Posted on 04/10/2025 7:41:53 PM PDT by ransomnote
SNIP
Proponents of nano hydroxyapatite (N-HAP) state it’s a safe replacement for fluoride in toothpaste, however it works much in the same way. With fluoride, fluorapatite is created on the surface of the enamel. With n-HAP, nano sized particles are able to be absorbed by a layer of protective proteins on the enamel called the pellicle. These particles are so small that they can be caught and held by these proteins and then presumably release calcium ions that are incorporated into the tooth.
It's potentially great for teeth, but what about the rest of the body? Is hydroxyapatite safe?
While it may sound like a healthier alternative because hydroxyapatite exists in the body naturally, we have to remember we're dealing with nanoparticles.
What Animal Studies Have Found
In 2016, the European Commission Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety wanted to find out is hydroxyapatite safe. They compiled a number of studies. Their findings were eye-opening. All are excerpts below are from their document, found here.
Effects on Lungs
When considering is hydroxyapatite safe, we have to look at animal studies. Lab rats were fed high amounts of N-HAP with some disturbing findings:
Death of the animals occurred from 10,000 mg/kg bw in both sexes as a result of cardiac and respiratory arrest. Important findings on animals surviving 14 d: lung vessels were moderately congested, “alveoli filled with air”; signs of “fatty degeneration of the liver”.
While this was a very high dose, other studies with lower doses found NAHA affected lungs in similar way:
Histopathological evaluation revealed “pseudotubercles in lung, performing intracavity embolism, inflammatory cell infiltrate and hyperplasy of stroma cell.”
and:
In lungs, seven cases of bronchial associated lymphoid tissue proliferation were observed.
Even though the nanoparticles were either injected or ingested, the nanoparticles ended up in the animals' lungs and created an inflammatory response there.
p>In addition to lung inflammation, NAHA was found to create free radical damage in the liver.
[t]he liver tissues from the rats exposed to nanohydroxyapatite showed inflammatory cell infiltration at the portal areas of the liver. Haematological analysis demonstrated increased white blood cells, elevated levels of the inflammatory cytokine TNF-α, and increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total bile acid (TBA), cholesterol, uric acid, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and low density lipoprotein (LDL) compared to controls. In the livers, increased levels of H2O2 and MDA (malondialdehyde) and decreased levels of glutathione (p<0.05) were observed.
Other markers of inflammation were found:
[T]here was a statistically significant increase in red blood cells, haemoglobin and haematocrit and a statistically significant decrease in platelet counts in treated animals. With respect to biochemical parameters, there were slight decreases in serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase, glucose and urea and statistically significant increases in serum glutamic pyruvate transaminase and alkaline phosphatase in treated animals compared to controls,
And that hydroxyapatite killed liver and kidney cells:
Histopathology revealed apoptotic cells in the kidneys and livers of animals treated with nano-hydroxyapatite.
Another study found free radical damage in the liver when exposed to NAHA:
Investigation of liver homogenates revealed changes in lipid peroxidation and reduced glutathione when compared to controls; however, there was no dose-dependency. All antioxidant enzymes investigated were lower compared to control with a dose-dependency for glutathione reductase. Further, superoxide dismutase was decreased in homogenates from treated animals.
Effects on Kidneys
Hydroxyapatite was also found to damage kidney tissue in animal studies:
1# nanomaterials (i.e. the smaller ones) resulted in a “vacuolar degeneration of nephric tubule epithelium in the kidney."
it can be deduced that systemically available nano-hydroxyapatite particles might be distributed into lungs and kidneys as histopathological changes were observed in these two organs.
Compared to untreated controls, dose-dependent increase of products of lipid peroxidation in liver, kidney and lung; significantly increased nitrate and nitrite levels in kidneys, livers and lungs; significantly reduced membrane fluidity in liver, kidney and lung; increase in ATPase activity in liver, kidney and lung (statistically significant after 20 mg in liver and after 10 and 20 mg in kidneys); statistically significantly increased glutathione peroxidase activity in erythrocytes from rats treated with 20 mg nano-HYAP.
Effects on Blood and Platelets
One study found N-HAP was able to negatively affect red blood cells and platelets because the nanoparticles stick to the cell membranes:
"Studies further demonstrate the induction of oxidative stress and inflammatory changes in cells after treatment with nano-hydroxyapatite. Thus, if systemically available, nano-hydroxyapatite might affect cells when it adheres to the plasma membrane from outside (e.g. of blood cells) or when it reaches the intracellular compartment"
"Studies using red blood cells have demonstrated that external adherence of nanohydroxyapatite to erythrocytes (which might be of relevance to the nano-hydroxyapatite material available in blood) might also have an impact on these cells (e.g. on sedimentation, aggregation)."
"there was a statistically significant increase in red blood cells, haemoglobin and haematocrit and a statistically significant decrease in platelet counts in treated animals."
Damage to DNA
One study found N-HAP damaged human DNA in vitro studies:
Turkez et al. (2014) investigated sister chromatid exchanges, micronucleus formation, chromosome aberration and 8-oxo-2-deoxyguanosine formation by needle-shaped nanohydroxyapatite with average particle diameters of 10 – 50 nm in cultured peripheral blood lymphocytes from 6 human donors. In comparison to untreated cultures, dose-dependent increases - in part of statistical significance - of sister chromatid exchanges, micronuclei, chromosome aberration rates and 8-oxo-2-deoxyguanosine levels were observed in treated cultures.
MUCH MORE AT THE LINK: https://bubbleandbee.com/blog/is-hydroxyapatite-safe-the-muddy-waters-of-nano-and-microparticles/
https://jnanobiotechnology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12951-019-0454-6
That’s exactly what I’ve been trying to tell everybody. But do they listen? No!
bttt
You can already get hydroxyapatite toothpaste. Most famous is Apagard from Japan. There is also Pearlie White from Singapore. Both are available on Amazon, and Pearlie White seems to me to be a better bargain, but I have no data to support that.
fluorite compounds such as sodium fluorite are absorbed only by the surface of the teeth, so it’s unnecessary and perhaps even foolish to consume such compounds for systemic distribution ... all that’s necessary too toughen tooth enamel is to use a mouthwash or toothpaste that contains sodium fluorite, and spit them out rather than swallow them after you’re done ...
Is this one group of industrial chemists communicating with other groups of industrial chemists? To whom are they directly speaking? Students, perhaps? This is either AI, or a portion of a seminar. Definitely not a dialog.
Interesting.
I make my own toothpaste, HA is an ingredient.
About 1/4 cup in the mix that gets used over 2 months or so.
I think I’m ok but will be aware of ingesting any.
Cool article, thanks for posting.
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Is Hydroxyapatite Safe? The Muddy Waters of Nano and Microparticles, lee martell wrote: Is this one group of industrial chemists communicating with other groups of industrial chemists? To whom are they directly speaking? Students, perhaps? This is either AI, or a portion of a seminar. Definitely not a dialog.
Sorry, Lee Martell. Looks like I excerpted the technical parts thinking we'd all prefer them when in fact, the article is written by a normal person, and what I posted after the word 'SNIP' was technical excerpts from her sources. Best to read the top of the article at the link. Again, sorry!
No problem at all. Sometimes, it’s on me, the reader, to rise to the standards of the article. Not all good to know information is going to be written in the style of an Opinion Article or Sound Bite.
Risewell says theirs is made in the USA, I use it
Note the study fed high amounts of it.
Brushing your teeth with it, which you dont then go and swallow it, is not being fed high amounts of it. Plus factor in we are 100-200 times the weight of rats.
Tnis stuff is in general, safe and great for tooth repair and reversing micro cracks in enamel, incorporating into the teeth and becoming teeth. It strengthens your teeth.
You dont eat it in large amounts.
Yup, exactly.
The EU has said nano-hydroxyapatite is safe if it is rod shaped, which is what many of these toothpastes use.
One I use is Davids Hydroxi Fluoride Free Nano Hydroxyapatite Toothpaste for Remineralizing Enamel.
The EU information approving this is here:
https://health.ec.europa.eu/publications/hydroxyapatite-nano-0_en
The very common rod shaped form is safe.
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Is Hydroxyapatite Safe? The Muddy Waters of Nano and Microparticles, Secret Agent Man wrote: Note the study fed high amounts of it.
Brushing your teeth with it, which you dont then go and swallow it, is not being fed high amounts of it. Plus factor in we are 100-200 times the weight of rats.
Tnis stuff is in general, safe and great for tooth repair and reversing micro cracks in enamel, incorporating into the teeth and becoming teeth. It strengthens your teeth.
You dont eat it in large amounts.
The lifestyle choice of using Hydroxyapatite means exposure 2 or 3 times per day indefinitely and overtime, the impact would be cumulative.
The hydoxyapatite ends up places unexpected - the rats were injected or fed the subtance but it was found in the lungs.
For humans brushing their teeth, causing micro abrasions in the gums, exposing mouth surfaces abraded by foods and gums by flossing, unintentionally swallowing portions of it would contribute to a cumulative 'dose'. Hydroxyapatite initially sticks in pores of the teeth upon brushing, but surely residue breaks free and is ingested - all these things contribute to cumulative ingestion. For this reason, toxic substances are not permitted in toothpaste - not that the public eats toothpaste, but it's not perfectly controllable.
The point of over-feeding rats is to exaggerate in a matter of days or months a 'worse case scenario' from which to estimate the impacts of smaller accumulation in humans which may occur over time, even years, when brushing teeth daily with this stuff.
Note the article says hydroxyapatite was found in significant amounts in baby formula *shudder*.
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Is Hydroxyapatite Safe? The Muddy Waters of Nano and Microparticles, ConservativeMind wrote: The EU has said nano-hydroxyapatite is safe if it is rod shaped, which is what many of these toothpastes use.
One I use is Davids Hydroxi Fluoride Free Nano Hydroxyapatite Toothpaste for Remineralizing Enamel.
The EU information approving this is here:
https://health.ec.europa.eu/publications/hydroxyapatite-nano-0_en
Yes, but I'm pretty sure the EU says Covid 19 'vaccines' are safe. I personally am going to wait until they examine the impacts of hydroxyapatite nano particles on the blood brain barrier. I no longer have much trust in 'new' products inadequately tested.
Manufacturers are not precise about the percentages of different shapes, and sizes. The article notes that larger sizes wouldn't be effective on tooth enamel, and yet the article below says smaller rod shapes contribute to inflammatory response during testing.
Effects of four types of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles with different nanocrystal morphologies and sizes on apoptosis in rat osteoblasts
Affiliations
- PMID: 22162110
- DOI: 10.1002/jat.1745
"Here, we aimed to compare the effects of four types of nano-HAP with different nanocrystal morphologies (short rod-like, long rod-like, spherical or needle-shaped crystals) and sizes (10-20, 10-30 or 20-40 nm) on growth inhibition and apoptosis in primary cultured rat osteoblasts. The osteoblasts was treated with the four types of nano-HAP at various concentrations (20, 40, 60, 80 or 100 mg l⁻¹). The nano-HAP specific surface area was detected using the Brunauer, Emmet and Teller method. The cell growth rate was detected using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay; apoptotic alterations and the level of reactive oxygen species in osteoblasts were measured using flow cytometry; and the amounts of apoptotic p53 and cytochrome c proteins were measured using western blotting. We observed that all four types of nano-HAP inhibited the growth of osteoblasts in a dose-dependent manner. These nano-HAP significantly induced apoptosis in osteoblasts. Nano-HAP with smaller specific surface areas induced lower apoptosis rates. The needle-shaped and the short rod-like particles induced greater cellular injury than the spherical and long rod-like particles, respectively"
Bkmk
And are we trying to force Europe to import it from us?
Just took a quick cruise through some recent papers.
Looks like genotoxicity and cytotoxicity are still issues.
And the one paper that asserted that it wasn’t used the words “most of the studies”.
Okaaaay...
We don’t whine about flouride any more.
We’ve got the jab to whine about....... much better
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.