NZ - Anti-fluoride claims criticised
Anti-fluoride claims criticised
Home » News » Dunedin
By Chris Morris on Fri, 7 Nov 2008
News: Dunedin | Local government
An anti-fluoride lobby group has been criticised for "misleading" claims linking bone cancer and fluoridated drinking water made in a pamphlet distributed in Dunedin.
The Advertising Standards Authority, in a decision released yesterday, ruled the Fluoride Action Network NZ (FANNZ) pamphlet made "unsubstantiated health claims" and used research results "in a manner which was misleading".
The group's pamphlet contained the heading: "Would you sacrifice your son's life to cancer because some people won't brush their teeth?"Claims contained in the pamphlet included one stating there was "an 85% chance" the death of a 17-year-old from bone cancer was caused by water fluoridation, and concluded: "Fluoridation - it's not worth the risk."
The pamphlet was distributed in Waitati, Warrington and Seacliff ahead of two public meetings in February, prompting a complaint to the ASA by the New Zealand Dental Association.
Yesterday's decision found the pamphlet had breached rules governing the distinction between fact and opinion, misleading claims, research and social responsibility.
It had also breached the ASA's code of ethics as it "played on fear".
NZDA executive director Dr David Crum said in a statement claims relating to the young boy's death "upset me the most".
Reviews of scientific evidence had consistently failed to find a connection between cancer and fluoridation, he said.
"This sort of misleading and false claim by anti-fluoridation-ists played on fear in a way that was appalling."
FANNZ national co-ordinator Mark Atkin, of Wellington, refused to respond to the complaint after questioning the ASA's jurisdiction.
Home » News » Dunedin
By Chris Morris on Fri, 7 Nov 2008
News: Dunedin | Local government
An anti-fluoride lobby group has been criticised for "misleading" claims linking bone cancer and fluoridated drinking water made in a pamphlet distributed in Dunedin.
The Advertising Standards Authority, in a decision released yesterday, ruled the Fluoride Action Network NZ (FANNZ) pamphlet made "unsubstantiated health claims" and used research results "in a manner which was misleading".
The group's pamphlet contained the heading: "Would you sacrifice your son's life to cancer because some people won't brush their teeth?"Claims contained in the pamphlet included one stating there was "an 85% chance" the death of a 17-year-old from bone cancer was caused by water fluoridation, and concluded: "Fluoridation - it's not worth the risk."
The pamphlet was distributed in Waitati, Warrington and Seacliff ahead of two public meetings in February, prompting a complaint to the ASA by the New Zealand Dental Association.
Yesterday's decision found the pamphlet had breached rules governing the distinction between fact and opinion, misleading claims, research and social responsibility.
It had also breached the ASA's code of ethics as it "played on fear".
NZDA executive director Dr David Crum said in a statement claims relating to the young boy's death "upset me the most".
Reviews of scientific evidence had consistently failed to find a connection between cancer and fluoridation, he said.
"This sort of misleading and false claim by anti-fluoridation-ists played on fear in a way that was appalling."
FANNZ national co-ordinator Mark Atkin, of Wellington, refused to respond to the complaint after questioning the ASA's jurisdiction.
posted by Bill at
9:32 AM
1 Comments:
There's SO much dis and mis-information on the pro-fluoride side, in an attampt to follow Ministy of Health policy here in NZ, that the media just swallow it (pun intended) whole, without doing ANY investigative journalism. And PLEASE, quote NOTHING from the ODT. They have snuffed out public deliberation following a crooked council meeting that I personally attended, where I witnessed a hijacking of the democratic process, after a previous meeting had voted FOR public consultation. The mayor, and his deputy in this small town, brought an amended proposal to the table, gave the councillors a few minutes to deliberate and decide, when the previous decision was swept aside. Now, the ODT have ended correspondence on the matter, and the anti-fluoride people who are numerous here, have NO VOICE.
Mr Bruce Spittle, and I'm sure he won't mind me quoting him here, in reply to the article above, wrote (but this wasn't able to be published due to this cessation of correspondence):
"I am not a member of FANNZ and was not involved with the preparation of the pamphlet stating that there was "an 85% chance" that the death of a 17-year-old from bone cancer was caused by water fluoridation" and concluding that fluoridation was "not worth the risk" (ODT, 7.11.08). However, the claim by the New Zealand Dental Association executive director, Dr David Crum, that the claim was misleading and false can be challenged. Dr Elsie Bassin et al. found that the odds ratio for developing osteosarcoma for males exposed to water fluoridated at a level of 0.7 ppm or more at age 7 years was 5.46 (Cancer Causes Control 2006; 17:421-28). This corresponds to an 85% increase in risk.
Bruce Spittle"
I am NOT Bruce Spittle.
By
Anonymous, at 15 November, 2008
Post a Comment
<< Home