Ministry of Environment (Quebec) 1979 Report On Fluorides, Fluoridation & Environmental Quality, pg 24:
“…. fluorides have been ranked high among environmental problems, Their toxicity is such that in 1947, the American Association for the Advancement of Science considered the fluoride ion the most dangerous atmospheric pollutant after sulphur dioxide and ozone, and placed it third among the urgent problems to be examined in this field…”
http://bramptonreiki.com/Quebec_MOE_1979_Report_On_Fluorides_Fluoridation_&_Enviro_Quality.PDF
“Fluoride spill at water facility literally burns holes in parking lot cement.”
The fluoride chemical was hydrofluorosilicic acid, HFSA, the same chemical used to fluoridate Peel’s drinking water.
These two conditions are extremely different but share a common cause. samples of generic viagra Your urinary tract extends from your two kidneys down through two tubes like viagra online australia structures called ureters, to your bladder, and urethra. This drug pattern has been manufactured in the measures of 250mg, 500mg and 750mg in tablets, 25mg/ml for oral consumption and they also manufactured this medicament in injection form in the measures of 5mg/ml and 25mg/ml that cialis free consultation have been used to treat the victims those who have adopted this solution in order to come over their sexual deficiencies. The assessment is reliant on your medical history, examination routines and an understanding of joint and tadalafil no prescription muscular assessment procedures.
– The non-governmental private organization that certifies HFSA for use in Canada takes no responsibly & makes no claims regarding safety (See pg iii: NSF/ANSI 60 2016: http://www.nsf.org/newsroom_
Health Canada says that NSF certification requires a toxicology review of HFSA… see page 3: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/agarewal_8-19-2016_16-15-10.pdf
… but Health Canada also admits it has no toxicology studies on HFSA (and no double-blind randomized clinical trials of fluoridation, and thus no studies adequate to establish the alleged safety or efficacy of fluoridation); the Region, the province and the NSF are also unable to supply any such studies. See Access to Information Request A-2014-00168: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Health-Canada-FOI-Response-Letter-June2014.pdf
– U.S. attorney James Robert Deal has written about NSF’s “fraudulent” certification of HFSA, which is given without the required risk analysis. http://jamesrobertdeal.org/fraudulent-fluoride-certification-2/
– The Region of Peel’s “expert”, Mr. Jeff Jennings, Manager of Water Treatment Capital, was called in front of Council during their meeting of March 9, 2017. Mr. Hennings stated, when questioned by Councillor John Sprovieri (our safe water hero!), that he did not know the long term effects of ingesting HFSA and would not argue that there are no adverse health effects. He claimed that, despite the Region being in the midst of much fluoridation attention and having a committee reviewing the issue for the last 2 years, he had not looked at HFSA’s MSDS lately.
– The shipping advice for HFSA clearly indicates that it is a dangerous good and a poison (see image: http://www.fluoridefreepeel.
– Both Fluorine and HFSA are classified as Dangerous Goods / Hazardous Materials in Transport Canada (2012) Emergency Response Guidebook. (See pages 22, 38, 116, 120: http://phmsa.dot.gov/
– Inorganic fluoride is listed as a Toxic Substance on Schedule 1 of the Toxic Substances List maintained by Environment and Climate Change Canada. (See #40: http://www.ec.gc.ca/lcpe-cepa/
– HFSA contains many toxins aside from fluoride, such as arsenic & lead. (Certificate of Analysis from Lakeview Water Treatment Facility in Mississauga, As = arsenic, Pb = lead: http://www.fluoridefreepeel.
– Justyna Burkiewicz, Supervisor, Water Quality and Compliance, Water and Wastewater Divisions, Region of Peel, has confirmed that HFSA is not procured under any grade classification (email of Nov 1, 2016 available upon request).
– The LDL 50, oral rat, for calcium fluoride is ~4250 ppm, as compared to the LDL 50, oral rat, of 125 – 430 shown on ControlChem’s HFSA MSDS (see page 1). This means that the amount of HFSA required to kill 50% of test rats is 10 – 34 times LESS than the amount of calcium fluoride required to do the same thing (R.I.P. rats!).
Some Publications on
Silicofluor
ides, Neurotoxicity and Behaviour
HFSA Supplier Receives Historic Fine For Mishandling Toxic Waste
Dr. William Hirzy & EPA Union on Fluoridation(27:25)
Water fluoridation is: “..in essence just a hazardous waste management tool. It has nothing to do with dental health whatsoever…. If this stuff 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 right into your drinking water system, it’s not a pollutant. That’s amazing… There’s got to be a better way to manage this stuff.”
September 5, 2011 On June 29th, 2000, Dr. William Hirzy was invited to give testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water on behalf of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) Chapter 280 – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Headquarters. At the time, Dr. Hirzy was Senior Vice-President of the EPA Headquarters Union.
Update: June 8, 2017
The region has changed HFSA suppliers.
[The region claims that their new HFSA is derived from calcium fluoride. Having safe-water advocates warn residents that the Region is adding industrial waste to our drinking water didn’t sound very nice, so a new spin on the topic was needed. The region has supplied zero evidence to support their claim (which is typical when it comes to the water fluoridation issue), their new supplier, ControlChem, has refused to answer any of our questions, and it is a moot point anyways.
According to Wikipedia, one HFSA is formed as a byproduct of hydrogen fluoride production when calcium fluoride is treated with sulfuric acid (see the “Production and principal reactions” section here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexafluorosilicic_acid, and please note that we do not generally consider Wikipedia a reliable source of information). Whether or not this is the origin of the Region’s new HFSA, it is still deadly industrial waste, there are still no toxicology studies, etc., etc.]
Below are some excerpts from the MSDS provided by ControlChem (see MSDS current F chemical June 2017 ControlChem):
pg 3: “Prevent spillage from entering drains or waterways”… “The hazardous nature of fluorosilicic acid requires emergency and spill procedures to be effective to avoid both human and environmental exposure. Hazardous conditions may result if material is managed improperly…. Environmental precautions: Do not contaminate water.”
Pg 7: “This MSDS if offered for your information, consideration and investigation… The information is believed to be accurate but ControlChem Canada Ltd provides no warranties, either expressed or implied. User assumes all risk to persons, property and environment through use or misuse.”
A new perspective on metals and other contaminants in fluoridation chemicals
International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health
Phyllis J Mullenix, April 2014
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
“…The production of fluoride additive involves phosphate rock, which contains cadmium (Cd), arsenic (As), lead (Pb), chromium (Cr), mercury (Hg), nickel (Ni), vanadium (V), uranium (U), and other radionuclides and metals at levels that vary by geographical origin. Metal contaminants in fluoride additives are a potential contamination source of the water supply….
…Results show that metal content varies with batch, and all HFS samples contained arsenic (4.9–56.0 ppm) or arsenic in addition to lead (10.3 ppm)… All HFS (212–415 ppm) … additives contained a surprising amount of aluminum.
… It is well established that batch-to-batch variation in contaminant content can change biological response and that even trace amounts of
contaminants can lower the threshold dose for an effect, particularly when there are synergistic interactions and the overall effect is greater than the sum of effects caused by contaminants acting alone.
… Synergism between contaminants fosters an underestimation of risks, like that occurring with combinations of Pb, As, Cd, and Cr or fluoride coexisting with aluminum or beryllium.
Combinations of contaminants can also trigger chemical degradation, generating decomposition products with toxicity greater than that of the original compounds. In a previous trace contaminant study of commercially available HFS samples, one in four samples had signs
of decomposition where an unexpectedly high level of hydrofluoric acid (3.3%) exceeded the AWWA standard (1%).
The MSDS’s for fluoride additives do not specify threshold limit values for decomposition products such as hydrogen fluoride. While they do warn against combining fluoride with metals to avoid corrosion, they do not describe the risks that decomposition creates for workers as a result of airborne contamination. Although the MSDS’s for HFS and NaF additives list a threshold limit value (TLV) of 2.5 mg(F)/m, they avoid the 0.5 ppm TLV (0.41 mg(F)/m at 25uC and 760 Torr) for occupational exposure to hydrogen fluoride.
This incomplete disclosure can result in unexpected outcomes, like that encountered by manufacturers of fluoroether compounds (i.e. sevoflurane) when trace amounts of metal oxides from metallic or glass surfaces of containers or medical devices initiated chemical degrada-
tion to form highly toxic levels of hydrogen fluoride, hydrofluoric acid, and silicon tetrafluoride.
Any metal initiated degradation of fluorinated compounds is important to consider, especially since drinking water increasingly contains fluorinated pharmaceuticals.
Beryllium oxyfluoride, barium fluoride, or magnesium fluoride are acutely more toxic than compounds such as sodium fluoride, calcium fluoride, or magnesium oxide….”
Debunking the ‘HFSA Dissociates, There’s No Need for Toxicology Studies‘ Argument
This assertion is not supported by the scientific literature, click here to learn more.
Finney et al., 2006, study of HFSA in Nanopure water: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2006-Finney-F-19-NMR-HFSDissociation-EnvironSciTechnol-2006-Michigan.pdf
Dissociation update (January 10, 2017): Dr. de Villa has still not provided evidence that supports her claim that HFSA dissociates 100% in our tap water, nor has she addressed concern that any HFSA that may dissociate might reassociate under acidic conditions such as in tea, coffee and the intestines of residents, nor has she addressed concern that compounds even more toxic than HFSA may form, nor has she addressed synergistic effects among contaminants (such as fluoride’s ability to increase uptake of aluminum).
How can we go even further and create legislation or to that affect mandating municipalities to provide pure and wholesome water?
How do we hold one accountable to breach of public trust?
Rommel, we already have legislation, Ontario’s Safe Drinking Water Act, which Council appears to be flagrantly violating, along with a few other laws (including the federal Food and Drugs Act, Charter Rights). These laws are superior to the provincial Fluoridation Act, which is nothing more than smoke and mirrors.
I suspect Council has been duped into believing that HFSA is a ‘water treatment chemical’ and hence the SDWA does not apply. This is absurd, given that HFSA has nothing to do with making the water potable (as chlorine does). It is added for the express purpose of having a direct effect on our bodies, not the water itself.
Please be sure to contact your Councillor and Mayor about this. We have created a fully referenced email that only takes 1 minute to send. It will be copied to all of Council: http://wedeservesafewater.com/Z/no-fluoride-peel.php
Please also share the website, Facebook posts, Tweets, etc! Encourage your friends to join our email list. See our Take Action page for more ideas: https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/take-action/
Will it take an other catastrophic event before Peel councilors realize the dangers of this dumping scheme hidden in the false premise of tooth decay prevention.
What if the 1979 Mississauga train derailment tankers were carrying Hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFSA, aka fluosilicic acid). One of the most toxic substance to humans after arsenic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Mississauga_train_derailment
The derailment ruptured several tankers, spilling styrene, toluene, propane, caustic soda, and chlorine onto the tracks and into the air.
Good point, Robert.
Here is a brief intro into fluoridation’s history: Fluorides, the atomic bomb, and fake news, from investigative reporter Jon Rappoport: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/03/15/fluorides-the-atomic-bomb-and-fake-news/
Chris Bryson, one of the two respected mainstream journalists mentioned in the article, wrote an entire book called the Fluoride Deception. Here is a 30 minute interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ly_QP4rGczo The book is available through the library and a pdf has been posted here: http://www.macquirelatory.com/Christopher%20Bryson%20-%20The_Fluoride_Deception.pdf Warning, it is extremely disturbing. I could not read past the 1st chapter. — Christine