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

UK Against Fluoridation

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH FLUORIDE CAMPAIGN

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH
FLUORIDE CAMPAIGN
NEWSLETTER 31st AUGUST, 2011
UNITED KINGDOM

Members of Parliament are not Doctors and have no right to prescribe fluoride to you, let alone everyone on the Electoral Register. Water fluoridation is not legal, it doesn't work and its arguably dangerous on a number of levels. The precautionary principle would argue against all such action. If the responsibility for implementing fluoridation is transferred to your Local Council, they are not doctors either and as far as i can tell, not insured. Tell your local councillors this and remind them that your voting decisions will be determined by their responses. You may wish to remind them that their various Party Leaders also said there would be no compulsory fluoridation unless people voted for it. Like many political promises these have not been upheld by these people once they were elected. Always keep this in mind and of course remind them at every opportunity.

Southampton meeting with Paul Connett and Council meeting

Sept 2011A public talk and question time with one of the world’s leading experts on fluoridation Professor Paul Connett PhD Director of the Fluoride Action Network Emeritus Professor of Chemistry St Lawrence University, New York Saturday 10th September 2.30 - 4.30pm at the Solent University Conference Centre Above Bar St, Southampton. Please print, deliver and display where ever you can as we need as many people to attend as possible.

On the following Wednesday 14th September we again need as many people as possible to attend a Public Demonstration at the Southampton City Council Meeting.

Assemble 1pm in Guildhall Square and then attend the Council meeting in the Guildhall at 2pm.

HAF will be presenting the petition calling for the Council to withdraw its endorsement of water fluoridation

Sean McNally Speaks before PHHSC 3-22-11

Australia - Fluoride caution

Fluoride caution
MARIE LOW
31 Aug, 2011 04:00 AM
TENTERFIELD Shire Council has heard a warning about sodium fluoride being a “toxic substance” as the NSW Department of Health issues reassurances it is a safe additive for the town’s water supply.
Natural health clinician and former Tenterfield nurse Margaret Vincent made a presentation to council last week, stating sodium fluoride was not a natural substance.

“The whole world has been had, and so have you,” Mrs Vincent told council. “If a child ingests five or four tablets of sodium fluoride, it is lethal.”

Mrs Vincent said sodium fluoride was a waste product of the aluminium, fertiliser and atomic industries, and had been banned as a water additive in a number of countries, including China, which will supply Tenterfield with its fluoride.

“As a former Tenterfield resident, I fought 30 years ago to keep fluoride out of Tenterfield’s water – and now, despite 80 per cent of the town voting against it, it seems Tenterfield will be forced to have it,” she said.

Mrs Vincent said she believed Tenterfield people should refuse to pay their water rates “en masse, as it would be too hazardous, and we are being medicated against our wishes”..........

Fluoridated Kentucky traditionally has the highest rate of tooth loss among older people

Good step on dental care
12:00am on Aug 31, 2011; Modified: 1:40am on Aug 31, 2011
At a time when so many problems seem so intractable, it's good to see government take even a small step toward fixing a big problem.
The 25,000 children in Eastern Kentucky who will get flouride treatments this fall will also help University of Kentucky researchers better understand how to prevent decay.
Kentucky traditionally has the highest rate of tooth loss among older people and above-average tooth loss in all age groups. Because oral health has a huge influence on overall health, preventing decay is one way to produce healthy, productive Kentuckians.
The Appalachian Regional Commission is providing a $1 million grant and state government $250,000 to pay for flouride treatments in 16 counties.
This effort builds on another federal-state collaboration that's helping communities develop effective oral health plans, including educating parents and children, and preparing more dentists to work with kids.

We may not know how to end poverty in Appalachia but we do know how to take care of kids' teeth, and this is a step in the right direction.

UK - Daily Echo - SOAPBOX: Adding fluoride to the water

Fluoride guinea pig fears
UNSURPRISINGLY Mrs Darnell (Daily Echo, 15 August) fears that fluoride deals have been done to a prearranged plan and that we are about to be made guinea pigs for its effects.
Without doubt, many think the same. It is especially disturbing since the guinea piggery has already been done in those areas which have had fluoride forced upon them for the last half-century - whose residents ought to be pressing for consideration of their own concerns and demanding the cessation of this tampering with their most vital of all supplies.
In 2000 the BMA Complete Family Health Guide claimed: 'where fluoride is added to the water to reduce tooth decay, the concentration is too low to cause fluorosis'.
That same year, the York Review identified a significant incidence of fluorosis in fluoridated areas. In 2003 the Department of Health, in its official reassurance to the public, stated that fluorosis 'may be aesthetically unacceptable but can be removed by routine dental treatment'.
That information was modified in later pronouncements, curiously omitting to mention that the treatment is costly and not available on the National Health.
Odd that the Health Service is happy to cause the problem, but not to rectify it. This year the DH resorts to the barefaced lie that fluoridation is 'without any ill effects'.
How dare the Government authorise, the health service promote, and the water industry comply with, the addition of a
chemical known to cause dental discoloration. How dare they count as trivial this indication that other effects on the body need to be investigated thoroughly. How dare they dismiss the visible effects as 'merely cosmetic', and pretend that it is of no importance. G PAYNE, Southampton

Monday, August 29, 2011

Some fruit drinks have no fruit in them

Fruit drinks marketed with tall claims of providing hydration to children contain as little as 5 per cent fruit, while some others have none at all, health experts have claimed.
And to make matters worse, many are loaded with added sugar.
The experts found Ribena squash promotes its vitamin C content without making clear that 90 per cent of the vitamin content is artificially added to the drink because it contains such a small amount of fruit juice.
..........The report, called Soft Drinks, Hard Sell, comes after the soft drinks industry reported its highest growth rate in seven years in 2010, with UK consumption reaching 14.6billion litres annually.

"Our survey found some truly misleading marketing blatantly used to drive sales and increase children's soft drinks consumption, which contributes to tooth decay and the UK's record rates of childhood obesity," the Daily Mail quoted The Children's Food Campaign's Clare Panjwani, who wrote the report, as saying.

New fluid helps teeth regenerate themselves

Sunday, August 28, 2011

Citizens demand a Fluoride Warning at Austin City Council

USA - CURE provides dental care to 1,200

The Chicago Dental Society
CURE provides dental care to 1,200
08/26/2011
The line formed long before the sun came up Friday, Aug. 19, the first day of the three-day free healthcare clinic organized by the Westchester-based Collaborative Underserved Relief and Education Network (CURE). With support from Remote Area Medical (RAM), CURE’s volunteer dentists, physicians, ophthalmologists, nurses, hygienists, technicians and all their auxiliaries delivered care to more than 2,000 people.

“The event was so much more than I had hoped it would be,” said Josette Szalko, executive director of CURE. “We had a great group of volunteers that really stepped up. It was physically and emotionally challenging, but also a really exhilarating experience.

“We provide a dignified environment for patients. It was hard for them to come, they didn’t know what to expect and they were nervous. A lot of the people who came through weren’t expecting the level of care and compassion that they received.”

Patients queued for services long before dawn, and received numbers as the sun rose. Upon registering, professionals met with each patient to take a brief health history, and to chart the patient’s course for the day: primary care and eye clinics were in the basement, and a dental clinic occupied the main floor. Volunteers — who also began arriving before 5 a.m. — met patients at the entrance to each clinic area for an exam before sending the patient toward a professional, waiting to provide care.

“Nowhere can these people go and get all these services under one roof in one day,” Ms. Szalko said. “Yes, they had to wait throughout the day, but otherwise seeing an ophthalmologist is totally inaccessible.”

In the dental clinic, 1,200 patients received care over three days. This included 1,000 extractions, 640 fillings and 300 cleanings.....

Fluoridation is state-mandated in Illinois:NYSCOF

Saturday, August 27, 2011

UK - Daily Echo letters - Telling the tooth about fluoride paint

Telling the tooth about fluoride paint
THE Daily Telegraph reported on August 19 that the number of children having fluoride painted on their teeth has risen by 55 per cent in a year. NHS dentists carried this out on 850,000 children in England.
It is less controversial than putting fluoride into the water supply and is targeted at individuals instead of forcing everyone to drink it in tap water. Fluoride applied to teeth is effective, unlike drinking fluoridated water. Ian
Packington, Science Adviser of the National Pure Water Association (who is highly qualified) writes that fluoride varnishes do work if they are applied correctly and reapplied as necessary. They prevent decay in molar fissures, etc, before a filling becomes necessary. Once the fluoride varnish has dried, it is effectively 'sealed in' and fluoride leakage into the saliva and into the body of the child is limited and acceptable.
This is very different to drinking water fluoridation in the UK which uses impure fluoride -hexafluorosilicic acid - from the scrubbings of phosphate fertiliser factories.
This is deliberately tipped into public water supplies of people of all ages - who have not given their informed consent.
Ian writes that researcher Dr. Robert Weaver showed clearly that drinking naturally fluoridated water does not reduce tooth decay, in his comparisons between South Shields (1.25 ppm) & North Shields/Tyneside (0.25 ppm.)
A WILLS, address supplied.

I AM writing to complain about fluoride being introduced into the water.
I like many others do not want it added to our water supply. If they do I will have a solicitor waiting to sue the council for ignoring my human rights.
Why don't they supply schoolchildren with sweets or chewing gum that have fluoride added?
I do not need it for my teeth and I certainly do not want it entering my body in any shape or form.
So beware, I will sue if you go ahead with this.
NAME & ADDRESS SUPPLIED.

Friday, August 26, 2011

UK - Echo letter - Not a voting subject

Not a voting subject
WHILE I welcome Mr Willotts' comments (Letters, August 17) on putting fluoride in the water, I would point out that by asking for a referendum he is effectively saying that whatever the majority want they can have.
While this sort of vote is useful with other things of community concern, where the issue is of mass medication without consent I take issue with it. Admittedly the 'anti' side would almost definitely win - that is obvious by the number of letters appearing in the Echo - it is still, nonetheless, asking other people to decide on whether you take medication or not and should, therefore, not be the subject of a referendum. NAME & ADDRESS SUPPLIED.

Fluoride is Toxic Waste (LITERALLY) - Chris White

$1.2 million program to help 25,000 kids in E. Ky. fight tooth decay

$1.2 million program to help 25,000 kids in E. Ky. fight tooth decay
By Beth Musgrave
About 25,000 school children in 16 Eastern Kentucky counties will receive a free fluoride tooth-varnish treatment this school year in an effort to improve the region's high rate of child tooth decay.
A $1 million grant from the Appalachian Regional Commission will pay for most of the program, which will provide the fluoride varnish treatment to children in first through fifth grades in selected schools in Bell, Breathitt, Clay, Elliott, Floyd, Harlan, Jackson, Knott, Knox, Lee, Magoffin, Menifee, Owsley, Perry, Russell and Wolfe counties. The state will pay about $250,000 for the program.

Gov. Steve Beshear, speaking at a news conference at the University of Kentucky Dental School, said the program is the latest effort of an initiative he created in 2009 called Healthy Smiles Kentucky.

"We know that children learn best when they are healthy," Beshear said. "We also know that dental health is a key component of overall health."

In 2001, research showed that half of Kentucky's children had decay in their primary teeth and that nearly half of children ages 2, 3 and 4 had untreated dental problems...


Kentucky is fluoridated

14 Conspiracy Theories That the Media Now Admits Are Conspiracy Facts

14 Conspiracy Theories That the Media Now Admits Are Conspiracy Facts
End of the American Dream
#7 Fluoride Is Harmful
Incredibly, the federal government is finally admitting that high levels of fluoride in our drinking water can be harmful. In fact, the feds have reduced the "recommended amount" of fluoride in our drinking water for the first time in 50 years.


We probably won't see them ban fluoride any time soon, but for them to even acknowledge a problem with fluoride is a major step. In a recent article on CNN, it was reported that the federal government is now saying that high levels of fluoride in the water have now officially been linked with fluorosis....

The Department of Health and Human Services and Environmental Protection Agency are proposing the change because of an increase in fluorosis – a condition that causes spotting and streaking on children's teeth.

USA - Some communities in Tennessee rejecting fluoride in drinking water

Paris TN: Some communities in Tennessee rejecting fluoride in drinking water
By MELANIE HOWARD
P-I Staff Writer
Published: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:44 AM CDT
With numerous sources of fluoride now available, members of some Tennessee communities have begun to question whether the continued addition of this chemical to sources of public drinking water is still necessary.

City aldermen in Spring Hill voted last week to discontinue the addition of fluoride to their city’s water. Spring Hill joins the cities of Waynesboro and Lewisburg as the third Tennessee city to make this decision.

Addition of fluoride to drinking water is not a process mandated by Tennessee state law, John Etheridge, general manager for the Paris Board of Public Utilities, explained. It is a decision made by each individual utility company.....

Etheridge as well as Paris City Manager Carl Holder both said they had not been approached by anyone requesting that fluoride be removed from the drinking water in the city of Paris.

The practice of water fluoridation began in the United States in 1945 in an attempt to help lower the rate of cavities and tooth decay in children and adults. By 1950 it was endorsed by the Public Health Service because of the impact it had on lowering the incidence of tooth decay among those who drank the fluoridated water.

Terry Wimberley, who serves the BPU as director of the water/wastewater operations, said that in 1951, Milan was the first Tennessee city to begin adding fluoride to the water. The Paris utility company followed suit in 1952.

Nearly 60 years later, some are wondering why fluoride is still being added to the water since it is available in so many different sources.....

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Parental advice on limiting children's sugar

Parental advice on limiting children's sugar
Children will only ever develop a 'sweet tooth' on the basis of what their mum and dad have given them as treats, according to parental advice from the British Dental Health Foundation.
Dr Nigel Carter, chief executive of the charity, advised: "If your child has a drink in between meals, it is best to give them water or milk instead of sugary or acidic drinks, which can cause decay."
"If you are going to give them sugary drinks, such as squash, ensure it is diluted 10:1 parts," he added.
Offering further parental advice, Dr Carter said that savoury foods, such as cheese, are a better way of rewarding good behaviour, as they will not cause tooth decay like sugary treats..............


USA - Philomath Dentists Begin Advocating for a Return to Flouride

Philomath Dentists Begin Advocating for a Return to Flouride
But the Philomath City Council remains steadfast in its decision to keep flouride out of drinking water
By: Christen McCurdy
August 24, 2011--The two doctors who spearheaded the effort to add fluoride to Philomath's drinking water 25 years ago are now taking action to bring it back.
Dr. David Grube said the group – which doesn't have a name yet – will meet next Monday with the intention of putting the issue before the public to decide upon.
“The city took a straw poll, and of the respondents, 70 percent said they did want fluoride in the water, and yet the city council ignored them,” Grube said.
At its Aug. 8 meeting, the Philomath City Council announced that the city would stick to its earlier decision to de-fluoridate the water supply. The council originally voted on the issue in May and has since received numerous public comments on the issue.
City manager Randy Kugler said the city had been adding hydrofluosilicic acid to treat its drinking water, and did not replace it after using up the last canister in June. He declined to comment on the issue.
Philomath mayor Ken Schaudt was not available for comment for this story, and did not respond to the Lund Report's requests for comment for a previous story on this issue.
The Aug. 8 meeting minutes have not yet been posted to the city's website. According to an article in the Corvallis Gazette-Times, Schaudt read a list of 10 reasons he stuck by his prior vote to discontinue the use of fluoride in drinking water – chief among them freedom of choice, as well as environmental concerns and the potential unknown health effects of fluoride.

“He ignored all the doctors in town and the scientists,” Grube said of Schaudt. “He also said he didn't think the citizens of the community were smart enough to be able to vote on it.”..........

Comments
Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 08/24/2011 - 19:01.
Please let your community know WHICH of "all the doctors in town and the scientists" has ever run a test on any single one of the community "patients" (because you're all patients if you're all being medicated), to follow up for possible fluoride overload. Please let your community know where the tests were run. The community should understand that there is NO way to obtain a simple, accurate, routine test for fluoride to determine if one has an overload of it, and there are no doctors following fluoride levels. Please let your community also know that there are two tests that are commonly used to determine fluoride levels in water. One is ISE, which is cheap and inaccurate. The other is Ion Chromatography, which is expensive and will give accurate readings of fluoride, in excess of 100 mg/L of the ISE testing.
Mary Sparrowdancer



Canada - FAN thanks fans of fluoride-free water

FAN thanks fans of fluoride-free water
By Ayesha Drouillard, The Windsor Star August 24, 2011 Re: Foes of fluoride have their say at meeting, by Vincent McDermott, Aug. 18.

Members of our local Fluoride Action Network would like to thank all the people who attended our first meeting as well as all those who have shown interest and have offered to help make our collective vision of a water supply free of hydrofluorosilicic acid come true. We are delighted and overwhelmed by all the positive responses and great ideas we have received. We would also like to take this opportunity to thank The Windsor Star for bringing attention to this very important cause, which affects everyone in Windsor, Lasalle and Tecumseh....


Canada - What comes after fluoride? Chlorine?

What comes after fluoride? Chlorine?
By Dr. Pasquale Duronio, The Windsor Star August 24, 2011
The lunatics have escaped from the asylum. The Fluoride Action Network has arrived in Windsor.
What amazes me is that this "discussion" (read: fear mongering) still goes on. Brantford, Ont., was the first community in the world with fluoridated water in the early '50s.
I wonder: Why aren't they all dead from cancer? Surely, there must be a rational explanation. It must be a plot when scientists proclaim that there is no connection between fluoridated drinking water and osteosarcoma.
Since it is an invasion of the rights of Windsorites to add fluoride to drinking water, then it must be so when chlorine is added. The chlorine must go!.........

That's nice, we are all lunatics.

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

USA - Fluoride Issues #2

Monday, August 22, 2011

Don't Swallow Your Toothpaste - Health Alert



Old video but worth seeing again

USA - In fluoridated Georgia


In fluoridated Georgia (Atlanta & Woodstock) 4,000 people show up to get dental care - extractions, root canals, fillings, etc. Americans continue to be dentist-deficient and fluoride overdosed:NYSCOFmsnbc.com Video Player

Pediatricians advise parents of young children that they should manage cavity prevention as they would battle any chronic illness

ABCDisease
By Neena Santija
....While cavities are on the decline in the general population, they are a fact of life for increasing numbers of young children, according to the Centers for Disease Control. They affect 10 percent of 2-year-olds and over half of 5-year-olds, causing everything from minor toothaches to missed school days to complications that require major surgery. But dentists say few people realize that cavities are symptoms of dental caries, the most common chronic disease in children today, according to the CDC.
Caries is caused by a transmissible bacteria that produces acids in the mouth when we eat anything with carbohydrates, including sugary or starchy foods. Those acids dissolve the teeth, and without good oral health practices, they can lead to tooth decay - cavities. But cavities are preventable if the underlying caries is managed.
“Because it’s chronic, and because it’s a condition that is caused by bacteria, you can actually, as a patient, stop the disease process if you know what to do,’’ said Dr. Man Wai Ng, a pediatric dentist at Children’s Hospital Boston. “And you can actually prevent it from starting.’’

Ali and Jeannette Wicks-Lim weren’t aware of that when they brought their toddler, Mason, to the dentist for the first time after noticing signs of decay on one of his upper teeth. “I think it had almost started to look chipped,’’ Ali Wicks-Lim said.

They were shocked to find he had eight cavities. They never gave him candy or soda, and they brushed his teeth twice a day....

Mason may not have been eating sugary snacks, but he was eating crackers throughout the day. Because he wasn’t brushing his teeth after each snack, the constant presence of carbohydrates in his mouth fueled the bacteria and acid production.



Sunday, August 21, 2011

90 Year-Old Powerful Natural Cancer Therapy You've Probably Never Heard Of



If you have the time it is very interesting.

Kidneys and Fluoride Revisited #4

My local city council needs to know that fluoridating water has serious implications to people's health. In my case, my kidneys have suffered markedly because of fluoride.

Based on the rate of kidney decline I'd been experiencing, if I hadn't gotten off all sources of fluoride 16 months ago, in 4 months I'd be starting kidney dialysis. Fluoridated water damages low functioning kidneys and even can cause kidney disease.

Saturday, August 20, 2011

UK - Daily Echo - So many unanswered fluoride questions ...

So many unanswered fluoride questions ...

FOLLOWING the Southern Central Strategic Health Authority's (SHA) recent admission in the Daily Echo on August 8 that they do not know the areas that will receive fluoridated water or the costs involved, we thought
people would like further examples of their ignorance.
We are particularly concerned about the rise in the fluoride concentration when water is boiled and re-boiled which happens in many cooking processes.
Here are the answers to some of the questions we put to the SHA in a letter:
Q. If I reboil water in a kettle how much will the fluoride concentration increase by?
A. The SHA does not have information on this and is therefore unable to answer this question.
Q. Will boiling vegetables in fluoridated water increase my fluoride intake?
A. It is likely there will be an increase in fluoride.
Q. What is the ppm of fluoride in a standard cup of tea made using fluoridated water?
A. The SHA does not have information on this and is therefore unable to answer this question. Please note however, that tea does contain fluoride but different brands contain varying amounts.
Q. What is the bioaccumulation rate of fluoride ingested by drinking water?
A. The SHA does not have information on this and is therefore unable to answer this question.
This last question is extremely important as fluoride is an enzyme inhibitor and therefore effects many bodily functions especially the thyroid.
We have written to our local councillors, MPs and to the PM and although sympathetic, they say they are powerless to stop the SHA - democracy indeed!
DR & MRS WILLIAMS,

Lordswood, Southampton.
• I HOPE the article (Daily Echo, August 8) on fluoride will be read by the SHA with an open mind. They are so bent on making us guinea pigs I think they could not have studied in detail the affect physically. It's not only drinking it, its bathing and some people have skin complaints. Others have to drink plenty (aren't we all supposed to) for very serious health reasons, won't they be overdosed?
How will overdose affect us? It is not just about teeth and isn't it about time parents took responsibility? Children don't do water! As a last resort cannot they be taught teeth hygiene at nursery school?
NAME & ADDRESS SUPPLIED

Friday, August 19, 2011

UK - Shake up pours cold water on fluoride plans

Shake up pours cold water on fluoride plans
19th Aug 2011
A senior MP has held talks with health ministers amid growing fears that a looming shake-up will make it harder to add fluoride to tap water in more parts of England.
Sir Paul Beresford, the chairman of the all-party parliamentary group for dentistry, said he had put a 'robust' case that the changes will set back the campaign, despite the promise of huge benefits for children's teeth.
The concern flows from the flagship Health and Social Care Bill, which will axe the ten strategic health authorities (SHAs) next year, as the government wages war on NHS 'bureaucracy'.
Responsibility for public health matters – including fluoridation – will then pass to local authorities, which are expected to be far more reluctant to act.
In the recent example of attempts to fluoridate in the Southampton area, most councils in Hampshire came out against adding the chemical to tap water supplies.
Sir Paul said: 'I had a meeting at the department of health because there are real concerns that the changes in the Bill will fluoridation less likely in the future.
'I would like ministers to listen to those concerns and think again about making local councils responsible before the legislation returns to the Commons.'
That return is just weeks away, because the Health Bill is – controversially – due to be pushed through the Commons in just two days, on September 6 and 7.
The legislation was expected to face months of delay – after David Cameron was forced to set up a review group and promise 'significant changes', amid a fierce public backlash.
But, despite the almost unprecedented step of returning the Bill to its committee stage, scores of amendments were debated in the days before the start of the summer recess – clearing the way for the Bill's final Commons stages next month.
Ministers have accepted that the new role for local councils offers 'hope' to opponents of fluoridation, even while extolling the benefits of the chemical.
In May, health minister Anne Milton told MPs that fluoridation led to a 15% increase in the proportion of children without tooth decay, 'on the best available evidence'.
Meanwhile, Southampton is to get its water supply fluoridated – despite the local protests – after a High Court judge rejected a final appeal against the decision not to allow a judicial review.

It means South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) can move ahead with the scheme, which will affect nearly 200,000 people in parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams.

Other health authorities had put their own fluoridation schemes on hold, pending the outcome of the Hampshire case.

55 per cent rise in children having fluoride varnish treatment

55 per cent rise in children having fluoride varnish treatment
The number of children having fluoride painted onto their teeth in a bid to tackle tooth decay has risen by 55 per cent in a year.
By Martin Beckford, Health Correspondent
Official figures show NHS dentists in England carried out almost 850,000 fluoride varnish treatments on young people in 2010-11, representing 8 per cent of all child treatments.

The number of such treatments for adults also rose by 22 per cent, to 335,000, data from the NHS Information Centre show.

Fluoride varnish, now backed by the Department of Health as safe and effective for all children, is increasingly being used by dentists as a longer-lasting form of protection against tooth decay than toothbrushing.
It is also less controversial than putting fluoride, which protects tooth enamel from the bacteria in plaque, into the water supply.

USA - lawsuit against Metropolitan Water District

Ventura County is among plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Metropolitan Water District
By Kim Lamb Gregory
Ventura County Star
Posted August 18, 2011 at 5:38 p.m.
An advocacy group called Citizens for Safe Drinking Water is suing Southern California's largest water wholesaler with claims that consumers in Ventura, San Diego and Los Angeles counties are being medicated without their consent.

At issue is a fluoride compound called hydrofluosilicic acid, which the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California uses in the water supply to help prevent dental disease.

"Whereas the government can do something to require us to be medicated, they can't medicate us with an unapproved substance," said La Jolla attorney Kyle Nordrehaug, who is representing Citizens for Safe Drinking Water on a pro bono basis. He filed the lawsuit Aug. 9 in U.S. District Court, Southern District of California,

The group's national director, Jeff Green, explained in a news release that the lawsuit is not trying to prove hydrofluosilicic acid is safe or unsafe for human consumption. Their point is that it hasn't been tested or approved for safety or effectiveness by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.....

USA - Fluoridation raises important questions

Fluoridation raises important questions
Published: Thursday, August 18, 2011
A recent look at cost, effectiveness and side effects of fluoridating drinking water supplies evokes memories of the fluoridation wars of the 1950s and '60s.

While we hope it doesn't result in total elimination of a proven tooth-decay preventive, we acknowledge that elimination indeed might be the result.

Mount Clemens' City Commission voted recently to stop fluoridating the city's water supply as soon as it uses up its remaining supply of the fluoride compound. Although many pushed for elimination on grounds that it is or may be harmful, one commissioner cited elimination of the $40,000 annual cost.

Fluoride is present naturally in most ground water. Cities, starting with Grand Rapids in 1945, began adding it to water systems after it was shown that it substantially reduces tooth decay. A range of 0.7 to 1.2 parts per million was considered suitable; Detroit began adding it to the regional water system at the rate of 1 part per million in the mid-1960s.

It was controversial then, as in most communities. Proposals to fluoridate were put on many ballots, and defeated often. High concentrations of fluoride were known to cause mottling and pitting of teeth and were suspected in bone ailments as well.

Opponents of fluoridation say the presence of fluoride in toothpaste and some foods and bottled water now justify eliminating it from water supplies.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and American Dental Association continue to promote its use, and few challenge fluoride's effectiveness in preventing tooth decay.

Nevertheless, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has proposed decreasing the amount of fluoride to drinking water to 0.7 parts per million, the lower limit of the current range.

The Department cites the increasing amount of fluoride from toothpaste and other sources along with an increasing amount of mostly low-level pitting of teeth in adolescents and evidence that there is no decay prevention from concentrations over 0.7 parts per million.......

Why is the SCSHA going to put 1ppm in the water?

Lymington Times - Wafer firm admits NHS fluoride plan may miss out some areas

Wafer firm admits NHS fluoride plan may miss out some areas
THE planned fluoridation of Southampton's waiter supply, which will affect around 8,000 Totton residents, may not reach all of the intended areas of the scheme, it has emerged.
The South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) gave its approval in 2009 for the chemical to be added to the city's supply after the local primary care trust said it was needed to combat child tooth decay.
But in a letter responding to.a query about dosing stations, a senior customer relations adviser at Southern Water wrote: "Depending upon the location of this dosing system it is most likely that not all the areas identified in the schemes of the feasibility study .will actually receive a fluoridated supply."
The controversial scheme had been on hold for two years pending the outcome of a judicial review challenge to the SHA's decision to back the plans, but High Court judges backed the authority.
Before the SHA board voted unanimously in February 2009 to approve the scheme, a feasibility report suggested fluoride could be added at two dosing stations —- an existing water plant at Otterbourne and a new station in Rownhams:
A spokeswoman for the SHA told the 'A&T' it was continuing with its plan to add the chemical to the supply by 2013.
She added: "The SHA has formally requested that Southern Water increases the fluoride content of the water that it supplies to premises
within the area covered by the proposed scheme.
"The , SHA is working with Southern Water on developing an implementation plan which will be shared with key stakeholders.
"We are still working on the timetable [and it] is our aim to complete implementation in 2013 — however, we do not yet have a specific implementation date.
"The actual location of the dosing system has yet to be finalised and that will determine the precise areas that will receive fluoridated water.
"The board unanimously decided that the health benefits outweigh all of the arguments against water fluoridation for the population described in the consultation and remains confident with this decision.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

UK _ Daily Echo - In my view

In my view by Mrs Kinchington
Why is this being forced upon us?
SO water bosses have admitted that fluoride will not be delivered to all the areas expected under the Scheme planned for Hampshire, so it may not reach these poorer areas that the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) are supposed to be aiming at then ('Fluoride: Children with worst teeth may not get it', Daily Echo, August 8).
It all is getting too ridiculous for words. Also the SHA apparently doesn't even know how much it is all going to cost. Why not? They have had long enough to work it out. I do know that it will be a high cost to people's health if this goes into our water.
This scheme should never go ahead and should now be scrapped completely. Our water is our lifeline and the SHA should just leave well alone. They just seem to want to push this through not given a thought about our health. All they keep saying is that it is for children's teeth and they don't
even know how they are going to get it to the children that they are supposed to be aiming it at.
Can I ask if they have anything to go into the water for stress because a lot of people are suffering from stress because of this proposed scheme, and if this does go in what else will be treated through our water supply?
Also the SHA are using the word "treating". Well, in my view when you treat something it becomes a medicine and they have no right to make us all drink this fluoride for the sake of a few children's teeth that they can't even target.
If they are concerned about children's teeth then put cod Infer oil capsules and milk back into schools. When I was a kid every morning we took a cod liver oil capsule and half a pint of milk for strong teeth and bones. My teeth and many others are still good.
This scheme is flawed in a lot of ways and if this goes ahead it will surely go down as a scandalous waste of money and a sheer waste of time and a health hazard for all of Southampton and surrounding areas.
SHA, I'm afraid you haven't done your homework on fluoride. You just seem to want it in without a care what it does to the rest of our bodies.
We deserve to be heard and treated with respect so please hear and respect our wishes.
We the public do not want your fluoride.

FAN Newsletter

Last week we told you about the victory in Philomath, Oregon, where the city council voted 6-1 to end fluoridation after holding several public hearings and being criticized by members of the dental and medical community.
Well, the momentum continues to build as another North American community has ended the fluoridation of its drinking water. On Monday, the city council of Spring Hill, Tennessee unanimously rejected fluoridation due to the cost and concerns raised about the health risks associated with ingesting fluoride.
Lets keep the momentum building! Start an infant warning campaign in your community, or use this guide to begin organizing your own local campaign to end fluoridation.

Three Lawsuits in the Works

Three lawsuits have been filed recently in the U.S. that could have a major impact on the fluoridation debate.
The first lawsuit is in Clallam County, Washington. On April 28, Protect the Peninsula's Future, Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, and Eloise Kailin filed suit in superior court against the cities of Forks and Port Angeles, Washington, noting that the fluoride chemicals being used matched the definition for prescription drugs. The suit alleges that the cities lacked the necessary permits for dispensing these drugs. Plaintiffs requested that the practice be halted under search and seizure statutes until permits were obtained. The request was denied by the superior court, but a review by the State Supreme Court was requested and the court's review decision is currently pending.

The second lawsuit was filed by an individual, Patrick Reeners, of Gallatin, Tennessee on July 19, 2011 in the general sessions court of Sumner County. The suit is against the American Dental Association (ADA), and the complaint was served on the organization's President, Dr. Raymond Gist, DDS. The charge is fraud, false advertising and willful harm. Reeners believes the promotion of water fluoridation as "safe and effective" was never approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). He believes the ADA makes this claim while failing to recognize and fairly report on harmful cumulative contributions of fluoride from multiple non-water sources of fluoride.
Reeners believes that fluoride is portrayed on the Association's website as a totally desirable and harmless means of preventing tooth decay. In particular, Reeners believes that the fluoride additive is promoted as if drinking water provided an appropriate dosage, which might be true if you could control total water consumption. However, people also ingest significant doses of fluoride from many other sources such as food, beverages, dental products, and medication. The suit alleges that the general public is ill-informed of the amounts of fluoride on or in most of these products. For example, brewed black tea reportedly tested at more than three parts per million (ppm) fluoride, three times the one ppm of fluoridated drinking water. White grape juice was reported at 2.7 ppm (EPA report #820-R-10-015 Dec. 2010, page 26).
The third lawsuit was filed on August 9th, 2011 by multiple individual plaintiffs on behalf of the general public interest. The suit was filed in the federal District Court, Southern District of California, against the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), which serves some 17 million consumers. The suit alleges willful misrepresentation, deceptive business practices, and infringements on the consumer's constitutional right to be free of bodily intrusion without their consent. This lawsuit challenges the MWD's claims of safely and effectively reducing tooth decay while delivering a drug that has not been approved for MWD's claims for intended use. It alleges that MWD knowingly failed to inform the public and water recipients of the drug's unapproved status or give notice of evidence of significant potential harms from hydrofluorsilicic acid, which would require a full FDA review, approval process, and notice of any contraindications.
Plaintiffs point to the unique health effects of hydrofluorosilicic acid, which when compared to sodium fluoride, have a disproportionate toxic effect on children, and the fact that consumers are unable to prevent absorption of the chemical through their skin during baths and showers.
These three lawsuits insist on better protection of the public health by application of existing laws.


Wednesday, August 17, 2011

UK - Daily Echo letters

Majority's wishes are being ignored
'WATER is life, don't let it kill you'.
We as responsible parents and citizens of Southampton have a duty to protect our children and families from the fluoride which the South Central Strategic Health Authority are determined to administer to our drinking water. Despite the great fluoride Daily Echo debate and the many letters of protest, they have ignored the wishes of the majority. My son will not be part of the
experiment. I will do all that I can to protect him and future generations. I call on MPs John Denham and Alan Whitehead, and also council leader Royston Smith, to demand a referendum. For their employers -3,600 professional people - cannot be wrong in calling for an end to artificial water fluoridation. AWILLOTT, Lordswood, Southampton.

• FLUORIDE is to be introduced into our water supply for what can only be medical reasons.
The medication of adults can only be done with informed consent. We do NOT give that consent.
Why dose a whole population with a toxic substance that will perhaps benefit only a few children?
The dental health of young children is the responsibility of their parents.
H & M COX, Chandler's Ford.

• IN reply to the article in the Daily Echo, August 8 - do NOT put fluoride in our water.
Why should we be forced to drink and pay for medication we do not want?
MRS M TOWNSEND, Southampton.

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Most toothpastes carry health warning: unfit for use by kids

Most toothpastes carry health warning: unfit for use by kids
Aug 16, 2011 | Age Correspondent| Hyderabad.
The next time you buy toothpaste, make sure to read the fineprint on the box, particularly if you have children below 12 years at home. This is because toothpaste, though it seems quite harmless, carries a health warning for children.
A reading of the fineprint will reveal that most toothpaste brands are not meant for children below six years of age and some are not recommended for children up to 12 years. It is better to choose toothpastes exclusively meant for children, but even these caution that they are not meant for children below five years.
“We take it for granted that toothpaste is for the entire family. But in most cases it is not so. The type of toothpaste we choose should depend on the quantum of the dental problem we suffer. Certain toothpastes are not meant for children who do not know how to spit out the excess paste and tend to swallow it. Toothpastes containing chemicals cause mineralisation and they are absorbed by body. There should always be adult supervision if toothpaste is used for small children,” says Dr M. Rahmatullah, chairman of the Indian Academy for Advanced Dental Education.
According to him, children below six years may be given a “pea size” quantity of toothpaste and not the usual “two centimetre” quantity. Moreover, brushing should always be under adult supervision and the children should be made to spit out the toothpaste.
Dr Rahmatullah also cautions that toothpaste containing fluoride and meant for sensitive teeth or whitening teeth should not be given to children.....

USA - Taking it in the teeth

Taking it in the teeth
There's not enough help for low-income people with dental problems in Charlotte
it in the teeth
Charlotte, NC: "Every Friday at sunrise, dozens of people in Charlotte line up at the Urban Ministry Center. They're waiting to take part in a lottery.

The winners get their teeth pulled.

This is how dental care works sometimes for people in Charlotte who can't afford a dentist."

In fluoridated Charlotte:NYSCOF

USA - City leaders voted unanimously Monday to quit adding fluoride to city water.

SPRING HILL — City leaders voted unanimously Monday to quit adding fluoride to city water.
Alderman Amy Wurth asked the Board of Mayor and Aldermen for the change, saying that not all city residents may need the supplement because it appears in many more sources than it did in 1945, when fluor- idation began as a way to reduce dental decay.
Twelve states and the District of Columbia require fluoride use in public water systems. In Tennessee, community water systems make that decision locally.
Of the 479 community water systems in Tennessee, 303 add fluoride, according to TDEC’s Division of Water Supply.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services plans to lower the recommended level of fluoride in drinking water for the first time in nearly 50 years to reduce the possibility of children receiving too much fluoride.

— Jill Cecil Wiersma
The Tennessean

Monday, August 15, 2011

Fluoride Hurts Your Bones and Your Health

Fluoride Hurts Your Bones and Your Health
From an increase of fracture risk, in particular hip fractures as studies show, to the current hypothyroidism epidemics, to name a few, fluoride supplementation to prevent tooth decay has been and still is a controversial topic.

And it’s not as though its addition to tap water can be directly linked to cavity reduction. It is quite obvious that there has been a clear increase in good oral health habits in the past decades. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) already acknowledged years ago that fluoride’s “predominant” effect is after teeth have erupted (permanent teeth) and topical. So there’s no reason to ingest fluoride.....

Fluoride: Disposing of Mining Waste Through Your Body

Fluoride: Disposing of Mining Waste Through Your Body
The Human Costs of Forced Filtration
Published Monday, August 15, 2011 2:30 am
by John Rehill
BRADENTON -- August 13 ended Fluoride Awareness Week and promotion of the documentary with numerous health experts and scientists describing examples of many maladies caused by intake of the phosphate mining/fertilizer industry's hazardous waste. The documentary is available for free viewing on line here.
The maladies from this forced pollution of your body include (but aren’t limited to) lowered IQ, impaired mental development (brain retardation) and dementia; damage to your kidneys, pineal and thyroid glands resulting in hyperactivity and/or lethargy, chronic fatigue and disrupted immune system; arthritic symptoms and digestive tract (gastrointestinal) problems. See the Fluoride Action Network for more information about professional perspectives on fluoridation and the countless catastrophic health impacts from dumping hazardous waste in our municipal water.



I’m sorry to break the news that those aren’t the only costs you’ll be incurring as one of the enslaved filtration and disposal dump sites for the phosphate mining/fertilizer industry. Unfortunately the free preview of the fluoride awareness video didn’t begin by explaining that approximately 50 years ago, the phosphate mining industry discovered an alternative to paying billions of dollars to dispose of the highly toxic hydrofluosilicic acid industrial waste product (also known as fluorosilicic acid) from producing phosphate rock fertilizer. That alternative was to SELL the hazardous waste to municipalities throughout the U.S. to be dumped into our municipal water supplies, generating billions of dollars of income for the industry on the backs of those citizens' health. An earlier source was waste from nuclear weapons.
This would be like your municipality paying you to pick up your garbage then dumping it in the local stream!
The Manatee County Utility Department confirmed that its residents are paying more than $86,000 annually (in addition to what incorporated parts of the county pay) for hazardous waste from the phosphate mining/fertilizer industry to be dumped into the municipal water supply. And this dumping has continued for many years. Such financial government waste sounds like a juicy morsel for the Tea Party!
How were municipalities throughout the U.S. convinced to pay the industry billions of dollars to dump its hazardous neurotoxin, described by Dartmouth College research scientist Dr. Roger Masters as "potentially the worst environmental poison since leaded gasoline, into our public water supplies and bottled water?" You’ll have to wait for my FLUORIDEGATE sequel for that mystery and intrigue.
Meanwhile, the short answer involves claims that forced “mass-medication” with this hazardous industrial waste product would prevent tooth decay. Despite these claims, none of the municipalities, agencies or dentists promoting fluoridation of water supplies contacted in preparation for this article produced a single peer-reviewed publication of results from any toxicological studies supporting those claims.
The lack of any support for these claims from published toxicological studies is the basis of a lawsuit filed on August 9, in the midst of Fluoride Awareness Week. The suit was filed against the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the largest water wholesaler in that area on behalf of millions of citizens and water consumers in San Diego, Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, California. The suit alleges willful misrepresentation and deceptive business practices by the water supplier for “delivering a hydrofluosilicic acid drug through their water system that has never been approved for safety and effectiveness, nor in the expected dosages delivered by MWD through retail water districts, either topically, systemically through ingestion, or trans-dermal exposures through baths and showers.”
The basis of the suit is that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the only government entity with the authority to approve claims of safety and effectiveness for products intended to treat and prevent disease, but that the FDA has never approved mass-medication via fluoridation of the public water supply as a treatment for, or prevention of, dental disease. Jeff Green, National Director of Citizens for Safe Drinking Water and spokesperson for the Plaintiffs, summarized the suit as follows: "Don’t tell us, or the media, or the court how safe it is. Go tell it to the FDA through the evaluation process and get approval for the claims for the specific product you deliver, and don’t administer it to us topically, systemically through our ingestion, or through our skin from our baths and showers, without our consent until you do."
Yes, that’s correct - even if you spend hundreds of dollars buying a reverse osmosis filter to install at your sink or a portable Berkey Filter to remove this hazardous waste from the water you drink, you and your family still will absorb it through your skin when you shower and bathe. Whole-house filters to remove this hazardous waste from water you bathe and shower in are even more expensive and still won’t prevent you from being the hazardous waste dump-site of the phosphate mining/fertilizer industry. Your body still will be contaminated by fluoride if you ingest commercial beverages, food, toothpaste and other dental products.
And your costs and impacts don’t stop there. The surprising part of the Fluoride Awareness documentary preview was the Sierra Club representative’s comments. He failed to mention any of the countless environmental impacts of uncontrolled mass-disposal of this hazardous waste into our nation’s streams, lakes and oceans via discharges of fluoridated municipal water. The Sierra Club claims “We are America's largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization. Inspired by nature…” and that its magazine is “for people who care deeply about nature.” So where is the deep caring about nonhuman organisms in the water environments being used by the phosphate mining/fertilizer industry to dump this hazardous waste as municipal water discharge without any monitoring or regulation? Stay tuned for more details about your costs for forced filtration and disposal of hazardous waste from the phosphate mining/fertilizer industry and how you can become an abolitionist.

UK - Daily Echo - So much for 'power to local people'

So much for 'power to local people'
AM I alone in thinking that we, the long suffering public and soon to be guinea pigs, have been wasting time and effort in the fluoride debate?
I am convinced that the outcome was already predetermined and "all roads would lead to Rome" and the government.
In September 20081 received a letter from the SHA acknowledging my response to their consultation and that all responses would be independently analysed by Bristol University and a final decision would follow in February 2009. (made of course by the SHA) No surprise at their perverse decision.
In July 2010, after writing many letters etc. to various sources, I wrote to Mrs Cameron in the vain.hope that being a mother herself and knowing the risks involved if babies were given fluoridated water, she might have a word with her husband, making him aware of local concerns.
The response from her office said she had no powers (as a private, unelected citizen) to intervene in government policy.
In June 20111 wrote to Southern Water expressing my disgust that as a private co. and knowing the legitimate concerns of their customers, they were going ahead with this unholy scheme.
They replied that under the Water Act 2003 the law required that if the SHA requested them to dose fluoride, then by law they must do so.
I then wrote to a local councillor at the Civic Centre and was informed that the SHA would be defunct in 2012 and it would be up to any new administration to "try and put matters right".
Now the government has extended the life of the SHA by 12 months. It begs the question: Why?
Has some behind the scenes deal been done with industry to enable the toxic waste hexafluorisilic acid to be disposed of via our water system?
So much for Mr Cameron's "power to local people" platitudes. Incidentally, it is interesting that some fluoride toothpastes advise that where fluoride is in the water, parents of children under six should consult a dentist before allowing them to use it!
What dangers lurk for the rest of us?
MRS M DARNELL, Southampton.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

The Daily Activity Every Middle Aged Woman Should Beware of

By The Fluoride Action Network
It has been established that fluoride has the ability to alter your endocrine function, yet this fact is being ignored by the agencies and associations that continue to promote the practice of water fluoridation.
According to a 2006 report by the National Research Council of the National Academies1 , fluoride is "an endocrine disruptor in the broad sense of altering normal endocrine function."
This altered function can involve your thyroid, parathyroid, and pineal glands, as well as your adrenals, pancreas, and pituitary.
Your thyroid gland and its associated hormones are responsible for maintaining your body's overall metabolic rate, and for regulating normal growth and development. As all metabolically active cells require thyroid hormone for proper functioning, disruption of this system can have a wide range of effects on virtually every system of your body. Thyroid dysfunction is considered among the most prevalent of endocrine diseases in the United States........

Prevention the key to reducing veterinary bills

...Focus on oral hygiene habits. By the age of three, 80 percent of dogs and 70 percent of cats show signs of gum disease. Infections that begin in the gums can spread to major organs with grave consequences, particularly with the heart and kidneys. The first line of defense against gum disease is regular tooth brushing. Make sure you use a soft brush designed for pets, and toothpaste formulated for pets. Human toothpaste with fluoride can be toxic to pets. Your veterinarian will instruct you as to how to get started.....

And humans.

USA - Spring Hill rethinks fluoride in water

Spring Hill rethinks fluoride in water
Alderman will push to end additive use
Intended to protect teeth, fluoride may crop up in more places than consumers realize.
It’s in canned goods, soft drinks and bottled water — sources that didn’t include the supplement in 1945 when community water fluoridation began as a way to reduce dental decay, Spring Hill Alderman Amy Wurth said.
She’s asking city leaders on Monday to vote on a resolution that would end the city’s practice of adding it to city water.
Residents like Richard Hinman are eager for the change.
“For me, when I take a shower, I don’t want to bathe in sodium fluoride,” he said. “I don’t want to cook with sodium fluoride. I actually spend a lot of money on filters to get it out of my water supply.”..........

USA - Oral health warrants clinical concern

Dental Care for Young Children
Oral health warrants clinical concern
By Stacie Zais, RN, BSN, FNP-S
August 6, 2011
One of the largest unmet health needs in the United States is dental care for children. Dental caries is the most common chronic disease of childhood. Approximately 60% of U.S. children experience caries in their primary teeth by age 5, and by age 17, 78% of children have caries.

After 66+ years of water fluoridation and 55+ years of fluoridated toothpaste: NTSCOF

Saturday, August 13, 2011

Calif. water district sued over fluoridation program

Calif. water district sued over fluoridation program
By DrBicuspid Staff
August 12, 2011 -- The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) is allegedly using an unapproved drug to fulfill its water fluoridation program, according to a lawsuit filed August 9 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California (Case No. 11-cv-01765-JLS-BLM).
The lawsuit, filed by four Southern California residents "on behalf of themselves and the general public," alleges that MWD is injecting hydrofluosilicic acid into the water supply for the purpose of treating disease and dental caries. It also alleges that hydrofluosilicic acid has never been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval for the treatment of disease or dental caries.

"The MWD's use of an unapproved drug to medicate plaintiffs and other persons in order to forcibly treat disease and dental caries without their consent violates the Constitutional rights of these citizens and violates the Food and Drug Administration Act," the lawsuit states.

The industrial-grade hydrofluosilicic acid that the MWD uses is a byproduct of fertilizer production and should not be confused with different fluoride compounds, such as calcium fluoride or sodium fluoride, that are naturally occurring or already approved for certain uses, according to the complaint. Fluoridation is typically accomplished by adding one of three compounds to the water: sodium fluoride, fluorosilicic acid, or sodium fluorosilicate.

"MWD has chosen to medicate the plaintiffs with an unapproved drug without their consent that is not produced with controlled manufacturing practices and consistencies in impurities, and analyses of hydrofluosilicic acid indicate contamination of the unapproved drug with dangerous impurities, including lead and arsenic, and varying amounts of cadmium, mercury, beryllium, and other contaminants," the lawsuit states.

In addition, the plaintiffs claim that MWD has made public declarations that it intended to add fluoride to the water to safely and effectively treat and prevent dental disease, and then, "in a classic bait and switch, selected and initiated use of an unapproved drug to fulfill that intention."

The plaintiffs are not seeking monetary damages but are calling for the product to be thoroughly evaluated and approved before continuing to expose consumers without their consent, according to their attorney, Kyle Nordrehaug.

"This case does not challenge the public policy of fluoridation," Nordrehaug stated in a press release. "It does challenge MWD's bait-and-switch tactics of orchestrating statements by them and their down-line distributors of water to individual consumers when MWD knew that the actual drug product that they deliver had never had a toxicological study performed on the health and behavioral effects of its continued use until 2010, much less approval for MWD's perpetuation of absolute health claims."

Friday, August 12, 2011

USA - Consumer Alert on Water Fluoridation:

Consumer Alert on Water Fluoridation: 41% of American Teenagers Have This Disease
August 11, 2011
The CDC, ADA, and local health officials continue to promote fluoridation even though just this January, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recommended a nation-wide reduction in fluoride levels. This was after it learned that 41 percent of American adolescents, ages 12-15, have dental fluorosis, a clear sign of overexposure to fluoride, and that the rate is continuing to increase steadily...........This year in New Hampshire and Arkansas, citizen groups got legislation introduced at the state-level which would require notices on all municipal water bills warning parents not to feed infants fluoridated water. Citizens in Tennessee, led by the Lillie Center were successful in getting a prominent team of bi-partisan legislators to call for an end to the promotion of fluoridation by the state. In Alaska, Fluoride Free Fairbanks along with many concerned citizens urged their city council to review fluoridation, and in March the city council’s task force charged with studying the issue recommended that the city stop adding fluoride to their water. Clearly, a small group of educated and dedicated citizens can accomplish a lot when they organize locally against fluoridation.

Letter from Prof Paul Connett

I challenge those who believe that science is on the side of water fluoridation to read the book I co-authored with James Beck, MD, PhD and Spedding Micklem D.Phil, entitled "The Case Against Fluoride" (Chlesea Green, 2010).

For over 60 years this program has been promoted via endorsements from "authorities." Endorsements are no substitute for references to the primary scientific literature.

Sadly most scientists are not interested in the subject and most doctors and dentists are too busy treating patients to spend the time reading this literature. Instead, they simply rely on (and repeat) reassurances from their professional bodies. They also rely on pronouncements from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). On some issues this might be a safe thing to do, but NOT on fluoridation. There is only one small group at the CDC that is responsible for the fluoridation program and that is the Oral Health Division (recently downgraded to a branch). This consists of 30 employees and most of their qualifications are dental. Very few (if any) have any qualifications in toxicology or specialized branches of medicine. Not only are they not qualified to review the literature on the harm posed by fluoride but they also have a huge conflict of interest in the matter. Their job is to PROMOTE fluoridation not QUESTION it. Essentially they act like an adjunct of the American Dental Association.

This is what the American Dental Association had to say about professional responsibilities of dentists with respect to fluoridation in a white paper from 1979:

“Individual dentists must be convinced that they need not be familiar with scientific reports and field investigations on fluoridation to be effective participants and that non- participation is overt neglect of professional responsibility.” (American Dental Association, “White Paper on Fluoridation,” Council on Dental Health and Health Planning, 1979, http://fluoridealert.org/ada.white.paper.1979.html )

Very little has changed. Behind the scenes many dentists tell us that they are OK with the use of fluoride in topical treatments but do not feel it is right to force it on people via the public water supply. However, they are loathe to express this opinion in public because of peer pressures from their colleagues.

I urge readers to look at our book to learn more about the history and science of this issue. If they haven't got time for that spend 28 minutes watching the videotape "Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation" which can be accessed for free online at www.FluorideAlert.org

Paul Connett, PhD, Director of the Fluoride Action Network

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Prop 65 Cancer Experts Will Consider Listing Fluoride as Carcinogen

USA - Metropolitan Water District of SoCal Sued for Illegal Use of an Unapproved Drug

Metropolitan Water District of SoCal Sued for Illegal Use of an Unapproved Drug to Fulfill Fluoridation Program
San Diego, CA (PRWEB) August 10, 2011
Alleging willful misrepresentation and deceptive business practices by Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, in the interest of millions of consumers, the California attorneys at Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik filed Foli v. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Case No. 3:2011cv01765 in the Southern District of California. The lawsuit cites that MWD of SoCal has made claims of safely and effectively treating and preventing dental disease in recipient consumers, while selecting and delivering a hydrofluosilicic acid drug through their water system that has never been approved for safety and effectiveness, nor in the expected dosages delivered by MWD through retail water districts, either topically, systemically through ingestion, or trans-dermal exposures through baths and showers.

In the legal action which may impact the decision-making of water districts across the country employing the same practices, the lawsuit filed on August 9, 2011 in San Diego Federal District Court addresses the Constitutional right of Plaintiffs to be free of bodily intrusion from a drug that has not been approved for MWD's intent to alter the physical structure and bodily functions to make a person's teeth more resistant to the demineralization process of tooth decay without their consent. The lawsuit against MWD SoCal is entitled Foli, Brown, Aslanian & Blake vs. Metorpolitan Water District of Southern California, Case No. '11CV1765JLS BLM.

While some consumers may elect to purchase bottled water for drinking, virtually all consumers are captive to exposures from baths and showers, as simple filtration and most non-commercial methods do not remove the product, resulting in exposures to consumers similar to those medications delivered by seasickness or nicotine patches.

"This case does not challenge the public policy of fluoridation," states Kyle Nordrehaug, attorney for the Plaintiffs. "It does challenge MWD's bait and switch tactics of orchestrating statements by them and their down-line distributors of water to individual consumers when MWD knew that the actual drug product that they deliver had never had a toxicological study performed on the health and behavioral effects of its continued use until 2010, much less approval for MWD's perpetuation of absolute health claims."..................

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Fuk u Stephen Harper & Barack Obama, Fluoride (2 of 2)



Oops excuse the language he is intelligent and knowledgeable but why does he swear?

USA - City Must Decide on Fluoride: Should it Stay or Go?

City Must Decide on Fluoride: Should it Stay or Go?
Staunch supporters on both sides resurrect decades-long water fluoridation issue because of a 2012 budget proposal.
By Jeff Rosenfield
It was a hot-button issue after city officials released the projected 2012 budget in June. Officials proposed eliminating the city’s more-than-20-year fluoridation program as a cost-cutting measure.

Doing so would save an estimated $13,000 from the budget and prevent the city from having to replace a $40,000 storage tank“ Sometime in the next budget cycle — and probably we can put it off until the end — we are going to have to replace our tank,” Paul Stanek, assistant utility director at the city’s water plant, said by phone. “The money we are going to propose to spend wouldn’t have to be done until the end of the next fiscal year," which is Oct. 1, 2012.

Dunedin eco-activist Bree Cheatham, an outspoken opponent of
fluoridated drinking water, quickly became involved when she learned it was a proposed cut. The issue was brought up during a budget workshop July 13 but was tabled for further discussion in September after she raised her objections........

Tuesday, August 09, 2011

USA - Fluoride Free Austin Demands Fluoride Warning Be Added To Water Bills

USA - Fluoride Awareness Week – Enough is Enough

Fluoride Awareness Week – Enough is Enough - Fluoride Must Be Removed from all US Drinking Water Supplies
08/08/2011 18:19:00 admin
New York – August 8, 2011 – Dentists often brag that promoting water fluoridation would put them out of business. Instead, five new dental schools are opening since 2000, others are being planned and the dentist workforce is growing, according to American Dental Association leaders.1 Modern science shows that fluoride ingestion doesn’t reduce tooth decay2 but can impair health3 and damage children’s teeth4 - making fluoridation a huge waste of taxpayers’ money.......

USA - Fluoride Awareness Week – Enough is Enough

Fluoride Awareness Week – Enough is Enough - Fluoride Must Be Removed from all US Drinking Water Supplies
08/08/2011 18:19:00 admin
New York – August 8, 2011 – Dentists often brag that promoting water fluoridation would put them out of business. Instead, five new dental schools are opening since 2000, others are being planned and the dentist workforce is growing, according to American Dental Association leaders.1 Modern science shows that fluoride ingestion doesn’t reduce tooth decay2 but can impair health3 and damage children’s teeth4 - making fluoridation a huge waste of taxpayers’ money.......

The Healthy Drink that May Destroy Your Sleep By Dr. Mercola

The Healthy Drink that May Destroy Your Sleep
Posted By Dr. Mercola | August 09 2011
The pineal gland is a small endocrine gland located between the two hemispheres of your brain. It is sometimes called the "third eye" due to its resemblance to the human retina. While your pineal gland is only about the size of a single grain of rice (5-8 mm), it performs several functions that are extremely important to your body.

One main role of your pineal gland is to produce melatonin, the natural sleep hormone that plays a vital role in your normal sleep function. Melatonin is not only necessary for proper sleep however, it also regulates the onset of puberty and fights against harmful free radicals. When your pineal gland function is suppressed, melatonin production suffers and you are putting yourself at risk for a number of startling conditions including:

Large article worth reading.

Monday, August 08, 2011

UK - Despite much debate, fluoride may not reach some of the most deprived areas

Despite much debate, fluoride may not reach some of the most deprived areas
EXCLUSIVE
• By Jon Reeve
jon.reeve@dailyecho.co.uk
WATER bosses have admitted it is likely fluoride will not be delivered to all the areas expected under the controversial scheme planned for Hampshire, the Daily Echo can reveal.
That could mean some of the most deprived areas of Southampton, where tooth decay in children is at its worst, will not receive the dosed supplies -which was the main argument for putting fluoride in water.
It comes as chiefs at South Central Strategic Health Authority say they still do not know how much it is going to cost to build the infrastructure needed to add the chemical to tap water.
Campaigners say the revelations show all of the major arguments for fluorida-tion have been shown to be fundamentally flawed, and the scheme should be put back on hold immediately, or scrapped completely.
Stephen Peckham, chairman of Hampshire Against Fluoridation, said: "It has to be technically and economically feasible - they are the first two criteria. All of the underpinning of their arguments has been stripped away, even if they worked in the first place.
A senior customer relations adviser said in a letter responding to a query about dosing stations that the actual locations have "yet to be finalised".
She said: "Depending upon the location of this dosing system it is most likely that not all the areas identified in the schemes 1 and 7 of the feasibility study will actually receive a fluoridated supply."
"The SHA board decided that the health benefits outweigh all arguments against water fluoridation for the population described in the consultation and remains confident with this decision.

Shortened version due to copyright

NZ - Bone cancer fluoride study opens door to law suits

Bone cancer fluoride study opens door to law suits
Sunday, 7 August, 2011 - 19:51 Five years after being promised to disprove the link between fluoride and osteosarcoma bone cancer, the promised study has finally been published, failing in its promise, as predicted by international fluoride experts.

The study only looked at bone-fluoride level at the time of osteosarcoma, which is irrelevant to age-related exposure effect shown in the earlier research it was supposed to disprove. It just shows total lifetime exposure to fluoride; not whether it occurred during the critical 6-8 year old period, shown by the earlier research.

"Fluoridation promoters have been relying on this failed promise ever since 2006, to defend continued fluoridation in spite of the risk. What will they rely on now?" asks Mary Byrne, National Coordinator of Fluoride Action Network. "Why, spinning Douglass' study as if it were valid of course. They have already started - what else can they do? If they admit Douglass failed, they must admit that fluoridation should end immediately" answers Ms Byrne.

Osteosarcoma kills between 3 and 4 NZ male youths each year. Legal action against councils and fluoridation promoters began being prepared in the USA as soon as Bassin's 2001 study was discovered in 2006, having been suppressed for four years. "Publication of Douglass' failed study now opens the doorway for such action" suggests Mark Atkin, FANNZ' legal adviser.

"Now that Douglass' study is finally published, it is clearly incapable of refuting Bassin's work" according to FAN director, Dr Paul Connett, Ph.D. "Bassin's study was a high quality product; Douglass' study was not" he concludes. "And it was only published in a dental journal, published by fluoridation promoters The International Association of Dental Research - why not in Cancer Causes and Control like his original promise, and Bassin's study? Would it not have passed objective peer-review?" adds Ms Byrne.

Sunday, August 07, 2011

C2C Ian interviews Dr. Paul Connett on Fluoride Dangers 2

5 Medical Advances That Sound Too Good to Be True?

5 Medical Advances That Sound Too Good to Be True?

2.Say Goodbye to Tooth Decay
BioPharma has created a new bacterial strain, called SMaRT, which prevents tooth decay; this is done by keeping the bacteria that live on teeth from producing lactic acid. Although it is still undergoing clinical trials at the moment, a single application of SMaRT will keep your teeth healthy for the rest of your life!

Even if it worked and was safe would it reach the market?

Dental Care for Young Children USA

Dental Care for Young Children USA
"One of the largest unmet health needs in the United States is dental care for children. Dental caries is the most common chronic disease of childhood.1 Approximately 60% of U.S. children experience caries in their primary teeth by age 5, and by age 17, 78% of children have caries.2"

After 66+ years of water fluoridation and 55+ years of fluoridated toothpaste:NYSCOF

Saturday, August 06, 2011

C2C Ian interviews Dr. Paul Connett on Fluoride Dangers 1

Fluoridated Water and Fluoride Tablets?

USA - Show me your teeth

Show me your teeth
Now that we have fluoridated our lawns, organic gardens and our pets; washed our cars and clothes and most of all flushed mountains of fluoride down our toilets daily, I am wondering if we have fewer cavities yet?

Is there any follow-up research to see if poor children have fewer cavities? Could we have some feedback?
Gene Elder

Going by the number of dental practices set up in Southampton UK in the last year there will be a vast improvement from dental decay in 6 years time that will be credited to the introduction of fluoridation. In Birmingham there are more dentists per head than elsewhere and Coventry had £1,000,000 injection of extra funding in its dental budget both of course fluoridated

Friday, August 05, 2011

Poor Aussie kids have 70% more caries than the wealthy

Poor Aussie kids have 70% more caries than the wealthy
By Rob Goszkowski, Assistant Editor
August 3, 2011 -- Echoing conditions in the U.S., two reports released today by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) reveal some alarming trends in the oral health of Australian children, particularly those in the lowest socioeconomic areas.
Across all states and territories that were included in the analysis, the average number of decayed, missing, and filled deciduous teeth of children from those areas was roughly 70% higher than those from the highest socioeconomic status areas, according to the first report, "Dental decay among Australian children."
"Of children aged 5 to 6 years in Western Australia, dental decay was 22% higher for children in the lowest socioeconomic areas than for those in the highest socioeconomic areas, while in the Northern Territory the difference was much greater: 139%," stated AIHW spokesperson Kaye Roberts-Thomson in a press release.
New South Wales and Victoria were not included in the report as data were unavailable.
“More than 40% of Australian children aged 5-6 years had untreated decay.”
— Kaye Roberts-Thomson, Australian
Institute of Health and Welfare Among all children ages 5 to 6 years, 48.7% had a history of dental decay in the deciduous teeth and the average number of decayed, missing, and filled teeth was 2. Of children who were 12 years old, 45.1% had a history of dental decay in the permanent teeth and the average number of decayed, missing, and filled teeth was 1.1.
Untreated dental caries is another significant issue, the AIHW noted.
"More than 40% of Australian children aged 5-6 years had untreated decay, and a quarter of Australian children aged 12 years had untreated decay," Roberts-Thomson said.
The proportion of children ages 5 to 6 years with untreated caries varied among states and territories from 29.3% in the Australian Capital Territory to 49.7% in the Northern Territory. There was no difference in prevalence of decay between boys and girls, according to the AIHW.
Toothbrushing education needed
The second report, "Changes in child toothbrushing over time," found that while toothbrushing is almost universally practiced in Australia, there has been a decline in toothbrushing frequency among children.
Between 1993 and 2000, the proportion of children brushing less than once a day when they began brushing their teeth almost doubled from 8% to 15%. The proportion brushing twice a day decreased from a high of 44% in 1993 to 32% in 2000.
"While slipping rates of toothbrushing frequency reduce the risk of very mild or mild fluorosis, the protective effects of fluoride exposure are lost," the AIHW noted. "The proportion of children brushing with low-fluoride children's toothpaste, as is recommended for children aged 6 years or under, has increased. Most young children now use low-fluoride toothpaste."
However, the inappropriate eating or licking of toothpaste has increased, both when children start brushing and at age 5, according to the AIHW.
"This is an established risk factor for dental fluorosis with no benefit in preventing dental caries," the agency concluded.

Canada - Kudos for flouride story

Kudos for flouride story
Posted Aug 4, 2011
By Jerry Flynn
I want to applaud Jeff Maguire for his well-written article on fluoride in last week's edition, and the EMC for placing it on their front page. To say this is a controversial issue is an understatement, but the fact is, North America is far behind the rest of the world in the move to ban fluoride from our drinking water. This battle has been raging for years without attracting a whole lot of press. It's time to get it into the mainstream and learn the facts. Googling the Fluoride Action Network can bring you up to speed very quickly, as two of the first articles you'll see are "10 Facts about Fluoride" and "Fifty Reasons to Oppose Fluoridation."
As the article said last week, I am convinced that fluoride is not necessary, has never been necessary, and is a hazard to our health. Please check it out and get educated on the fluoride issue, and then make the decision whether or not it's time to join the many cities and towns in Canada and the U.S. as well as most of the rest of the world that have banned fluoride from their drinking water.
Jerry Flynn
Carleton Place
councillor

Thursday, August 04, 2011

Fluoride Action Network

Yesterday the Fluoride Action Network distributed the following media release responding to the latest fluoride propaganda from the dental community. Please help us combat the pro-fluoride spin machine by forwarding our press release to your local media contacts and outlets.
NEW YORK, Aug. 2, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A paper in the Journal of Dental Research by dentist Chester Douglass and colleagues, "An Assessment of Bone Fluoride and Osteosarcoma," (7/28/11) claims to show no association between fluoride bone levels and osteosarcoma, a form of bone cancer. However, Douglass' study has serious scientific flaws and is incapable of disproving a previous study (Bassin et al., 2006) which linked water fluoridation to osteosarcoma, reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

Bassin found a 500% to 600% increased risk for young boys, exposed to fluoride in their 6th to 8th years, of later developing osteosarcoma. Douglass' study does not address exposure during this critical period because it measured the level of fluoride in bone, which accumulates fluoride over a lifetime. These bone levels provide no information about when the person was exposed to fluoride.

Not only does Douglass' study fail to refute Bassin's main finding, it suffers from other serious weaknesses:
1) Douglass' study was much smaller and weaker than Bassin's. It had only 20 control subjects under age 30, a fifth of Bassin's. For this key age group, Douglass' study was so small it could provide no reliable conclusions. Even Douglass admitted this serious limitation.
2) Douglass' choice of comparison group is suspect. Douglass compared the bone fluoride level of patients with osteosarcoma to "controls" with other forms of bone cancer. If fluoride also causes these other bone cancer types, then one would not expect to find any difference in bone fluoride between these groups. It is biologically plausible that fluoride could cause other bone cancers because it reaches such high concentrations in bone. One of the only studies of fluoride and non-osteosarcoma bone cancers did find a link, but this evidence was never mentioned by Douglass.
3) The controls were severely mismatched to the cases. Controls were much older (median 41 yrs) than the cases (18 yrs). The risk of osteosarcoma is highly age-dependent. Also, fluoride builds up in bone with age. Given Douglass' small sample size, it is unlikely he could have adequately compensated for the gross mismatch in age, especially because of these two simultaneous age dependencies. The groups were also mismatched on sex ratio, and osteosarcoma risk is well known to be sex dependent. Properly adjusting for sex and age would be virtually impossible.

In 2001, Douglass signed off on Elise Bassin's Ph.D. dissertation which found the strong association between fluoride and osteosarcoma. When it was later published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal in 2006, Cancer Causes and Control, an accompanying letter from Douglass claimed that his "larger" study would eventually refute Bassin's findings. But Douglass also told a Fox News reporter that Bassin "... did a good job. She had a good group of people advising her. And it's a nice-it's a nice analysis. There's nothing wrong with that analysis."
Now that Douglass' study is finally published, it is clearly incapable of refuting Bassin's work. According to FAN director, Paul Connett, Ph.D., "Bassin's study was a high quality product, Douglass' study was not."
Chris Neurath, FAN's Research Director, points out "Even though Douglass collected extensive fluoride exposure histories from hundreds of other controls, that data was ignored in this paper. FAN is calling for the release of all of the Douglass data. The only way to get to the bottom of Douglass' two decade's study is to make the data available for any independent researcher to check and do the analyses which Douglass has failed to provide. The public has paid millions for this data, why is most of it still behind locked doors?"
One reason is suggested in Douglass' conflict-of-interest declaration where he says he has "... written reviews of the literature for several companies that sell, reimburse for, or do research on preventive dentistry products, most notably GlaxoSmithKline, Colgate-Palmolive, Dentsply, Quintile, Delta Dental Plans...."
Omitted was his paid editorship of Colgate's promotional dental newsletter, which regularly contains advertisements for Colgate's fluoride products.

The International Association of Dental Research (IADR), publishers of The Journal of Dental Research, has a history of promoting fluoridation.
Connett says, "In my opinion, it seems that Douglass is more interested in protecting fluoride than investigating this issue objectively. Bassin's work suggests fluoridation may be causing a frequently fatal cancer in teenage boys. Douglass, after five years of trying, has failed to refute this disturbing evidence. How long will fluoridation promoters be allowed to continue to spin this issue?"
"Why are dentists - especially those who have shown a strong interest in protecting the water fluoridation program - conducting and publishing cancer research, anyway?" asks Connett.
A more detailed critique of Douglass' paper will be posted soon at www.fluoridealert.org.
Contact Paul Connett, PhD
SOURCE: Fluoride Action Network

Wednesday, August 03, 2011

AUSSIE kids have more cavities

AUSSIE kids have more cavities and are brushing their teeth less than kids were 20 years ago, new data shows.
Two Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reports released today show that almost half of the country's children aged five to six had a history of decay in their baby teeth and almost half of those aged 12 had a history of decay in their adult teeth.

University of Adelaide Professor Kaye Roberts-Thomson, from the Australian Research Centre for Population Oral Health, said children reached the peak of their dental health in the mid-1990s.

This was a great improvement on the 1970s but the dental health of children now was declining.

"Since the mid-1990s, children seem to be getting more decay and that's been slowly increasing," Prof Roberts-Thomson said..................

Fluoridated Australia

New Study Fails to Refute Fluoride-Osteosarcoma Link

New Study Fails to Refute Fluoride-Osteosarcoma Link
NEW YORK, Aug. 2, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A paper in the Journal of Dental Research by dentist Chester Douglass and colleagues, "An Assessment of Bone Fluoride and Osteosarcoma," (7/28/11) claims to show no association between fluoride bone levels and osteosarcoma, a form of bone cancer. However, Douglass' study has serious scientific flaws and is incapable of disproving a previous study (Bassin et al., 2006) which linked water fluoridation to osteosarcoma, reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

Bassin found a 500% to 600% increased risk for young boys, exposed to fluoride in their 6th to 8th years, of later developing osteosarcoma. Douglass' study does not address exposure during this critical period because it measured the level of fluoride in bone, which accumulates fluoride over a lifetime. These bone levels provide no information about when the person was exposed to fluoride.

Not only does Douglass' study fail to refute Bassin's main finding, it suffers from other serious weaknesses:

1) Douglass' study was much smaller and weaker than Bassin's. It had only 20 control subjects under age 30, a fifth of Bassin's. For this key age group, Douglass' study was so small it could provide no reliable conclusions. Even Douglass admitted this serious limitation.

2) Douglass' choice of comparison group is suspect. Douglass compared the bone fluoride level of patients with osteosarcoma to "controls" with other forms of bone cancer. If fluoride also causes these other bone cancer types, then one would not expect to find any difference in bone fluoride between these groups. It is biologically plausible that fluoride could cause other bone cancers because it reaches such high concentrations in bone. One of the only studies of fluoride and non-osteosarcoma bone cancers did find a link, but this evidence was never mentioned by Douglass.

3) The controls were severely mismatched to the cases. Controls were much older (median 41 yrs) than the cases (18 yrs). The risk of osteosarcoma is highly age-dependent. Also, fluoride builds up in bone with age. Given Douglass' small sample size, it is unlikely he could have adequately compensated for the gross mismatch in age, especially because of these two simultaneous age dependencies. The groups were also mismatched on sex ratio, and osteosarcoma risk is well known to be sex dependent. Properly adjusting for sex and age would be virtually impossible.

In 2001, Douglass signed off on Elise Bassin's Ph.D. dissertation which found the strong association between fluoride and osteosarcoma. When it was later published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal in 2006, Cancer Causes and Control, an accompanying letter from Douglass claimed that his "larger" study would eventually refute Bassin's findings. But Douglass also told a Fox News reporter that Bassin "... did a good job. She had a good group of people advising her. And it's a nice—it's a nice analysis. There's nothing wrong with that analysis."

Now that Douglass' study is finally published, it is clearly incapable of refuting Bassin's work. According to FAN director, Paul Connett, Ph.D., "Bassin's study was a high quality product, Douglass' study was not."

Chris Neurath, FAN's Research Director, points out "Even though Douglass collected extensive fluoride exposure histories from hundreds of other controls, that data was ignored in this paper. FAN is calling for the release of all of the Douglass data. The only way to get to the bottom of Douglass' two decade's study is to make the data available for any independent researcher to check and do the analyses which Douglass has failed to provide. The public has paid millions for this data, why is most of it still behind locked doors?"

One reason is suggested in Douglass' conflict-of-interest declaration where he says he has "... written reviews of the literature for several companies that sell, reimburse for, or do research on preventive dentistry products, most notably GlaxoSmithKline, Colgate-Palmolive, Dentsply, Quintile, Delta Dental Plans...."

Omitted was his paid editorship of Colgate's promotional dental newsletter, which regularly contains advertisements for Colgate's fluoride products.

The International Association of Dental Research (IADR), publishers of The Journal of Dental Research, has a history of promoting fluoridation.

Connett says, "In my opinion, it seems that Douglass is more interested in protecting fluoride than investigating this issue objectively. Bassin's work suggests fluoridation may be causing a frequently fatal cancer in teenage boys. Douglass, after five years of trying, has failed to refute this disturbing evidence. How long will fluoridation promoters be allowed to continue to spin this issue?"

"Why are dentists – especially those who have shown a strong interest in protecting the water fluoridation program – conducting and publishing cancer research, anyway?" asks Connett.

A more detailed critique of Douglass' paper will be posted soon at http://www.FluorideAction.Net


SOURCE Fluoride Action Network

Study confirms fluoride toxic in tiny amounts

Study confirms fluoride toxic in tiny amounts
By Dr. William Campbell Douglass on 08/02/2011
If the fastest way to rot a kid's mind is with TV and junk food, the slow method involves plain old water.
Thank your government for that.
The fluoride intentionally dumped into your water is a neurotoxin so powerful that a new study finds it can have devastating effects in concentrations as low as 1 part per million.
That's so thoroughly diluted it's positively homeopathic, folks -- and it's right smack in the middle of the target used by the feds for years (and just a fraction of what many people still get with every sip, by the way).
Your tainted tap
Mexican researchers examined data from 18 studies on humans and animals and found that prolonged exposure -- like, say, a lifelong presence in your drinking glass --"may cause significant damage to health and particularly to the nervous system."
The review also confirms what I've been saying since the 1960s: Fluoride has the power to cross the blood-brain barrier.
That means once it's in your system, it has a free pass to run roughshod through your noggin -- and the researchers wrote in Neurologia that fluoride damage in the brain is similar to that of Alzheimer's disease, according to animal studies.
That could help explain the dramatic rise in this disease in recent generations.
But the biggest fluoride risk isn't among seniors -- it's among children, because this stuff is proven to make kids dumber than a knock-knock joke.
And because fluoride works so slowly, you may not even notice the damage... not at first anyway.
Then, one day, you wake up and realize the only way your kid is getting into college is by getting a job there…as a janitor.
Don't get me wrong -- the world needs its janitors. But if you don't want your kids and grandkids to be forced to be among them, keep them away from fluoridated water, toothpaste, mouthwash, and anything else that contains this poison.
The most effective way to do that is with a reverse-osmosis water filter.
Attach it where the water enters your home, and every tap will be clean, safe and fluoride-free