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

UK Against Fluoridation

Thursday, April 30, 2009

Australia - To fluoridate our water or not to... that is the question

To fluoridate our water or not to... that is the question
29/04/2009 10:26:00 AM
Bega Valley Shire Council will consult with the community on a proposal to fluoridate all of the shire’s drinking water.
In a report to last week’s council meeting, the group manager of infrastructure, waste and water, Doug Mein, said that over the past 12 months council had received a number of enquiries from community members, dental practitioners and NSW Health regarding the introduction of fluoridation to areas not already treated.

Drinking water in Bega, Kalaru and Tathra is fluoridated, a decision that goes back to the days before the Bega Municipal Council was amalgamated with Imlay and Mumbulla Shire Councils to form the Bega Valley Shire Council.

There would be no capital cost to council of fluoridation as a 100 per cent capital works subsidy is now provided by the NSW Government for the design and installation of fluoridation plants.

Operating costs are expected to be around $2 per head of population per year in a major rural centre.

“The cost benefit ratio is understood to be conservatively estimated at one dollar invested in water fluoridation delivers at least $13 saving in dental costs,” Mr Mein said.

Council had five staff trained in fluoride plant operation associated with the Bega-Tathra water supply system and others would need training should fluoridation be adopted for the remainder of the shire.

Mr Mein said drinking water fluoridation was an emotive subject in some communities because while the overwhelming bulk of the Australian population supported it, some sections of the community were opposed to drinking fluoridated water.

“In NSW, the evidence base for the safety, effectiveness and equity of fluoridation remains strong,” he said.

“This is revealed in, among other things, continuous population epidemiology tracking that shows no correlation between water fluoridation and any other disease.”

He recommended that council engage in community consultation before making any decision on the matter.

The final resolution would go the Director General of Health for final approval or rejection.

Councillors resolved that staff, in consultation with NSW Health, should design a community consultation program for council consideration, noting that financial contributions from NSW Health were expected and that the community consultation program would be undertaken prior to any decision to introduce fluoridation.

Another consultation like the Southampton one? 72% of 10,000 said no and 12 unelected quango members say yes. No contest, the 12 win the vote.

USA - Mobile dental service visits St. Charles schools

.......... Mobile dental service visits St. Charles schools
Jessica Bock
ST. CHARLES, Apr 29, 2009 (St. Louis Post-Dispatch - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) --
Reclining in the gray plastic dental chair temporarily set up in her school gym, 10-year-old Kyren Amo opened her mouth and spilled the beans to Dr. Hillard Ullman.
No, she hadn't brushed her teeth in a few days, Kyren said. You see, her hamsters have her toothbrush. The soft bristles are a good way to brush their coats, she told Ullman.
After X-rays, Kyren headed out with freshly cleaned teeth and a shiny new silver toothbrush -- not to be given away to any more hamsters, Ullman told her.
Kyren was one of 125 students at Monroe Elementary who recently signed up to have their teeth checked, cleaned and X-rayed at school this month by dentists, hygienists and technicians. Like other mobile dental services, Phoenix-based ReachOut Healthcare America provides dentists for students who might otherwise not get proper care for their teeth. Any student can participate, although typically the patients are uninsured or on Medicaid.
ReachOut has dentists in eight states, including school districts in St. Louis, Warren, Ste. Genevieve and Franklin counties. This is the first year the company has come to schools in St. Charles County.
Nicole Thomes, the nurse at Coverdell Elementary in St. Charles, arranged for ReachOut to go to St. Charles schools after seeing as many as seven students a week complaining of toothaches. Some had severe dental decay. And with more parents losing their jobs and insurance during these poor economic times, she said the need will probably increase. Dental care often gets put off during tough times.
"Some had teeth that were literally rotting and mushy," Thomes said. "I saw large cavities you could stick a cotton tip in." ..............

St. Charles, Missouri, is fluoridated:NYSCOF

EU scientific committee asked to review evidence on risks of adding fluoride to drinking water

EU scientific committee asked to review evidence on risks of adding fluoride to drinking water

The European Commission's Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) has been asked to critically review any new evidence concerning the hazards, health effects, human exposure and risk of adding fluoride to communal drinking water suppliers in order to protect against tooth decay. It will assess the most common fluoridation agents such as (hydro)fluorosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride.

USA - ADA.org: ADA News: Dental program serves Massachusetts seniors

ADA.org: ADA News: Dental program serves Massachusetts seniors
"In 2009, after holding 13 screening clinics that served 408 seniors, program statistics showed 19 percent of patients presented with acute discomfort, nearly 32 percent had untreated decay and nearly 47 percent had progressive periodontitis. More than half (55 percent) had no dentist of record and most—82.6 percent—had no dental insurance. Patients' average annual income was around $12,000 and a third of them had an income under the federal poverty level."

In fluoridated Norwood, Massachusetts:NYSCOF

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Another Study Links Fluoride to Bone Cancer

Another Study Links Fluoride to Bone Cancer
NEW YORK, April 29 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Blood fluoride levels were significantly higher in patients with osteosarcoma than in control groups, according to research published in Biological Trace Element Research (April 2009). Osteosarcoma, a rare bone cancer, occurs mostly in children and young adults.
Randhu and colleagues measured serum fluoride levels in three equal groups of age-matched and sex-matched patients. Group one had osteosarcoma, group two had non-osteosarcoma bone tumors, and group three had musculo-skeletal pain.(1)
"Mean serum fluoride concentration was found to be significantly higher in patients with osteosarcoma as compared to the other two groups," writes Randhu's team. "(T)his report proves a link between raised fluoride levels in serum and osteosarcoma," they write.
This reinforces a 2006 published Harvard study by Bassin showing a link between water fluoridation and osteosarcoma in young boys.(2)
A 1992 New Jersey Department of Health study shows osteosarcoma rates higher among young males in fluoridated vs. unfluoridated regions of New Jersey.(3)
More studies link fluoride to bone and other cancers but are downplayed or ignored by government officials.(4)(5)
Bone defects similar to bone cancer were detected in fluoridated Newburgh, NY children as early as 1955. Newburgh is home of the first human health fluoridation experiment begun in 1945.
According to Christopher Bryson in The Fluoride Deception, "A radiologist, Dr. John Caffey of Columbia University, called the defects 'striking' in their 'similarity' to bone cancer... and seen more than twice as frequently among boys in Newburgh as among boys in nonfluoridated Kingston [the control city]."(6)
In 2006, the prestigious National Research Council review of fluoride/fluoridation toxicology found a fluoride/bone cancer link plausible.
"If governments truly want to save money, stopping fluoridation is a no-brainer. It would save money, preserve health and teeth," says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation.
In 2005, 11 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) employee unions, representing over 7000 environmental and public health professionals called for a moratorium on fluoridation programs across the country and asked EPA management to recognize fluoride as posing a serious risk of causing cancer in people.(7)
In addition, over 2,430 professionals urge the U.S. Congress to stop fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted, citing scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks. See statement:
References: http://tinyurl.com/osteosarcom
Contact: Paul Beeber, JD 516-433-8882 nyscof@aol.com

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

Canada - Fluoride not for everyone

Fluoride not for everyone
Posted By
In a letter to the editor (Sun Times March 23), Dr. Totten defends fluoride, while anyone who dares to criticize fluoridation is deemed to be incompetent.
Studies in China, India and Brazil, where there are high concentrations of fluoride in the soil, show the people living there have a low IQ. In other words fluoride intake affects the brain.
More than five million Americans are living with Alzheimer's Disease and many in Canada as well. Karl Roehrborn in his letter of March 12 describes how rats fed on 1 ppm of sodium fluoride or aluminum fluoride have higher levels of aluminum in their brain as well as amyloid deposits which are associated with Alzheimer's.
Those with Alzheimer's and their family and friends would not find Dr. Totten's remarks funny. They are looking for any means to avoid or lessen the symptoms of this devastating illness. Any study should be taken seriously as our health is important and should not be taken lightly. As with any food, treatment, or drug, one size does not fit all. One man's meat is another man's poison. From 1% to 4% of the population may have a sensitivity to fluoride.
In a city of 22,000 up to 880 people could be affected and many may not know that it is fluoride that is causing their problems.
For sensitive people to avoid drinking, cooking and bathing with fluoridated water must be extremely difficult and expensive. They may have to move out of the city, and those living outside of Owen Sound are fortunate that they are not forced to use fluoridated water.
Fluoridated toothpaste and other products containing this chemical are available to those who want it. Let the rest of us make our own choice.
In 1997, we may have been ignorant, but with all the news about the danger of chemicals, access to the Internet, and more concern for our well being, many of us are challenging old ideas, treatments and drugs.
We are trying to help ourselves to a better life.
Dr. Paul Connett, a director of the Fluoride Action Network and Dentist Dr. Bill Osmunson once believed in fluoride, but through their research found that this chemical is not suitable for the human body.
C. D. White Owen Sound

NZ - Fluoridation of water supplies stopped pending consultation

Fluoridation of water supplies stopped pending consultation
Updated at 11:05am on 29 April 2009
The addition of fluoride to water in the Far North has been stopped, pending community consultation.
The Far North District Council agreed to fluoridate Kaitaia and Kaikohe water for two years, on what it understood was a trial basis.
The Northland District Health Board has applied to continue the measure for another two years.
But the council says it was expecting some results from the trial, before consulting the community about whether to continue.
However the health board has no results yet and says its study is not about proving the effectiveness of fluoridation.
The council will not now resume fluoridation until it has consulted the community.

Australia - Unnecessary procrastination

Our Say - Unnecessary procrastination
29/04/2009 10:31:00 AM
The benefits of fluoridation to dental health are indisputable and the Bega Valley Shire Council should start the process to fluoridate this area’s water supply forthwith. Our children’s teeth, and those of our ageing population, have been deprived the benefits of fluoride for close on half a century putting this area among the most backward because of past councils’ resistance to this recognised tooth decay preventative measure.
It places this area in the 6 per cent of the state that does not have access to fluoridated public water supplies.
Water fluoridation has been the primary public oral health policy for the prevention of tooth decay in NSW for more than 50 years.
The previous councils’ reluctance to introduce fluoride to our water was based on the cost of the capital works and general health safety concerns despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
It has been a case of health discrimination at its worst - residents in Bega, Tathra and Kalaru have enjoyed the benefits of fluoridation for about 40 years while the remainder of the shire’s population have either had to seek fluoride from other sources or do without to the detriment of young teeth and parents’ budgets.
The fact that fluoridated drinking water is mandatory in other states shows how out of step with this oral health measure the State of NSW and the council have been.
The welcome change in council’s attitude has been driven by the fact that the NSW Government will now provide a 100 per cent subsidy for the necessary capital works.
The council has accepted the fact that there is no correlation between water fluoridation and any other disease.
And it acknowledges that water fluoridation will deliver significant savings in dental costs.
Given that the council is now convinced of the benefits of fluoridation, we agree with the comments made by the two dentists reported in the story ‘Dentists say yes to fluoride.’
They say that the council should just get on and do it. We couldn’t agree more and we believe the vast majority of the population would agree as well.

About time the majority of the population woke up if they looked at this blog long enough I can't see any rational person agreeing with this long term risky medication for the little benefit it gives.

From the June Zest magazine

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

FAN Bulletin 1067: Important News from Ireland

FAN Bulletin 1067: Important News from Ireland
Before you read the article below, Doctors 'struggling to cope' with upsurge in hip fractures, which appeared in The Sunday Times of Ireland on April 12, and Professor Vyvyan Howard's response to the article (April 19), here is some important background information to put this story in context.

Ireland is the only country in Europe with mandatory fluoridation and with more than 70% of its population drinking fluoridated water it is well above the next highest country (UK at 10%). Most European countries do not fluoridate their drinking water and yet according to WHO figures their teeth are no worse than countries that do.

The Irish mandatory fluoridation law went into effect in 1963, and in the 46 years since the government has done NO (zero) health studies on the population - just endless studies on teeth and a completely BOGUS review of the issue called the Fluoridation Forum (2002).

While the epidemiological studies on a connection between fluoridation and hip fractures are mixed, in my view and the view of the National Research Council (NRC, 2006), the weight of evidence of animal studies, clinical trials and the epidemiological studies is that excess fluoride weakens bones making them more brittle and more prone to fracture. The most convincing of the epidemiological studies is the study by Li et al (2001) who showed what looks like a linear increase in hip fractures in the elderly drinking well water containing above 1.00 ppm, with the rates in the village with 4.3 - 8 ppm triple that of the rate in the 1 ppm village .

The NRC 2006 report requested the EPA Office of Drinking Water to perform a new risk assessment because the Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (MCLG) for fluoride --which is based on the "best" science at the time to provide a safe Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), the regulatory standard-- was not protective of human health. Both the MCL and MCLG are 4 ppm fluoride. Two of the adverse health effects NRC wants EPA to re-assess are involved with fluoride's impact on the bone:

Bone fractures: "... the majority of the committee concluded that the MCLG is not likely to be protective against bone fractures." (page 3)

Clinical Stage 2 skeletal fluorosis: "associated with chronic joint pain, arthritic symptoms, calcification of ligaments, and osteosclerosis of cancellous bones ... the committee judges that stage II is more appropriately characterized as the first stage at which the condition is adverse to health. Thus, this stage of the affliction should also be considered in evaluating any proposed changes in drinking-water standards for fluoride." (pages 170-171)

Thus there is a strong chance that the increased rate of hip fractures (and maybe arthritis rates as well) in Ireland has something to do with the fact that those aged over 46 have had a lifetime of exposure to fluoride (in their water, in their toothpaste, in their tea, and in their Guiness! (see the Nun's Story on Guiness).

Remember each day approximately 50% of the fluoride ingested is mostly stored in the bone and accumulates there with age. Those with kidney impairment accumulate fluoride even faster.

Hopefully opponents of fluoridation in Ireland will force the government to take a serious look at the hip fracture-fluoridation connection- especially the Green party which is now a junior partner in that government and promised prior to the election that if elected they would end fluoridation!

Paul Connett

The Sunday Times (Ireland) - April 12, 2009

Doctors 'struggling to cope' with upsurge in hip fractures

With population on the rise and more people expected to live longer, medics insist a 'national strategy' is imperative

By Jan Battles

Doctors at Dublin's Mater hospital say a national strategy is needed to cope with the burden that hip fractures will place on the health system as Ireland's population ages and life expectancy increases.

They predict a doubling in the annual number of hip fractures in less than 20 years, and warn that facilities are struggling to cope. There are just over 2,800 fractures a year, but this will exceed 5,700 by 2026.

Ireland has no national strategy for the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis, even though an estimated 90% of hip fractures are due to the brittle-bone disease. The audit found that women over 50 are three times more likely to suffer broken hips than men.

"The prevalence of osteoporosis is increasing all the time," said Kevin Mulhall, an orthopaedic surgeon in the Mater and an author of the study published in Osteoporosis International. "On the surgical side we are seeing increasing numbers of fragility fractures. Because of osteoporosis, the bone is fragile so it fractures.

"People suffer a lot with a hip fracture. It's a serious trauma for an older person and the results afterwards can be pretty devastating for them in terms of their level of independence."

According to the Irish Osteoporosis Society, one in five people aged 60 or over who fracture a hip will die within six to 12 months due to the secondary complications of osteoporosis. These include blood clots, pneumonia or infection from being bed bound. Half of them will no longer be able to dress, wash or walk unassisted. Only 30% will regain their independence.

Mulhall said: "The whole idea is to try and get continuous care where the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of fractures is all improved."

Before the study, there were no figures on how many hip fractures occur each year in Ireland. The Irish Osteoporosis Society estimates the government spends €420m a year on fractures suffered by senior citizens. This is estimated to rise by up to €2 billion by 2030.

Michelle O'Brien of the society said: "The average hip costs approximately ¤15,000. Including rehabilitation it is ¤26,000. Yet a scan for osteoporosis costs on average ¤100 and takes eight minutes. In the majority of people the condition is preventable, and it is treatable."

Earlier this month the charity launched a new radio campaign, fronted by presenter Craig Doyle, to point out that good nutrition can help prevent osteoporosis. Weight-bearing exercise is also advised.

Robin Webster, chief executive of Age Action, said: "One of the problems with falls is that they take older people's confidence. Rehabilitation is critically important. They become prisoners in their own homes because they are not sure - they worry if they go into crowds that they will be pushed or fall."

Ursula Andress, 73, a former Bond girl who has osteoporosis, is supporting an international awareness campaign.

Professor Vyvyan Howard's response letter

The Sunday Times (Ireland)
April 19, 2009

Fluoride Insight

Further to your report Doctors 'struggling to cope' with upsurge in hip fractures ( News, last week ), the republic of Ireland is the most fluoridated country in the world. There is well documented epidemiological literature associating hip and other fractures with drinking-water fluoridation. It would be most illuminating to compare the reported hip fracture rates with those in unfluoridated Northern Ireland. This finding should be yet another nail in the coffin of this unwarranted mass medicaiton. We certainly should not be extending the practice in the UK.

Professor Vyvyan Howard
Molecular Biosciences Centre, University of Ulster

Are kids being overdosed on fluoride?

UK - Jill Palmer: Something is rotten in the state of teeth – poverty is root cause

Jill Palmer: Something is rotten in the state of teeth – poverty is root cause
DENTAL decay is a disease of social disadvantage. The recent shocking study which revealed the staggering number of young children who have rotten teeth proved that the poor are far more likely to need treatment.

The study showed that more than 470,000 children needed hospital admission for treatment relating to their teeth between 1997 and 2006. The most worrying rise in serious problems was among the most deprived.

There was a huge difference in the chances of being admitted to hospital to have a tooth out between children in affluent areas and those in socially disadvantaged areas. Twice as many treatments were provided to children from the poorest areas compared to those from the richest.

Is this any surprise? There is a growing gap between the health of the wealthiest and the poorest in this country.

Despite endless efforts by the Government, which says its priority is “narrowing the health gap between disadvantaged groups, communities and the rest of the country, and on improving health overall”, Britain is still divided between the healthy haves and less healthy have-nots.

Health inequalities begin in the womb, are nurtured by bad diet and poor parenting, and multiplied by bad habits such as smoking. Teeth are no exception.

In Tackling Health Inequalities: A Programme for Action, published in 2003, the Government announced some very impressive aims to: reduce smoking in

manual social groups; prevent and manage other risks for coronary heart disease and cancer such as poor diet and obesity, physical inactivity and hypertension through effective primary care and public health interventions – especially targeting the over-50s; improve housing quality by tackling cold and dampness, and reducing accidents at home and on the road; improve the quality and accessibility of antenatal care and early years support in disadvantaged areas; reduce smoking and improve nutrition in pregnancy and early years; prevent teenage pregnancy and support teenage parents; and improve housing conditions for children in disadvantaged areas.

There was no mention of oral health. However, for many years, oral health has been one of the biggest health divides and one of the worst inequalities.

One of the best ways to tackle it is water fluoridation. It is one of the few public health improvement measures that can benefit the public without people having to change their lifestyle.

Eating more healthily, cooking fresh products, abandoning ready meals, all takes time and money. Quitting smoking, taking more exercise, both take willpower.

The recently-announced NHS health checks, which will invite everyone aged between 40 and 74 for a free health assessment, are far more likely to benefit the worried well more than the deprived sick. If you have no job, live in inadequate housing and have problems finding enough money to feed your children, you are not going to turn up for a health check and follow advice on weight management and reducing your risk of heart attack.

It is the same with oral health. While the affluent may be concerned about replacing toothbrushes, buying fluoride toothpaste and finding a dentist who accepts National Health Service patients, the same cannot always be said of those living in social deprivation.

Even if they do, one of the best ways of protecting children’s teeth is a sealant put over the back teeth during the early years when they are most likely to experience tooth decay.

Sadly, this procedure is rarely available on the NHS. Nearly 15 years ago, when I paid for my daughter’s teeth to be treated in this way, it cost £10 a tooth. I dread to think what it costs today. How many people can afford that?

That is why water fluoridation is so vital. There is considerable evidence that it is the first decay that you get that sets you up for your lifetime experience. The later you get your first filling, the better your lifetime oral health.

Fluoridating water protects teeth. It has been shown to reduce the number of decayed, missing and filled teeth, particularly in children. Water fluoridation has been around since the 1960s. We can blame Margaret Thatcher initially for privatising the water companies in 1988 and causing a slowdown in the uptake.

Until recently, no real progress had taken place in implementing new water fluoridation schemes within the United Kingdom since the ownership of most water companies passed into the private sector.

Up until 2003, water companies had no obligation to fluoridate the water even when requested to do so by health authorities.

Now much of the blame lies with NHS funding. As water fluoridation is a public health measure to improve dental health, it is paid for entirely by the NHS. At local level, the strategic health authority is billed by the water company for the entire cost of fluoridating supplies.

Although they have a duty to improve the health of their local populations and reduce health inequalities, strategic health authorities also have a financial duty to keep in budget and must not spend more cash than is allocated to them.

But there are many competing demands on fixed budgets and fluoridation is often overlooked in favour of more dynamic life-saving treatments. Yet the cost to the NHS of treating avoidable dental disease would be substantially reduced by spending money on fluoridating water.

The answer surely is to ring-fence money for this purpose. It is the best way to ensure that “everybody, irrespective of means, shall have equal opportunity to benefit from the best healthcare available” – to misquote Aneurin Bevan slightly – and get rid of the scandalous inequalities in the health of children’s teeth.

They've been given plenty of money to fluoridate so how researched is this article?
The educated public know more than this correspondent and don't want it.

All about sugar

Xylitol revisited
Connie Sidder
27 April 2009
............To understand the effects of white sugar, it is necessary to understand that sugar has no fiber, no minerals, no proteins, and no fats, just empty calories. What happens when one eats sugar? The body must borrow nutrients from healthy cells to metabolize the incomplete food. Often the calcium in the bones is lost due to the process needed to neutralize the effects of sugar..........

Australia - PETER MOORE: And another thing ....

Finally, my good friends, the anti-fluoride lobby have fired the last shots in their irrational and fear- based tirade against the introduction of fluoride into the water system. The concerted letter writing campaign to all local newspapers by the same bunch of writers was short on facts but long on misinformation and rhetoric. They have lost this battle, thank God,

I find it strange that fluoridation brings out such a polarized view we think people pushing fluoride are zealots who refuse to look at the evidence, they all think we are cranks.

Monday, April 27, 2009

Serum Fluoride and Sialic Acid Levels in Osteosarcoma

Serum Fluoride and Sialic Acid Levels in Osteosarcoma.Sandhu R, Lal H, Kundu ZS, Kharb S.
Department of Biochemistry, Pt B D Sharma University of Health Sciences, H No 1447, sector-1, Urban Estate, Rohtak, 124001, Haryana, India.

Osteosarcoma is a rare malignant bone tumor most commonly occurring in children and young adults presenting with painful swelling. Various etiological factors for osteosarcoma are ionizing radiation, family history of bone disorders and cancer, chemicals (fluoride, beryllium, and vinyl chloride), and viruses. Status of fluoride levels in serum of osteosarcoma is still not clear. Recent reports have indicated that there is a link between fluoride exposure and osteosarcoma. Glycoproteins and glycosaminoglycans are an integral part of bone and prolonged exposure to fluoride for long duration has been shown to cause degradation of collagen and ground substance in bones. The present study was planned to analyze serum fluoride, sialic acid, calcium, phosphorus, and alkaline phosphatase levels in 25 patients of osteosarcoma and age- and sex-matched subjects with bone-forming tumours other than osteosarcoma and musculo-skeletal pain (controls, 25 each). Fluoride levels were analyzed by ISE and sialic acid was analyzed by Warren's method. Mean serum fluoride concentration was found to be significantly higher in patients with osteosarcoma as compared to the other two groups. The mean value of flouride in patients with other bone-forming tumors was approximately 50% of the group of osteosarcoma; however, it was significantly higher when compared with patients of group I. Serum sialic acid concentration was found to be significantly raised in patients with osteosarcoma as well as in the group with other bone-forming tumors as compared to the group of controls. There was, however, no significant difference in the group of patients of osteosarcoma when compared with group of patients with other bone-forming tumors. These results showing higher level of fluoride with osteosarcoma compared to others suggesting a role of fluoride in the disease.

PMID: 19390788 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]



FAN Bulletin 1066: Report from Connett's Louisiana visit
April 27, 2009
Last week I spent four days in Louisiana - two days in Lafayette and two days in Baton Rouge. This was my second trip to Louisiana since the state legislature passed a mandatory fluoridation bill in 2008. My first trip was last October where I spoke on both zero waste and fluoridation at the annual conference organized by LEAN (the Louisiana Environmental Action Network, one of the best organized state environmental coalitions in the country).

Here is a short diary of last week's events, which were co-sponsored by LEAN and Citizens Opposed to Fluoridation (COF) in Lafayette.

Monday April 20. Lafayette.

My visit got off to a cracking start when the Lafayette newspaper (The Daily Advertiser) ran an article on top of the front page entitled Fluoridation debate revived. The article discussed a motion being prepared by City-Parish Council chairman Purvis Morrison asking for state representatives to repeal the mandatory fluoridation bill. The article pointed out that the installation of the fluoridation equipment would cost $654,200 and another $530,000 annually to run the system. The article plugged the meeting where I was to speak the following evening.

In the afternoon, I was featured on a one-hour live program on a public access cable TV station station (AOC). AOC has already showed the FAN DVD "Professional Perspectives on Fluoridation" several times. For this live program I was interviewed by Dr. Jim Reeves, a retired Professor of Engineering, who has been leading the charge to keep fluoridation out of Lafayette. In the evening I had dinner with COF members along with the president of the local chapter of the Sierra Club as well as a peace activist Vic Hummert (and his wife Rose), who I have known for over 20 years.

Tuesday April 21, Lafayette.

We had a very early start. I was driven over to a local radio station KPEL for a live interview at 6:30 am with Robert Burton. Then at 9:30 am I went (via phone) on a popular statewide radio call-in program hosted by Moon Griffon. At noon with both Dr. Jim Reeves and local political strategist par excellence, Carroll Baudoin (his group Concerned Citizens for Good Government has also been very helpful in helping COF get this issue on the radar screen), we made a joint appearance on a local TV program "Meet Your Neighbor" (Channel 10). In all these media appearances the hosts very generously promoted the lecture I was to give that evening.

Before that lecture, again with Jim Reeves and Carroll Baudoin, and other members of their respective groups, I went to the local council officers and met the mayor's assistant and received a certificate making me an "Honorary Cajun"!

At 6:40 pm I testified before the City-Parish Council in support of the motion opposing fluoridation in Lafayette, but had to leave before three dentists spoke against the motion. We learned later that the motion passed 8 to 1.

It is interesting to note that even though three dentists were willing to speak solo in support of fluoridation at this council meeting not one of them, nor any one else in Lafayette in favor of fluoridation, was prepared to debate me at the public meeting that same evening, even though they were invited to do so.

The 7:00 pm lecture took place in Hamilton Hall on the local University campus. In all about 100 people attended this meeting, representing a very large cross section of the community. It included students and professors from the University; citizens who had fought off fluoridation in Lafayette 20 years ago as well as many people - both young and old - new to the issue. I spoke for about 90 minutes and my presentation was followed by a lively question and answer session. Again we got very nice coverage in the local paper.

I was most impressed with the local group COF who had put these events together at fairly short notice. I was also gratified to see how much interest the local media is taking in the issue.

Wednesday April 22, Baton Rouge

On Wednesday morning, I set off with Jim and Carroll to Baton Rouge. Our first port of call was the local Public TV station where I had an in-depth taped interview for statewide airing. Both the interviewer and the cameraman were very interested in the topic and I think we will get a fair shake with this program. It will air statewide possibly in two parts.

In Baton Rouge we were joined by Mark Galasso, a musician, photographer and son of a prominent educator in Baton Rouge. Mark is extremely upset by the way this practice is being forced down Louisiana citizens' throats and is doing everything he can to help get the law rescinded.

In the afternoon, we met up with Mary Lee Orr, and Kathy Wascomb, the director and lobbyist for LEAN respectively. We first met with the director of the Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH) Alan Levine and three other members of his department. We explained our concerns about the mandatory bill and all listened very attentively but I was shocked at how little they knew about the fluoridation issue. No one on the staff claimed to have read the NRC (2006) review. They agreed to review any literature we sent them and get the response of the Louisiana Dental Association. We got the distinct impression that they were prepared to let the dentists lead on this issue.

After the DHH we went to the Department of Environmental Quality and spoke with the deputy director (and two of his staff) who has very good relations with LEAN and was more than willing to listen and stands by ready to help if he can find a way of doing so.

Everywhere we went Carroll and Jim handed out copies of FAN's new DVD "Professional Perspective on Fluoridation." What a tool that is proving to be.

Thursday April 23, Baton Rouge

At 9:30 am I appeared on another popular radio show and those interested can listen to my 12 minute interview. This will only be posted for a few more days so if you have trouble getting this please contact Mark Galasso at mark@Galassophotography.com who may be able to help with a different format.

The only other event that day was a very long and thorough interview with the local Baton Rouge newspaper.

All in all, I count this a very productive (and enjoyable) trip, not only helping with the local battles in Lafayette and Baton Rouge but also in getting the message out statewide. Watching how well LEAN is organized my only regret is that I did not contact them earlier while the mandatory bill was being quietly slipped through the legislature. Had I done so I think we would have had a much better chance of defeating it. But at least, two major cities are not allowing this mandatory bill to impose fluoridation on them without putting up a major fight.

While I was away two important developments took place.

An excellent article came to light that was published last October in Integrated HealthCare Practitioners, a Canadian publication. The article is entitled Motherhood, Apple Pie and Fluoridation: A Critical Evaluation of Fluoridation Practices in Canada , by Dr. Brian McLean, BSc, DDS. It looks as if we have found another well-informed dentist with the courage to speak out on this issue. I am sure Dr. Hardy Limeback will be delighted to get this moral and intellectual support from another member of his profession - up till now he has received little from that quarter but abuse. He should remember what Schopenhauer said. "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

Paul Connett

PS: Don't forget to get as many people as you know to visit FANs web site where they can order our latest DVD "Professional Perspectives on Fluoridation" online. Please let us know if you are able to get this shown on your local public access cable TV station.

How much fluoride are we ingesting?

Rain gardens a great way to conserve water

Rain gardens a great way to conserve water

By ELENA GRIMM - Chronicle News Groupday, more than 700 gallons of water will run off the average roof with every inch of rainfall – enough to fill 14 bathtubs.
That is the message that the DeKalb County Soil and Water Conservation District wants to get out. The district recently held a workshop on how to set up rain gardens, which are shallow, landscaped areas planted with wildflowers and other native plants that soak up rain water from a building’s roof.
Also, the SWCD is continuing to sell rain barrels – large, mosquito-proof containers placed under downspouts, collecting rainwater to nourish gardens and lawns, and even to wash cars and pets.
The benefits of rain are many, local conservationists say.
“The rainwater offers more nutrients for plants,” said Dean Johnson, a resource conservationist for the SWCD. “There’s no fluoride or other additives like city water has.”
The benefits can be felt in one’s pocketbook, too, as landscape watering accounts for about 40 percent of a total water bill, according to the SWCD.
But one of the greatest benefits of rain barrels and rain gardens is that they reduce the amount of stormwater runoff – thus mitigating flooding problems and water pollution from pet waste, lawn chemicals and motor fuel that is eventually carried into rivers and lakes.
The need for diverting stormwater is becoming more apparent as development continues.
A typical city block generates five times the amount of runoff that a woodland area of the same size would, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This is because impervious surfaces – like buildings and parking lots – prevent precipitation from naturally soaking into the ground.
And when manmade stormwater systems are overwhelmed by a heavy rainfall, flooding can result, said Ron Johnson, a master gardener with the University of Illinois DeKalb County Extension.
The DeKalb Area Women’s Center is in the beginning stages of creating a rain garden. Not only will it relieve some burden from the neighborhood’s old storm sewers, but director Anna Marie Coveny hopes it will beautify the entire neighborhood.
“Plants in rain gardens, they can be very beautiful native plants,” Ron Johnson said. “You end up with a beautiful garden and it’s low maintenance, and plus you’re doing Earth a favor by preventing all of this stormwater runoff and flood damage.”
Coveny is inviting anyone – especially people interested in creating their own rain gardens – to help build the garden.
“The experimenting is done here,” Coveny said. “We hope to treat it like an outdoor classroom so people can learn how to do a rain garden.”
The first step in building a rain garden is to pick a location, Ron Johnson said. It shouldn’t be the lowest spot in the yard, but an area where standing water leaves after five days so as not to invite mosquitoes to use it as a nesting ground, he said.
Then, you’ll want to determine your soil type and how permeable it is, he said. Sandy soil is ideal because it drains more quickly.

UK - Southampton daily Echo

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Should Infants Drink Fluoridated Water?

UK - Hampshire - New Forest next?

Saturday, April 25, 2009

Australia - MP sinks his teeth into fluoride issue

MP sinks his teeth into fluoride issue
24th April 2009
THE new LNP Member for Beaudesert has condemned the introduction of fluoride into south-east Queensland's water supply in his maiden speech in State Parliament on Wednesday.
Opposition MP Aidan McLindon said the Labor Government's decision was “ill-educated”.
“I never recall my mother telling me to swallow my toothpaste after I brushed my teeth,” he said.
“Maybe there is another poison out there we can add to the water that prevents obesity.”

NI 'Children pay price for flouride-free water'

'Children pay price for flouride-free water'
Friday, 24 April 2009
Northern Ireland children pay the price for fluoride-free water in extra decayed teeth, the chief nursing officer warned yesterday.
The Republic of Ireland uses the chemical in the mains supply and enjoys a better youth dental record, Martin Bradley added.
Local politicians rejected the measure over a decade ago because they believed it was best to minimise the amount of non-essential additives in water.
There had been related health concerns, but medical evidence largely allayed those fears, according to health professionals.
Mr Bradley said: "Fluoride is a big public health lever which we have great difficulty in pulling and it does make a difference."
He was addressing a nursing conference at Queen's University Belfast.
In the Republic there is a decay rate of one tooth per child compared to over two in Northern Ireland, one of the worst in Europe.
Opponents warned using fluoride amounts to mass medication.
In England and Wales they claimed fluoride can cause a range of problems, from tooth mottling to cancer, and threatened to mount a legal challenge on human rights grounds.
The British Dental Association (BDA) was among those calling for the change.
Alternatives to adding fluoride to the water supply include encouraging people to buy toothpaste with the substance and using a fluoride varnish on children's teeth before they develop cavities.
However, the poorest groups are least likely to attend a dentist despite having the worst dental records.
Young people are more susceptible to the destructive bacteria because they build up resistance as they get older and tend to eat more sugary foods at an early age. However older people are also eating more sweet foods.
Professionals estimate it costs £60 million a year in Northern Ireland to repair decayed teeth and if fluoride was used in the water it would cut that rate by 40%, producing a saving worth over £20 million.

Northern Ireland next for fluoridation?

USA - Keep Fluoride Out Of Water

Keep Fluoride Out Of Water
Posted By
Posted 1 hour ago
(Re: "Tottenham may dump fluoridated water" in the April 21 edition of the Examiner)
The Merck Index for element fluorine, a halogen gas that forms fluorides, finds it is the most reactive of all elements and will form compounds with most.
Then, fluorosilicic acid, a liquid form most often used for fluoridation, is commercial grade, regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Medicines and dental products such as toothpastes are all USP pharmaceutical grade, regulated by FDA, which now requires toothpaste labels to warn not to swallow even a pea-sized amount or call poison control. Hmmmm.
Two government documents to read are:Toxicological Profile for Fluorides, Hydrogen Fluoride,andFluorine,(F), 1993, andHealth Effects of Ingested Fluoride, National Academy of Sciences' report for Congress, 1993.
Anita Knight St. Petersburg, Fla.

UK - Southampton Daily Echo Saturday 25th April

UK - Saturday 25th April Southampton Daily Echo

Thursday 23 April Daily Echo - letter

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

NZ - Don’t poison kids with toxic fluoride waste

Don’t poison kids with toxic fluoride waste
Wednesday, 22 April 2009, 10:17 am
Press Release: Fluoride Action Network
Protect our children’s teeth – Don’t poison them with toxic fluoride waste.
The Lift the Lip campaign, to get Canterbury preschoolers to the dental nurse, has led to a big drop in tooth deacy. The number of five-year-olds without cavities has increased 14 per cent over the past nine years - “all without fluoridation” points out Mark Atkin, of Fluoride Action Network (FANNZ).
The campaign was launched in 2000. It involves GPs enrolling children into dental services at 15 months of age. Parents are encouraged to take their children for yearly dental checks until they are five. "By seeing children when they are very young we can pick up problems early and talk to parents or caregivers about how best to look after young teeth" said the programme’s clinical director, Dr Martin Lee.
Speaking of the fluoridation trial conducted in Kaitaia and Kaikohe since 2007, Mr Atkin adds “The Northland District Health Board needs to stop wasting taxpayer money, stop forcing fluoridation on people, and do something useful like this for dental health in the Far North.”
Dr. Neil Croucher, of the Northland DHB, confirmed that implementation of a teeth-brushing programme in Far North schools, where children have some of the worst teeth in New Zealand, had been “hugely successful”. Dr Croucher is also partly responsible for the Far North fluoridation trial.
FANNZ is deeply concerned about improving dental health. “Proper dental care is the way to improve children’s teeth – not by feeding them toxic industrial waste called ‘fluoride’, contaminated with lead, arsenic, and mercury” concludes Mr Atkin. “Fluoridation has been shown by the latest scientific research to be ineffective in reducing tooth decay, as well as posing serious health risks.”
For example, in 2006 the US Public Health Service advised parents not to use fluoridated water in making up baby formula, due to risk of dental fluorosis – a tooth enamel deformity. NZ Food Safety Authority documents confirm that this warning applies in New Zealand also “If fluoridated water is not safe for babies then it shouldn’t be in our water” says Mr Atkin.
The majority of developed countries have rejected fluoridation on scientific and ethical grounds. “This is in spite of political pressure from the fluoridation lobby, stemming from the USA.” advises Mr Atkin.
Public meetings on fluoridation are being held in the Far North in the last week of April.ends

Australia - Anti-fluoride rally in Geelong tonight

Anti-fluoride rally in Geelong tonight
Peter Begg
April 22nd, 2009
BARWON Freedom from Fluoridation will launch a community ``mandate'' to stop fluoridation tonight at Skilled Stadium. The group is aiming to collect thousands of signatures, with full contact details, for its ``mandate'', which will be sent to the State Parliament.The ``mandate'' calls on the parliament to stop all fluoridation of any water supply within the Barwon Water District and to prohibit the implementation of the Health (Fluoridation) Act 1973 within the Barwon Water District by any entity.BAFF spokesman David McRae said the State Government did not have a mandate to introduce fluoride.He said the group used the term mandate because it was different to a petition. The people had sovereignty over the parliament and the politicians were meant to serve the people.The launch will be addressed by leading Adelaide dentist and a past Australian Dental Association president Dr Andrew Harms.BAFF said Dr Harms would speak on the scientific evidence for fluoride health damage, and the fraudulent way authorities claimed dental health benefits.The launch is at 7.30pm in the Fred Flanagan Room, Skilled Stadium.

UK - Southampton - Daily Echo

Olga Senior
Director of communications and corportate affairs at the South Central Strategic Health Authority

The facts on fluoridation'
IN response to the In My View piece by Chris Barker (Daily Echo, April 6) I think it would be useful to set out some of the facts relating to the decision to add fluoride to the local water supply made by the board of South Central Strategic Health Authority.
The issues surrounding the public consultation are more complex than Mr Barker indicates in his article and he has not reported the results of the consultation in their entirety.
In 2003 MPs in a free vote in Parliament passed legislation which gave powers to strategic health authorities to make decisions on increasing the level of fluoride in water supplies following a public consultation.
South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) carried out a consultation in line with the relevant legislation and the results of that consultation show that there is no clear majority view on this issue amongst the people who would be affected in the area.
Yes, 72 per cent of those people who chose to respond in writing to the consultation were opposed to it. However, responses to public consultations are not representative of the views of everyone in an area.
As is normal in any consultation, regardless of the issue, those people who either strongly support or strongly oppose an issue are likely to respond in writing. That is why the SHA commissioned an independent phone survey of a large sample of randomly selected local people to gather their views on this issue.
Phone surveys carried out in this way are far more representative and give a better indication of local opinion than written responses to a consultation. The results showed that there was no majority view on this issue among local people -despite many claims by groups that there is. 32 per cent of people surveyed supported the proposal, 38 per cent opposed it whilst the remainder either did not know or neither supported or opposed it.
The survey showed that a quarter of those opposed to water fluoridation did so because of concerns it causes long-term side effects, something which is not backed up by any of the reputable, systematic reviews.
It is evident that there are small numbers of people in the local area who, during the consultation and since the decision was made, are intent on generating fear.
The conclusion was that the health arguments in favour of water fluoridation outweigh all other arguments against it.
There are some people dissatisfied with the decision the SHA has made given the polarising nature of the issue.
However the SHA is satisfied, along with major professional health organisations such as the World Health Organisation, the British Medical Association and the British Dental Association, that water fluoridation is safe and effective.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

"Freedom from Fluoride: Update"

Worth listening to the end.

UK - Fluoride in the water is a threat to health

Fluoride in the water is a threat to health
Balancing the pros and cons of fluoride in our water systems
Sir, Dr Nigel Carter speaks passionately in favour of fluoridating the water supply (Public sector, April 17). It would appear that he is not familiar with the findings of the 2006 US National Research Council (NRC) report on fluoride toxicity, which cites a growing body of scientific research linking fluoride exposure to disruption of the nervous and endocrine systems, including the brain, thyroid and adrenal glands. Data presented in the report suggest that doses of fluoride associated with thyroid disturbances are now exceeded by many Americans, particularly children, living in so-called “low-fluoride” (1ppm) areas. Even more worrying is the association of increased rates of osteosarcoma (bone cancer) in young males in fluoridated areas, as revealed in a recently published US study. Dr Carter also fails to mention that removal of aesthetically significant dental fluorosis has to be paid for privately.
How can fluoride be safe at 1ppm in water supplies when prolonged intake at 2ppm can lead to mottled or brown discoloration of the enamel in developing teeth and at levels of more than 8ppm may lead to bone disorders and degenerative changes in the kidneys, liver, adrenal glands, central nervous system and reproductive organs? There is no realistic safety margin in fluoridated water — its intake cannot be controlled. People with diabetes or kidney problems are at particular risk, as are non-breast-fed babies.
D. M. Jones
Ilford, Essex

USA - Preston man's humanitarian movement

Preston man's humanitarian movement
Published Date: 20 April 2009
By Chris Visser
He's one of the world's greatest humanitarians, alongside names such as Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, Gandhi and Bob Geldof.
He's a famous figure in the United States, but relatively unknown here in Britain – and he's from Preston.Stan Brock's work has helped more than 350,000 vulnerable patients across America, offering more than $33m of free medical care thanks to an army of more than 36,000 volunteers spanning two decades – led by the 72-year-old.His Tennessee-based Remote Area Medical (RAM) operation reaches out to those who have no, or very limited, access to health insurance benefits.This includes those who completely miss out on the United States' free Medicare system.He explains: "Medical care in the USA is a privilege of the wealthy and the well insured. Children can get care but there's a lot of people who fall through the cracks."Around 50m people don't have access to essential services at all – we see people who have a full mouth of rotting teeth and have the worst infections you will see anywhere in the world."Stan started the not-for-profit RAM in 1985, fully funded by private donations, which means nothing from government. It has recently mushroomed after gaining exposure on American TV's 60 Minutes into a massive operation which tours parts of America offering free healthcare as part of roadshows where anyone can turn up, "no questions asked", and gain access to a dentist, doctor, vet or optician.

In fluoridated USA.

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

In my view
Stephen Peckham
of Southampton.
Reader in health policy at the Department of Puofc Health and Policy

There must be open debate

I AM surprised that Professor Michael Lennon, chairman of the British Fluoridation Society, feels he has to attack me personally rather than focus on the issues surrounding water fluoridation and am not sure why he states that I "stoop to new depths".

My concern is that there should be open debate and, far from "denigrating eminent colleagues", I expressed disappointment that the vice president of the Faculty of Public Hearth, did not provide a more balanced picture of the facts. In response to Professor Lennon, my "cause" is to ensure the good use of evidence to promote ethically sound public health policy.

In his Soapbox piece, Professor Lennon chooses to focus on dental fluorosis but ignores much of the latest evidence on its extent and impact. At fluoride concentrations of 1ppm, as advocated for Southampton, a study in 2000 conducted in Newcastle found that 54 per cent of eight to nine year olds experienced some level of dental fluorosis.

While it is correct to state that most fluorosis produces a pearlised or white flecking, it is widely accepted that a proportion of affected children will experience brown staining and possible damage to the enamel of their teeth. Indeed, the most recent systematic review on fluoridation in Australia puts the estimate of fluorosis of more than aesthetic concern at ten per cent with other studies showing the more severe forms averaging between two and three per cent.

Research has consistently shown that adolescents with brown staining report negative views about their appearance and a 2006 UK study found that young people viewed dental fluorosis more negatively than dental decay.

It is not just about teeth - dental fluorosis is an indicator of fluoride absorption in the body. Evidence suggests that increasingly many people, particularly young children, are in danger of exceeding accepted safe limits of fluoride intake.
While the British Fluoridation Society has a mission to extend and promote water fluoridation - including through misinformation for which they have been criticised in Parliament -my concern is that we do not simply follow a policy based on evidence that is recognised as being of poor quality.

Our common goal should be to ensure that the people of Southampton are supported in attaining good dental health through effective community based and targeted measures as has been achieved elsewhere.

Monday, April 20, 2009

UK - MP Sandra Gidley.

Something in the Water?

Worth seeing again

Sunday, April 19, 2009

UK - Southampton

Fluoride varnish

If I knew nothing about it I would say what a simple way to prevent cavities but it is a poison. He is bound to swallow a lot of it. Far better give him the right diet cut out sweets from doting grandparents and Aunts.

nyscof said...
there is 26,000 parts per million fluorie in those varnishes. Some is swallowed. Some is absorbed into the saystem. And what happens as the varnish wears off the teeth - wear does it go - inhaled, absorbed, swallowed????

No studies done on adverse effects, of course. So there is no evidence. That's the way it goes until someone(s) get deathly ill or dies.

Fluoride in Washoe water up for debate again

The sometimes emotional issue of adding fluoride to public water supplies in Washoe County is on tap again in a new bill before the Nevada Legislature.
Supporters of Senate Bill 311, passed April 8 by the Senate Health and Education Committee, said it’s a safe and proven means to improve dental health of the county’s residents, including those who can’t afford to see a dentist.
Opponents said fluoridation of water is unnecessary and expensive. Some said the chemical is toxic and potentially harmful to consumers.
“I support it because I think children’s teeth are important,” said state Sen. Bernice Mathews, D-Reno, a retired nurse and a primary sponsor of the bill. “Dental health affects everything else in your body, so it’s important.”
“It’s a mass medication of the public water supply,” said Dr. Michael Gerber, a Reno homeopathic medical practitioner and strong opponent of fluoridation. “It is a very toxic material.”
In 1999, the Legislature passed a bill requiring the Southern Nevada Water Authority to begin adding fluoride to the Las Vegas area municipal water supply. Clark County voters continued fluoridation the following year by a margin of 58 percent.
Fluoridation provides “valuable dental benefits,” the SNWA website says.
Lawmakers backing the legislation said they want those same benefits available to residents of Washoe County.
“It’s been very, very successful in Clark County,” said co-sponsor Assemblyman Bernie Anderson, D-Sparks. “It’s particularly helpful for those who can’t afford medical-dental plans. This will help them have improved dental health.”
While she acknowledged the issue might be “somewhat contentious,” Assemblywoman Debbie Smith, D-Sparks, described fluoridation as a practice with shown benefits for dental health.
“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” said co-sponsor state Sen. Randolph Townsend, R-Reno. “Nothing’s changed in that adage for over a thousand years.”
In 2002, Washoe County voters rejected a ballot question to fluoridate water, with 58 percent opposed.
Because of that vote, directors of the Truckee Meadows Water Authority, the primary water purveyor serving the greater Reno-Sparks area, decided last Wednesday to oppose the legislation.
“The voters already voted on it and they voted to oppose it. That’s why we’re opposing it,” said Sparks Councilman Mike Carrigan, chairman of the TMWA board.
Paul Miller, TMWA manager of operations and water quality, said it would cost about $5 million to install equipment to fluoridate water pumped from the Truckee River and groundwater wells. Fluoridation would cost about $1 million annually afterward, adding about $1 per month to water bills across the region, Miller said.
The legislation requires fluoridation for public water systems serving more than 100,000 people, affecting only TMWA in Northern Nevada.
But because TMWA sells wholesale water supplies to other water providers, including Washoe County and the Sun Valley General Improvement District, customers of those purveyors would be affected, Miller said.
Removing fluoride from water supplied to any wholesale customers would require a process “prohibitively expensive,” he said.
Cost aside, fluoridation should be opposed for public health reasons, Gerber said. The chemical used, hydrofluosilicic acid, is toxic to human thyroid glands and can cause other health problems, he said.
Gerber said the nation’s dental health problems are most associated with poor diets high in sugar and that the problem should be addressed in other ways than adding chemicals to water.
“This is really a socioeconomic problem and not a lack of fluoride,” he said.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Child Obesity Is Linked to Chemicals in Plastics

Child Obesity Is Linked to Chemicals in Plastics
By Jennifer 8. Lee
Exposure to chemicals used in plastics may be linked with childhood obesity, according to results from a long-term health study on girls who live in East Harlem and surrounding communities that were presented to community leaders on Thursday by researchers at Mount Sinai Medical Center.

The chemicals in question are called phthalates, which are used to to make plastics pliable and in personal care products. Phthalates, which are absorbed into the body, are a type of endocrine disruptor — chemicals that affect glands and hormones that regulate many bodily functions. They have raised concerns as possible carcinogens for more than a decade, but attention over their role in obesity is relatively recent.

The research linking endocrine disruptors with obesity has been growing recently. A number of animal studies have shown that exposing mice to some endocrine disruptors causes them be more obese. Chemicals that have raised concern include Bisphenol A (which is used in plastics) and perfluorooctanoic acid, which is often used to create nonstick surfaces.

However, the East Harlem study, which includes data published in the journal Epidemiology, presents some of the first evidence linking obesity and endocrine disruptors in humans.

The researchers measured exposure to phthalates by looking at the children’s urine. “The heaviest girls have the highest levels of phthalates metabolites in their urine,” said Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, a professor of pediatrics at Mount Sinai, one of the lead researchers on the study. “It goes up as the children get heavier, but it’s most evident in the heaviest kids.”

This builds upon a larger Mount Sinai research effort called “Growing Up Healthy in East Harlem,” which has looked at various health factors in East Harlem children over the last 10 years, including pesticides, diet and even proximity to bodegas.

About 40 percent of the children in East Harlem are considered either overweight or obese. “When we say children, I’m talking about kindergarten children, we are talking about little kids,” Dr. Landrigan said. “This is a problem that begins early in life.”...............................

Perhaps that is why the West Midlands is known for its obesity

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

Fluoride toxicity

Fluoride toxicity
April 17, 2009
Question: I have a house plant, a Dracaena, and it has these blotchy brown spots on the leaves. Is that a fungus or something?

Answer: The brown spots may not be fungal disease but may be a symptom of fluoride toxicity. These types of cultural/nutrient problems often produce symptoms similar to that of fungal diseases.

Some Dracaena are quite sensitive to this element, which may be present in your water. Other sources of fluoride include perlite, a processed rock that is present in many potting mixes.

To solve the problem, you might want to water with nonflouridated water for a while and see if symptoms improve. Also, if you adjust the soil pH to between 6.0 and 6.5, this substantially reduced fluoride because at this pH, it becomes less available to the plant. You also may want to fertilize sparingly, watch the watering and consider repotting the plant to eliminate salt toxicity.

UK - West Midlands kids are smiles better than the rest!

West Midlands kids are smiles better than the rest!
Apr 17 2009 by Alison Dayani, Birmingham Mail
CHILDREN in the West Midlands have among the healthiest teeth in the country, latest Department of Health figures reveal.
Five-year-olds across the region have a below average level of decay and less fillings.
The glowing average figures of 1.02 decayed teeth, compared nationally to 1.47, has been attributed to parents encouraging their youngsters to brush their teeth twice a day and fluoride being put in the water supply.
It was a shock result considering a government survey also should Midland children are the most likely to eat sweets everyday.

No wonder they have obesity problem in the West Midlands. Forget the fluoridation train them not to eat sweets. If they can brainwash smokers to accept smoking in outside cages. Make drinking and driving taboo why not better awareness of dental health? Is it because there is a lot of fluorosilicic acid to be got rid of?

Friday, April 17, 2009

UK - Should we fluoridate Britain's water supply?

Should we fluoridate Britain's water supply?
Dr Nigel Carter, chief executive of the British Dental Health Foundation
I used to practise dentistry on the border of Birmingham, which had been fluoridated and Sandwell, which wasn't. We could tell with 100 per cent accuracy which side of the road children came from by the state of their teeth.

Invariably if we had a child whose address was Birmingham who came in with decay and we quizzed the parent we found that they had just moved into the area. Out of 100 health authorities at that time Sandwell was in the bottom quarter for oral health.

Within five years after fluoridation in 1987, it was in the top ten. It was that dramatic.
There is a lot of scientific evidence around the world in support of fluoridation and the effects that it has. In five-year-olds you are talking about a difference of one or two decayed teeth, and the difference grows as they get older.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that it is the first decay that you get that sets you up for your lifetime experience. The later that you get your first cavity the better your lifetime oral health is likely to be.

Dental decay is a disease of social disadvantage. It affects poorer people more than it affects the better off. As a result, the arguments put forward of parental responsibility are irrelevant - if you have got problems finding enough money to feed your children the last thing on your mind is replacing toothbrushes or buying fluoride toothpaste.

Fluoridating the water is a costeffective measure which in areas of high decay can give instant results.

There have been no convincing studies done to show any damaging health effects elsewhere in the body. The anti fluoridationists cite poor evidence which simply does not stand up to close examination.

The only effect is a slight increase in fluorosis of the teeth. In the early stages this is simply increased opalescence, making teeth look whiter. People often scream “fluorosis” when they see brown marks on teeth, however this is not always the cause.

There have always been brown marks on teeth which can be due to a disruption in maternal nutrition during pregnancy or illness around birth. Fluorosis is often due to children swallowing toothpaste, drinking fluoridated water and taking fluoride supplements.

We don't object to putting chlorine in the water to stop typhoid or health supplements in bread, it is mass medication, but it is an effective measure.

People forget that fluoride is not an artificial chemical - it occurs naturally in water. In some areas, such as Hartlepool, fluoride is taken out of the water because there is too much and it is necessary to reduce it to the right levels to avoid fluorosis. We are sim- ply adjusting what occurs naturally.

Nick Reeves, executive director of the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management

We object to fluoridation on ethical grounds. The Government is treating fluoride as a medication. Except in very exceptional circumstances people cannot be forced to take medication against their will.

In order to be lawful everyone would have to consent to fluoride being added to the water and not just a majority of citizens.

Consequently, this makes mass medication an illegal act that should be tested in the courts. Under the Poisons Act or the Human Rights Act people could sue the Government for forcing people to take medication against their will.

The science on fluoridation is not conclusive. There have been a number of studies around the world and the results have been mixed. Some groups have extreme concerns over the potential damage to health.

Excess fluoride can cause fluorosis of the teeth. It is true that the amounts that Government want to add to the water are tiny. But we don't know what the long-term effects are.

The Government has listened to only one side of the story. Some countries which have used fluoridated water, such as Canada, have now given up using it because they have concerns over the science.

There have been a number of conferences held by scientists and lots of research on the subject. Some say it's a good thing, others are not so sure. The long-term health effects are still unknown. So we say: “Let's err on the side of caution.”

There are alternative ways of dealing with oral health. Why not invest more money in dental healthcare free at the point of delivery? It seems a financially driven decision.

Dental healthcare has declined in recent years - people do not have easy access to it, we all know that it has become extremely difficult to find an NHS dentist. It is very much a postcode lottery.

If we are serious about improving dental healthcare let us make sure that we have good dental provision free at the point of delivery. That way everyone has the opportunity to improve their oral health, particularly in deprived areas.

Adding fluoride to the water looks like a quick fix. It is a very blunt instrument indeed and potentially a risky one, because we don't know what the long-term effects of fluoridation are.

It's not good enough to say “we have had consultations and a large number of people want fluoride in their water”. Because potentially many other people would be horrified, but they do not know about it.

A public debate needs to be held. The public does not have all the facts at its fingertips, so how can it make an informed decision?

Australia - Doctor warns against fluoridation

Doctor warns against fluoridation
An anti-fluoride campaigner says a New South Wales far south coast council should shelve a proposal to fluoridate all of the shire's drinking water.
The Bega Valley Shire Council and New South Wales Health are designing a community consultation program about fluoridation after inquiries from residents and dentists.
Drinking water in Bega, Kalaru and Tathra is already fluoridated, but the rest of the shire's water is without it.
But Dr Mark Diesendorf, from the University of NSW Institute for Environmental Studies, says the council needs to be careful how it proceeds with the consultation.
He says there is a lot of scientific evidence that fluoridation can damage bones and affect the central nervous system.
"I really think that with all the evidence against fluoridation now they should not be pushing it at all," he said.
"There's a whole range of ill effects being identified.
"At this stage in the game it is entirely irresponsible for health departments to be pushing this thing."
The council says while it recognises some sections of the community oppose fluoridation, there is strong evidence for its safety and effectiveness.

Fluoridation is safe, effective in water - he says.

Fluoridation is safe, effective in water
April 17, 2009
As of late, one can't help but notice the anti-flouridation fear-mongering articles, local forums and AOC programs cropping up in response to local efforts in finally fluoridating our community water systems. Junk science from the Internet, anecdotal remarks and studies are being utilized to instill doubt and fear into the minds of our local citizens on this very important issue.
Water fluoridation's goal is to prevent a chronic disease whose burdens particularly fall on children and on the poor. The aim of anti-"documents" is to create the illusion of scientific controversy. Often they quote statements that are out of date or out of context. Quotes from obscure or hard-to-locate journals are often used.
There are, of course, a few dentists and physicians who oppose fluoridation. Some of them object to fluoridation as a form of government intrusion, even though they know it is safe and effective. Some of the basic facts on this issue are as follows: The fluoridation of drinking water is endorsed by the American Dental Association, the American Medical Association and the U.S. Public Health Service. North American water systems have added fluoride, a naturally occurring element, to their water supplies since 1945. Since that time, child cavity rates have been reduced substantially where fluoridation has been implemented.

For more information, go to www.ada.org/public/ topics/fluoride/facts/ fluoridation_facts.pdfJ.
Jerome Smith, DDS

I like the fear mongering."promoting something undesirable or discreditable" He isn't of course.

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

Thursday, April 16, 2009

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

Documentary Double Feature

Documentary Double Feature
Laura Jacobs
Issue date: 4/15/09 Section: News
PrintEmail Article Tools Page 1 of 1 Two documentaries were screened on April 9 at Frostburg's Public Library courtesy of the president of Pure Water Committee, Bernard Miltonberger. Both documentaries provided striking insight into the things that people ingest every day, and the potential dangers in it. "Both of these films are within the mission of the Pure Water Committee and educating the public on nutrition and health," said Miltonberger. He also showed both films back to back because of their relevance to each other.
The first documentary was a short film (about a half hour long) about fluoride in water. Originally the government put fluoride in water in an attempt to help prevent tooth decay; however, as the video stated, fluoride is a dangerous toxin when ingested. It noted that fluoride is effective when applied topically to teeth, but ingesting too much can cause harm to teeth, bones, and more. The video argued for the stopping of fluoridating water with strong evidence from scientists, dentists, and health officials.
After the documentary about fluoridated water, the feature film, A Beautiful Truth, was shown. A Beautiful Truth, a play on Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, is about a young boy who seeks to find substantial evidence behind Dr. Max Gerson's theory on diet being linked to cancer and treating cancer. Depending on the viewer, it could be seen as hokey or confirm the worst of suspicions.
In the documentary, they explored fluoride in water, mercury in silver fillings, MSG in foods, as well as other processed foods. It also showed a little history behind Gerson's therapy and its benefits. Fifteen year old Garett travels the country in A Beautiful Truth, interviewing various medical authorities and supporters of the Gerson Therapy; opposing interviews seemed lacking.
While the documentary could potentially be seen as having a clear bias, it also brings up some strong points such as knowing what is in the food we eat, the dangers of too much processed food, and the benefits of eating organic.
Miltonberger felt that the truths presented in the documentaries were self evident and hoped that it might help people to try and think more about what they eat. "It affects everybody," he said. But is it relevant to the interests of FSU students? "Absolutely," Miltonberger affirmed.
He also noted that if any of the student organizations wanted to screen either film, he would be more than happy to present them. When asked if he thought this could ever be presented at FSU, Miltonberger said that it is entirely in the realm of possibility.
Any organization interested in having Miltonberger present the films at FSU can contact him at 301-689-5686.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Part 2 of 6 Former EPA scientists and others discus Water Fluoridation on the Gary Null Show

'Basic Firemanship': Hazardous material exercise hones skills

'Basic Firemanship': Hazardous material exercise hones skills
Staff Writer
PIGEON FORGE -- Firefighters from Sevier County and other surrounding areas participated in a Tennessee Emergency Management Agency Hazardous Material Exercise recently at the Pigeon Forge water plant.
"This will conclude the 80-hour portion of a very long class," said Matt Lovitt, Pigeon Forge firefighter and instructor. "It starts off as a basic firemanship class, then builds and builds. Federal law mandates that we have this so we're prepared to deal with things like unknown chemicals, big fuel leaks and acids."
Firefighters performed the exercise according to the following scenario:
A truck driver is making a delivery to the water plant and is securing his truck. When he turns the valve, he gets stung by a bee. He doesn't close the valve completely, and it results in leakage. The driver can't re-enter the area because of the strong nature of the chemical, so he calls for assistance.
"We've set up parameters, and we have a representative from the water department," Lovitt said. "Because they're much more familiar with (the chemical), we consult them and eliminate the threat."
Water Department plant operator Mike Huskey said the liquid fluoride is corrosive; if it traveled into a steam, for instance, it could kill fish and other wildlife.
"This area is a moderate threat, as far as the interstate coming through," Lovitt said. "With a major theme park and other attractions, there's always a possibility of something going awry. The more people we have trained, the better response we'll have."
Regional response trucks are like "rolling tool boxes" for responders in the community, he continued.
"We're hoping it will become a much better equipped unit," he said, pointing to a regional response truck on the scene. "We want to spread throughout the county and have a lot more people and equipment."
The suits the firefighters wear are rigid and hot, especially in warmer weather -- it's not uncommon for a participant to lose five pounds in one day from the exercise. Hand signals are learned because communication can get complicated, and numbers are taped on the back of the suits for identification.
Once participants contain and cap the leak, they move to a decontamination station where they are literally scrubbed down.
Throughout the exercise, they are judged on a point scale by five evaluators.
"This training is great -- what you're seeing is a movement of all Sevier County fire departments working together," said Pigeon Forge Fire Chief Tony Watson. "We can be better if we're working together.
"We're saving resources, saving money for the taxpayers."

Canada - Fluoride: let the people decide

Fluoride: let the people decide
Calgary HeraldApril 13, 2009 Comments (10)
Council should put the fluoride debate to the test and let the people spit out a decision as to whether it should remain in the city's drinking water.
This raging debate could be settled if Ald. Druh Farrell's call for another plebiscite is carried.
True, holding a third plebiscite in 20 years is tough for aldermen to swallow, but they should gulp it down anyway. New studies and ongoing research indicating there are medical risks from consuming too much fluoride make previous plebiscite decisions outdated.
The earlier votes on the issue were extremely close, indicating the public has always been divided on fluoride, (a chemical once used in rat poison.) In 1989, adding fluoride to drinking water passed by just 53 per cent. In 1998, it was reaffirmed by a very slight increase -- 55 per cent.
We acknowledge some demographics may reap an advantage from fluoridation, for example the children of low-income families, who do not receive regular oral care. Still, they're but a small percentage of the city's population, and there are other ways of serving those who really need it: School-wide fluoridation programs and free dental products are alternatives that could achieve the same results, while eliminating the risks to those who don't need it or want it, and would choose not to participate -- possibly with good reason.

After all, the National Kidney Foundation has changed its mind on fluoride, contending last year in an updated position paper on its web-site that there are risks to those with kidney diseases, and they need to be made aware of them. The organization believes those risks include " a rare bone disease called skeletal fluorosis, bone fractures and severe enamel fluorosis."

Bottom line: People need another opportunity to sink their teeth into the new research. Aldermen Farrell, John Mar, Brian Pincott, Jim Stevenson and Andre Chabot initially commendably pushed to remove the chemical without consulting Calgarians, but narrowly lost the motion, 7 to 6. And, perhaps Mayor Dave Bronconnier was correct when he said aldermen lacked the technical background to make the decision.

However, the public that drinks the city water still has a right to reconsider, and a plebiscite is a good compromise. (Collateral benefit: It might even increase voter turnout, nudging Calgarians out of an apathy that has been abysmal during the past few municipal elections.)

This is a tough one all right. But, either one trusts voters to choose wisely in their own interests, or one merely says one trusts them. It is, in fact, precisely the kind of issue that should be turned over to them for periodic review, if public interest warrants it.

In this case, it does seem to.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

UK - Southampton Daily Echo

USA - Fluoridation will carry big risks

The vast majority of citizens in Louisiana are unaware of the fact legislation was passed to mandate fluoridation of water supplies in every community of this beautiful but threatened state.
Most are unaware of the health risks connected to fluoridation. The controversy began in the 1950s and '60s.
If we are seeking some enlightenment on the subject, I invite everyone to go to the Internet and type in the name of Paul Connett. Dr. Connett has now retired as a professor of chemistry in St. Lawrence University in Canton, N.Y. He is a highly respected scientist and prophetic spokesperson for protection of our environment.
When his name appears on the Internet, there will 50-plus reasons for opposing fluoridation.
We need not be scientists to understand Dr. Connett's arguments.
The decision of governments to treat our water is inherently risky. If fluoride is necessary to prevent tooth decay in children, what of other threats to their well-being?
When I taught for two years in a local middle school, secretaries came into the library to dispense medications for the restless students. If fluoride is necessary for our teeth, perhaps other medications for nerves will be considered for our water supplies in the future as anxiety builds over loss of jobs and economic hardships in the 21st century.
Please read the 50 reasons and try to decide if fluoridation is what Lafayette needs in the water supply. Urge all in positions of authority to do more research.
Vic Hummert


Monday, April 13, 2009

NEW DVD: Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation (Now Available)

Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation
Are you looking for a tool to educate your city councilors, friends, and community about the problems with water fluoridation? Are you looking for a credible, science-based, yet easy-to-understand summary of the issue? If so, than look no further, as Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation was designed for that very purpose.

Featuring a Nobel Laureate in Medicine, three scientists from the National Research Council's landmark review on fluoride, as well as dentists, medical doctors, and leading researchers in the field, this professionally-produced 28-minute DVD presents a powerful indictment of the fluoridation program.

The DVD also includes four special features including Dr. Bill Osmunson's acclaimed statement on fluoride. A great resource for anyone involved in the issue.

Title #260929
Format: DVD-R