.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

UK Against Fluoridation

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

First Page

Second Page

Third page

End summary of the posted 3 pages from Doug Cross


Clearly, there is a serious incompatibility between UK and EC legislative frameworks here. Authorization of medication with unlicensed fluoridated water by national Governments is incompatible with the European Directives. It is also a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The situation is identical in both the UK and Ireland. The decisions of the IMB'and MHRA may be subject to challenge through the Courts as an issue of public interest. In the event that the Courts find that fluoridated water is a medicinal product according to the definitions of the EC Directive and the judgements of the ECJ, then potential further actions may be eligible under criminal law, and private actions for damages under the civil codes.

Doug Cross, Forensic Ecologist, November 2005.

Dentist shortfall

Dentist shortfall fears over 'awful' contracts
DOZENS of dentists could quit the NHS when new government rules come into force in the spring, it is feared.
Senior figures in the profession are warning that new dentist contracts to be brought in by the government in April look 'awful'. And local health chiefs – who have to try to make the Department of Health plan work – fear dentists may just choose to walk away from the NHS rather than sign up.
An exodus of dentists would be disastrous for our communities, which are already suffering a shortage of NHS practices.But Phil Gowers, chairman of the Local Dental Committee, said: 'It's awful. If you are more efficient you don't get any more, and what happens when you reach your quota? Do you stop treating people?'
Portsmouth Primary Care Trust chief executive Sheila Clark added: 'The terms and conditions are set nationally so there is only so much we can do – I share the concerns.'
30 January 2006
« Previous PageNext »

Monday, January 30, 2006

It's coming - Hampshire first.

Chiefs press on with water flouride plans
Health chiefs are pushing ahead with plans to put fluoride in the water despite warnings it could pose a danger to the public.
Portsmouth's NHS bosses will debate the issue in March and then plan to ask Hampshire Strategic Health Authority (SHA) to carry out a formal consultation.
This will ask whether people want fluoride to be put into the drinking water supply in a bid to boost oral health.
Anti-fluoride campaigners have also been invited to the board meeting of Portsmouth Primary Care Trust (PCT), which is open to the public, to make their case.
Opponents of the move insist fluoride is not safe and that people should not be forced to receive treatment.
However, public health chiefs believe it is a tried
and tested way to cut tooth decay.
Research in 1995 found that by using six 'dosing points', fluoride could be added to the water going into all homes in Portsmouth, southeast Hampshire and Chichester – only a couple of small areas around the Meon Valley would miss out.
Any public consultation would be county-wide.
Paul Edmondson-Jones, public health director for Portsmouth, said putting fluoride in the water was 'the thing to do' and because Portsmouth and Southampton had the worst oral health locally they had a duty to consider the move.
He said: 'I believe that fluoride in the doses we are talking about is perfectly safe.'
The Portsmouth PCT meeting will be at St James's Hospital, Milton on March 29 at 6.30pm.
28 January 2006

Sunday, January 29, 2006

Fluoridation and ID chips?

I see David Ike has a picture of Andy Burnham and write up on the Home Office Minister, responsible for the introduction of fluoridation into the Water Bill and now is in charge of introducing ID chips. David accuses him of telling porkies and says this is essential to get on in Bliar's government. Don't we know it.

Saturday, January 28, 2006

Opposite findings from previous post!

EarlyChildCaries.pdf (application/pdf Object)

"children with dental caries were more likely to have received a topical fluoride treatment than those without
caries. Pediatric Dentistry 25(6):565–571"

PDF file - search for 565 to find commment

Better than fluoridation - you have a choice.

Fluoride varnish helps prevent tooth decay
Jan 28, 2006, 12:52, Reviewed by: Dr. Priya Saxena
"Fluoride varnish is relatively inexpensive, easy to brush onto a child's teeth, and can be part of a positive first dental visit to help prevent tooth decay,"
By University of California - San Francisco, Fluoride varnish, a dental preventive treatment, reduces the incidence of early childhood tooth decay in combination with dental health counseling for parents, according to a study by investigators at the UCSF School of Dentistry.

Friday, January 27, 2006

UK Portsmouth plans to fluoridate - from Ann

Yesterday afternoon I received a ‘phone call from Nick Brooks health reporter of The News. He attended yesterday’s public meeting of the Portsmouth PCT and it seems they plan to hold a debate on fluoridation on 29 March. He plans (more exciting stories permitting!) to get an article into the paper today and said he would be asking for readers’ comments.You may not know that both the Portsmouth and East Hampshire & Fareham PCTs have agreed that we may have a slot to put our case at their March meetings. The press will be at both meetings and the general public may also attend. Portsmouth City say on their website that:

Questions are invited from the public and must be submitted in writing (or e-mail) 5 days before to : Maria Smith, Personal Assistant to CEO, Chair & PEC, Portsmouth City Primary Care Trust, Trust Central Office, St James’ Hospital, Locksway Road, Portsmouth, PO4 BLD, e-mail address: maria.smith@ports.nhs.uk.
The details are as follows:
· East Hampshire and Fareham & Gosport, 22.3.06 at 9.00 am in the Ferneham Hall, Fareham
· Portsmouth, 29.3.06 at 6.30 pm in the Entertainments Hall, St James’ Hospital, Locksway Road, Portsmouth
You may be also interested to know that Portsmouth Water have confirmed the costs of installing fluoridation plants are likely to be in the range of £500,000 and £1m per plant to say nothing of the running costs. Can or should they afford this expense?
Any support you are able to give us at either writing to the press or attending the meeting armed with questions would be much appreciated.

USA - They can choose

Battlefield to put fluoridation question to area residents
Ryan Slight
Battlefield-area residents soon will have a chance to decide whether they want fluoride returned to the public water.
The Greene County Public Water Supply District 1 will include a question on the Feb. 20 bill where customers can check whether they want fluoride in the water, a district employee said. The informal votes will be tallied, and results will be announced at a later date. The district board decided to stop fluoridating the water in October after two of three fluoride pumps broke. Board chairman Chuck McDaniel has said board members were not just concerned with the estimated $2,000 annual cost to fluoridate the water, but questioned the government’s role in putting the chemical in the water.Several dental professionals advocated putting fluoride in the water at a December board meeting, calling the chemical a safe, effective way to prevent tooth decay.


Thursday, January 26, 2006

Letter to Andover Advertiser from Dr Fox

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Good Video

Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - FreeMarketNews.com

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:43:18 -0500

Comments: I was very disturbed by the recent article link you carried about fluoride. Perhaps you haven't heard that 11 EPA unions, representing about 7000 scientist and workers have called for an end to fluoridation because it has been linked to cancer, among other things.

A picture is worth a thousand words, so here is a link to a four minute video about the truth of fluoridation that has been covered up for decades. Perhaps you could offer this link to your subscribers: http://www.octive9.com/Fluoride.wmv/

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Australia: Letter Against Fluoride

Back to basics only way to go
IT is of great concern to me that it is being mentioned that fluoride is to be added to several towns water supplies. Several years ago I worked as a nurse in an endoscopy clinic in Melbourne. One day I questioned a well-renowned gastroenterologist who I was regularly working with as to why there seemed to be so much inflammatory bowel disease. He said to me that through his experience there had been more evidence of inflammatory bowel disorders since the advent of toothpaste.
Fluoride is well known to be a cumulative chemical within the body if ingested.
Since being informed of this vital information my family has used natural toothpaste with no sugar, no fluoride or sodium lauryl sulphate, which is a toxic foaming agent. Natural toothpaste can be purchased at your local health food shop or on the internet. The water and government authorities need to give the community the choice as to whether it wishes to use fluoride or not. So why add it to the water when we can get a dose from toothpaste if we wish? Poor dental health will continue if we do not get down to the basics and have dental hygiene taught in our community and schools. The Government needs to urgently provide better dental health services that are accessible to all. Fluoride in water is not the answer to our dental health problems in Victoria. Dental hygiene and education is.
division 2 nurse, Benalla.

Sunday, January 22, 2006

Dangerous spillages keep happening

Steps taken to improve spill response
Saturday, January 21, 2006
Of The Patriot-News
The president of Pennsylvania American Water Co. has apologized to customers for the fluoride spill that left thousands of West Shore residents without water in December. "Please accept our deepest apologies for any inconvenience this caused," Daniel W. Warnock said in a letter mailed this week to the company's customers.
Water was contaminated Dec. 10 when 600 to 700 gallons of hydrofluorosilicic acid used in the fluoridation process spilled at the company's Yellow Breeches Water Treatment Plant in Fairview Twp. The water company issued a do-not-consume advisory for 34,000 home and business customers in 14 municipalities in Cumberland and northern York counties. The advisory was lifted the following day.
Municipal officials and residents complained that they didn't receive proper notification of the spill or the restrictions on water usage. Warnock said the spill was caused by operator error and that policies and procedures that would have prevented it weren't followed.
The company is implementing additional training for employees, including simulated emergency exercises, and has installed a spill detection alarm at the treatment plant, he said. Pennsylvania American also is evaluating its communication practices with the aim of improving the speed with which the company notifies customers of problems, Warnock said. "We are partnering with county emergency preparedness agencies to identify tools to better communicate with customers," he said. One system under consideration is a reverse 911 system, which would call customers with a recorded message about problems with water service. The company is building a state-of-the-art water treatment plant that will replace the Yellow Breeches treatment plant, Warnock said.
JERRY L. GLEASON: 975-9782 or jgleason@patriot-news.com

Saturday, January 21, 2006

Ireland: Dr Connett lashes Dept

by Gary Finnegan
A leading US scientist has written to the Chairman of the Oireachtas Committee on Health expressing his frustration at what he sees as a failure to take action on water fluoridation.Dr Paul Connett previously travelled to Ireland on two occasions to testify against the practice and appeared before the Oireachtas Committee in 2004. Since then, he claims, nothing has been done, and he feels he has been abused by those charged with assessing the merits of water fluoridation in Ireland.
In a letter to Deputy John Moloney, Chairman of the Oireachtas Committee on Health, Dr Paul Connett, Professor of Chemistry, St Lawrence University, Canton, New York, writes: “I have been both used and abused by the bureaucrats and dental policy advisors who spearhead the practice of mandatory water fluoridation in your country.”
He says he was first contacted by the Department of Health “out of the blue” over five years ago and asked if he would fly to Ireland to give evidence to the Fluoridation Forum. The Department paid Dr Connett’s expenses.
He said he drew the ire of lobby groups opposed to fluoridation who claimed that the Forum included a majority of pro-fluoride experts.
Dr Connett gave evidence in October, 2000, urging them to consider his document entitled 50 Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation. He said the panel and the then Health Minister Micheál Martin assured him that Ireland had an open mind on the issue.
According to Dr Connett, the Forum promised to respond to his document but ultimately stated that it did not have time to do so.
In May, 2004, the Green Party paid for Dr Connett to return to Ireland to appear before the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Health. In his letter, he says he was initially encouraged by his appearance as he felt the Committee was sympathetic to his case. “If there was anyone on the panel in favour of fluoridation they certainly didn’t make their presence known. I received no hostile questions. Far from it, at least two committee members present made it clear that they were strongly opposed to fluoridation,” he writes. Dr Connett told the Committee in May, 2004, he would be happy to return to debate the issue in public, if this was required.
He now says that no reply was received to his 50 Reasons thesis until an anonymous posting on the Department of Health website last year. The unsigned document did not take Dr Connett’s specific arguments to task – leading him to claim that the Department was deliberately attempting to cloud the issue.
“I am most disappointed that they didn’t have the courtesy to send their response to me in person, although I could understand the intense embarrassment that such a long-delayed and pathetic response must have caused them,” he states in his letter to Mr Moloney. Dr Connett accused the Irish Government of failing to conduct any original research on the impact of fluoridation and of relying on secondary analysis from other countries where a similar policy is in place. “It is amazing that they cannot keep track of the primary literature themselves,” he says.

Finally, Dr Connett says that if Ireland believes it has satisfactorily addressed the issues he raised, “I will wash my hands of the matter as far as your country is concerned.”

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Three good letters (USA)

Care for poor
It is unfortunate Star readers were given only the dentists' side of the fluoridation story when Tucson is the site of the most detailed fluoride/tooth decay studies ever done in the United States.
Professors Tim Jones and Cornelius Steelink did the most meticulous analysis of 50 years of decay data collected by Tucson dentists.
Jones' students have collected scientific data on everything in the trash from households in Tucson over the last 25 years.
The only significant difference in tooth decay was that Hispanic children suffered more tooth decay, not less. They found, as others have, that poor children have more tooth decay than rich children.
Does Tucson have sugar-rich soft drinks available in schools? The soft drinks we've tested have substantial amounts of fluoride in them, yet sugary drinks cause more tooth decay.
Instead of instituting a failed fluoridation program, Tucson should use that money to provide better access to dental care for those who cannot afford it. Children are already overexposed to fluoride. They don't need more.
David Kennedy, D.D.S.
Past president, International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, Tucson
Fluoride toxic
The government of India has constructed defluoridation plants because of toxic effects. A New Delhi study showed that a high fluoride level was associated with birth defects, stillbirths and early infant mortality. It also showed fluoride disrupts bone formation and hardening. A U.S. study showed twice as many hip fractures in a Utah city that used fluoridation compared with one that did not.
Does fluoridated water prevent tooth decay? It may decrease the decay of baby teeth in young children. It seems, however, to increase the decay rate of permanent teeth. A study of 29,000 elementary-school children in Tucson showed more decay with increased fluoride.
Most European countries do not use fluoridation. About half of them tried it and stopped when they saw no benefit. Tucson should review all the evidence on efficacy and toxicity before adding fluoride to our water.
Jane M. Orient, M.D.
Physician, Tucson
Curb sweets
The article conveniently ignores the facts to promulgate another questionable medical practice.
According to the data presented in the article, there is no statistical difference in Pima County's incidence rate of tooth decay when compared with the rest of Arizona where fluoride has been added to the water.
Maybe a better idea would be for parents to take charge of their children's health by restricting the use of "acidic, sugary soft drinks" that were referred to in the article.
Larry K. Roberts

Wednesday, January 18, 2006

Pros and Cons according to the Mirror

WE need water to survive, but which is better - tap or bottled? Sally Janes looks at the pros and cons.
By Sally Janes
AT this time of year, most of us are looking for a good detox to give our bodies a break after the festive season.Drinking lots of water, say the experts, is the best way to do this. But what's best for us - tap water or bottled? Here, we weigh up the health concerns and benefits...
Tap water worries

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Dallas, Texas is fluoridated

•A toddler with a mouthful of cavities went untreated because a community clinic was not equipped to sedate her and her mother couldn't afford to take her elsewhere.

•A 9-year-old with nine cavities planned nine visits to a low-cost clinic, because even there her parents could afford to treat only one tooth at a time.

•An 8-year-old, who lost Medicaid coverage when his mother began work, returned to the dentist when he complained of pain and needed five fillings and three teeth removed.

Children with untreated cavities and dental infections experience chronic low-grade pain, occasionally replaced by high-grade pain. Children with chronic pain are inattentive, less likely to sleep soundly or eat fully and unable to learn well. Clinic directors and children's dental health advocates say dental problems are the leading cause of school absenteeism among low-income children.

Last year was a very successful year for the Fluoride Action Network

(I-Newswire) - Fluoride, added to water supplies, is touted as a tooth decay preventive. Science increasingly shows fluoridation is ineffective, harmful and a waste of money. But the politics of organized dentistry keeps fluoridated water flowing.Last year, 2005, was a very successful year for the Fluoride Action Network ( FAN ) and their affiliated groups for getting the truth out and bringing negative fluoride science to the media’s attention. Voters rejected fluoridation in at least nine referenda including Bellingham, Washington, where fluoridationists spent $260,000 to lose against a small group of volunteers armed with the truth and very little cash. Eight legislative bodies rebuffed fluoridation. Five state mandates were deflected. Another study linked fluoridation to bone cancer. Several others point to fluoride's harm. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) professionals ask for a fluoridation moratorium. FAN together with the Environmental Working Group ( EWG ) and Beyond Pesticides ask the EPA to revoke their approval of fumigant sulfuryl fluoride because it adds harmful levels of fluoride residues to foods - at levels even your dentist wouldn't recommend.We captured the media’s attention. FAN members appeared on TV, radio and in print. And there were many other highlights. Detailed information can be found here:


Sunday, January 15, 2006

Tucson dentists: Fluoridate water now

"In communities that have (fluoride), the decay rate is so much lower — that's been documented throughout the scientific literature over and over," said Dr. Robert Howard, a longtime Tucson dentist and a veteran of the fluoride wars in the '90s.

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Health chief wants it in water; others cite risks

Fluoride use disputed
By Dan Shapley
Poughkeepsie Journal
In Dutchess County, Poughkeepsie is the only one of 725 public water systems that adds fluoride to drinking water.That could change, though. Commissioner of Health Dr. Michael Caldwell has made it a priority this year to inform public water providers about the benefits of fluoride in cavity prevention, in hopes that more choose to do so.
"To me, it's equivalent to the success of immunizations," Caldwell said. "There's nothing else we've been able to do on a community-wide level to improve dental health as fluoride has done."
In advocating for increased fluoridation, Caldwell is advancing an initiative the Centers for Disease Control calls one of the nation's top 10 public health achievements of the last century.He's also wading into a controversy. A network of opposition groups argues that increased access to other forms of fluoride, as well as a suspected link to bone cancer, should make fluoridated drinking water a thing of the past.Fluoridation has been controversial from the start.

Long article extract.

Friday, January 13, 2006

Mormons don't want it

Water co. won't add fluoride, faces charges
SALT LAKE CITY — A Salt Lake County water company could face a lawsuit for not adding fluoride to public drinking water, according to a report from channel KSL-TV.
Five years ago county voters approved the addition of fluoride to the drinking water provided by Holladay Water Co., but the company has refused to go along with the mandate, saying 72 percent of the customers it serves do not want fluoride, the article said. According to the article, the Salt Lake Valley Health Department has asked the district attorney to take action against Holladay for breaking a binding law.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

USA - Common Sense

Fluoride in the water means pollutants within the body


Of late, we've once again learned that health officials sometimes change their minds about what is considered healthy and safe. The recent warnings from the Food and Drug Administration about previously approved pain medications and over-the-counter diet aids and cough suppressants demonstrate this.
Have you ever wondered what medications and health practices that we accept today will later be known to have harmed us rather than helped us? Here is one: fluoridating our drinking water to prevent cavities.
We've said for 50-plus years that fluoride is safe, effective and necessary. But now information is pouring in from around the world and the U.S. that shows that fluoridated drinking water may actually be causing many of the "diseases of aging" — hip fractures, thyroid disease and joint pain — and disorders that affect persons of all ages.
Most of the fluoride we've been injecting into our drinking water is silicofluoride, a substance that has never been tested or approved by any federal agency. It is a fluoride-containing air pollutant emission captured by smokestack "scrubber" equipment at phosphate fertilizer factories.
If it is emitted into the air, it is a pollutant; if it is discharged into a lake or river, it is a pollutant and it is regulated by EPA as a water "contaminant." But if it is in our drinking water and we ingest it into our bodies, it is somehow called a "nutrient." Because of the industrial processes and raw material used as its source, the fluoride also comes contaminated with radioactive uranium decay compounds, arsenic, lead and mercury.
"Why weren't we told this?" people ask. Well, we were … but not really. Buried in many water agencies' quality reports amongst a dizzying list of chemical names is a little-observed statement that the source of the "contaminant" fluoride is "discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories."
The pro-fluoride people tell us the toxic fluoride, arsenic and radioactive compounds are diluted in the water, therefore they pose no harm. But what we haven't been told is that these compounds are cumulative poisons. The small amounts we ingest accumulate in our bodies and can cause bone cancer, thyroid disease, kidney damage and joint pain. If your kidneys work well, approximately half of the fluoride you ingest goes out in your urine, but the remaining half is stored — cumulatively and potentially harmfully — in your body.
How do you feel that your body and the bodies of your loved ones are being used as the final resting place of the toxic discharges of industry? As a public health professional with a background in hazardous materials management and assessment, I can tell you that I am now firmly against fluoridation. And a growing number of other medical, dental and public health professionals are also calling for a halt to fluoridation, including 11 EPA employee unions representing 7,000 EPA scientists, lab workers and other employees across the U.S.
In 2000, dentists conceded that fluoride helps prevent cavities primarily topically, while in the mouth — not by your body's systemic absorption of the chemical. So, why continue drinking a toxic chemical throughout your whole body if its main action against cavities occurs when it touches your teeth in the mouth? To continue supporting the drinking of primarily-topically-acting fluoride would be like your doctor handing you a bottle of liquid sunscreen and telling you, "Drink this to prevent sunburn."
You and your family also receive fluoride in foods — in your cereal, bread, baby food, canned foods, tea, sodas, pasta and frozen foods (because they're made with fluoridated water), as well as from toothpaste and antibiotics. A number of government agencies are reconsidering the safety of fluoridation, and the fact that we absorb it cumulatively from so many unmonitored sources is one of the reasons for their doing so.
Large numbers of countries around the world reject water fluoridation (such as Japan, Germany, and Belgium). World Health Organization statistics show that countries with no form of fluoridation have similar drops in overall cavity rates as the United States.
The dental industry and public health agencies are fearful and defensive, and one can understand why. It is projected that the health effects and lawsuit costs from fluoridation will dwarf those of tobacco.
An increasing number of Americans believe an individual does not need to be a scientist or doctor to understand the dangers of fluoridation. It flies in the face of common sense, they say. They do what many Tennesseans who read this article may want to do: Contact their water district and governing officials and tell them, "Stop the fluoride!" •

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Press Release by: Fluoride Action Network

(openPR) - Fluoride Action Network (FAN) urges the NYS Bureau of Pesticides to rescind their recent approval of a new food fumigant pesticide, sulfuryl fluoride, because serious health risks, raised by environmental groups, remain unanswered by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
In a November 28, 2005 letter to Dow AgroSciences, Maureen Serafini, Director, NYS Bureau of Pesticides, approved sulfuryl fluoride (ProFume®) fumigant on all processed foods and a large number of raw food commodities in New York. These are the foods most Americans eat.
In response, FAN’s Pesticide Project Director, Ellen Connett, requested Director Serafini to revoke this approval.
On January 4, 2006, Connett sent a letter to Director Serafini to inform her that three advocacy groups have raised serious concerns about the inherent dangers of sulfuryl fluoride’s use as a food fumigant. These issues have been presented to the EPA on three separate occasions, beginning in 2002, and remain unresolved.

Saturday, January 07, 2006

Australia: Basic rights being violated

I GREW up on farms no fluoride or any other chemicals in my water, or that of my brothers. Pure rainwater for us, thank you. Im fine, they are fine, our teeth are fine. Then I moved to town Albury to be exact. A constant chemical flavour to the water I drank and unexplainable aches and pains that were never there before.
Then after doing a bit of research on the internet we had a miracle. We started boiling and filtering our water or buying it from the supermarket. No more awful taste and a major reduction of aches and pains. While I cannot claim that fluoride caused these problems, I can say that any chemical obviously has an effect.
Bernie Bell from The Border Mail, Saturday, January 2 makes a very valid point. If people want fluoride or any other extra chemical running around their system, then take a pill. Im not responsible for you or your childrens health. The best thing you can do is teach your children to clean their teeth thoroughly. And if you want them to take fluoride and its not subsidised by state or federal government, lobby them, the government, to do so. Dont foist your needs on the rest of us.
Why should my basic right of fresh clean drinking water be undermined by a few members of the population?
A significant number of our population is overweight. Are they going to add diet pills to our water now?

Call for fluoridation next?

Eleanor Harvey, head of communications for Eastern Wakefield PCT, said: “The main factors that determine the incidence of dental decay in very young children are not visits to the dentist but diet, oral health education and the use of fluoride toothpaste or fluoridated water. Nine of the 13 wards covered by Eastern Wakefield Primary Care Trust (PCT) are among the 20 per cent most deprived in the country.”

Friday, January 06, 2006

Sugar shock - hidden in seemingly innocuous foods is your pearly whites' worst enemy

When he started out, Frachella thought that fluoride would be a miracle drug for dentistry: "I thought if we optimized topical and systemic fluoride, that we would eliminate tooth decay in 30 years. I was naive, and didn't foresee that we would be drinking battery acid by the tens of thousands of liters, thanks to the sugar lobby in the United States. And the American Medical Association and the American Dental Association have caved to them, taking grant money from the sugar industry."

Even those profitable soda and snack vending machines at schools are part of the problem: "In the long run, what are those costing the parents and the kids, in terms of not just tooth decay but diabetes and obesity," Lausier pondered

Thursday, January 05, 2006

Interesting letters attached to the article in newspaper.

Among the areas in Middle Tennessee that do not fluoridate water is the Pleasant View Utility District.
Its general manager, John Anthony, said the decision not to fluoridate the water was made because it was not required and it was expensive.
“You have to have a lot of apparatus to treat the fluoride in the proper dosages,” Anthony said. “When we looked into it, we determined that it didn’t improve the quality of the water and it was expensive and fluoridation is potentially dangerous if you had a malfunction in some of your equipment so we decided just not to do it.”

Opponents nationwide claim that water fluoridation can cause dangerous side effects such as bone fractures, arthritis, immune system problems and other health issues.

The National Research Council, a branch of the National Academy of Science, is currently reviewing all literature available on water fluoridation and its effects and is expected to release results in February 2006

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Australia fight continues.

Wed, Jan 04, 2006
No guarantee fluoride safe
I WRITE in response to the “Forum seeking fluoride backers” article (The Border Mail, December 14). This article indicated that any professional who supported the use of fluoride in our water supply was invited to participate in a debate.
While this offer still stands, it might be worthwhile noting that unless those who meet the challenge are geneticists, toxicologists, professors of chemistry or of a similar degree, they will not be able to stand by any promise they may make to the people in regard to the safety of fluoride in our drinking water.
It is also worth noting that two of the three organisations who were indicated in the fluoridation booklet as supporting the use of fluoride in our drinking water do not in fact conduct any scientific research into the effects of fluoride.
The Australian Dental Association and the Australian Medical Association base all of their decisions and policies on the safety and use of fluoride on research data of other organisations. So when it comes to the crunch, they will be able to say “well its not our fault, we were just quoting such and such”. The Australian Medical Association has stated that it neither supports nor contests the use of fluoride.

The third organisation which is quoted as being in support of fluoridation is the World Health Organisation. But the WHO book, Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans describes chemicals used in fluoridation in Australia as being “an insecticide fungicide, bactericide, a rodenticide (rat poison), to worm pigs and as an insecticide on lawns”. The WHO also warned in 1994 that “dental and public health authorities should be aware of the total fluoride exposure in the population before introducing any such additional fluoride program”.
No such study is to be done for North East Water as stated by the spokesperson for the Victorian Department of Human Services, Bram Alexander, in The Border Mail on December 7 last year. So much for the verbal promises that fluoride is safe for humans I can guarantee that not one person with any scientific standing who is directly responsible for fluoridation will give a written promise that fluoride in our drinking water is safe and therefore will not harm any human being.
spokesperson for the Fluoride Education Awareness Team,Wodonga.

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Previous Australian letter stated aluminium is not a risk to health - read about the toxic effects here.

Australia - Border Mail Letter.

Tue, Jan 03, 2006
Fluoride would fail drug tests
KIM Radnell claims that fluoridation is safe but gives no evidence at all (The Border Mail, December 15). Kim does not believe that people can be sensitive or allergic to the toxicity of fluoride. Kim should talk to local sufferers.
There are many in Melbourne who are medically proven as fluoride-sensitive and have to spend massive amounts of money on filtering out all the fluoride coming into their home. They are severely restricted from going to restaurants or friends homes.
Would Kim Radnell pay the expenses of fluoride-sensitive sufferers here if the mass fluoride program is introduced? Holland tried fluoridation in one section of Amsterdam from 1972 to 1976. A large medical team did double blind tests on people who were getting stomach pains, mouth ulcers, skin rashes, headaches, worsening of asthma and allergies and joint pains. The majority of cases were proven to be genuine fluoride toxic sensitivity symptoms. Fluoridation was ceased.
Australian health authorities, in their eagerness to promote fluoridation, have failed to study the people reporting illness. In 1991, the National Health and Medical Research Council called for these sufferers to be studied properly. It has not been done. In 60 years, the fluoride chemicals added to water in US and Australia has never been subjected to drug safety testing. They would fail miserably if they were made to go through the proper regulatory process.

Monday, January 02, 2006

Australian Fluoridation News

Excellent web page with news letters I'd never seen before.

Sunday, January 01, 2006

USA - Waiting for National Study before deciding

Local woman fights fluoridation

Recommendations on whether the drinking water in Hightstown and East Windsor should remain fluoridated will wait until a national study is released in February.
The Hightstown Board of Health decided earlier this month to postpone until March its recommendation to Borough Council, pending a major study by the National Academy of Sciences on the issue.