To me the pandemic is so overwhelming in importance that fluoridation is an issue far less urgent. The first few minutes is the important piece to see. Alex is a bit over the top but without him we would be in the dark as to what is going on in the global world

From Ann Wills

 Daily Mail 30.12.21  “TELL US THE TRUE SCALE OF WARD CASES, SAY TORIES” by Martin Beckford.

A row erupted over the Government’s Covid figures on 29 Dec. as it emerged that almost 1 in 3 patients in hospital with Covid was admitted for unrelated reasons.

These cases are people taken to hospital for an unrelated reason, such as a fall or broken bone, who just happen to then discover they also have the virus.  It means 1,000s of those who are being counted as Covid admissions - which would suggest they are severely ill with the virus - are not actually suffering seriously with Covid. 

Many only tested positive once they were on hospital wards - & many have simply caught the virus while in hospital.  It has raised concerns that headline statistics of Covid admissions rising to a record 29% may be misleading.  There are concerns that these statistics are overestimating how many people are dangerously ill with Covid.  Last night former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith said  “It’s almost certain the admissions for Covid are far lower than the figures suggest.”  He called for the independent “Office for National Statistics” to publish the figures for true Covid admissions, rather than the NHS giving them. 

Ann 

Dr Mercola

 As predicted over a year ago, we're now on an injection treadmill with no end in sight, and every single dose carries the risk of serious side effects, up to and including permanent disability and death. The only scientifically sound way out of this failed experiment is to stop. No more boosters.

F.A.N.

 FAN’s most important video

While searching for the name of an expert scientist who helped set up the Cochrane Collaboration (Sir Iain Chalmers), I found myself watching again the videotape (Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation) that Michael Connett produced and edited in 2008. It was his swan song before going to Law School.

Even though this video is 13 years old I was struck by how well the material stands up today, particularly what several experts (Phyllis Mullenix, Bob Isaacson, Vyvyan Howard, Kathleen Thiessen, and yes, even me!) had to say about the early studies on fluoride’s neurotoxicity.

I urge all our supporters – especially those who have joined us since 2017, when the first of the US government studies on neurotoxicity was published -to take a first or second look at this video and share it with people you know who are still denying the science on this issue and believe that opposition to fluoridation is not science-based.

This video makes it clear that for many years important scientists have opposed fluoridation using very clear, rational, scientific and ethical arguments. It is insulting for fluoridation proponents to pretend otherwise, but it fits well into their modus operandi of attacking the messenger rather than deal with the message. 

This video includes interviews with a Nobel Laureate (Arvid Carlsson), three co-authors of the landmark National Research Council review of 2006 (Drs. Kathleen Thiesen, Hardy Limeback and Bob Isaacson), two former scientists from the EPA (Drs. Bill Hirzy and Bob Carton), Dr. Phiylis Mullenix (author of a landmark study on animal neurotoxicity in1995) Sir Iain Chalmers, Lord Baldwin, Professor Vyvyan Howard (an infant and fetal pathologist), prominent dentists (Drs. Bill Osmunson and Hardy Limeback) and several environmentalists and myself.

The video underlines FAN’s long history of pursuing the science on this issue and finding ways to communicate that science simply and clearly to both the public and decision-makers. With your help we will continue to do this.

Thank you, 

Paul Connett
Executive Director

From F.A.N.

 Before we get to FAN's Christmas greetings we have some wonderful news to share on our fundraiser. 

Yesterday really took off and combined with today's mail we have exceeded by a wide margin both our mini-goals for Christmas Eve. We have reached $62,667 from 585 donors.

This included:
 

1)  a bid of $551 on the water filter donated by Jack Crowther - bids are open till midnight (ET) tonight. Maximum bid allowed will be $991. Make sure your donation ends with a "1".

2) Milestone bonuses for passing 450, 500 and 550 donations.

3) A small foundation grant of $5000 (this is why the number of donors is so important).

4) $1395 from a total of 125 supporters in today's mail.

5) and several people who made multiple donations.

And we have some more good news. We have just been told we have another marvelous benefactor (SuperAngel) who has made this amazing pledge: he will double all donations (any amount under $1000!) made today.

Thank you ALL for helping to take the "d" out of fundraiser - and gave us  lot of fun during these difficult times.

Now no more fundraising from us (you can check our totals on our website (www.FluorideALERT.org) - until Monday Dec 27 morning  - when we will return to the daunting task of trying to get close to $150,000 from 1500 donors to fund our 2022 campaign to end fluoridation worldwide.

 

Happy Holidays!
 

The Team at FAN wishes all of our supporters a Merry Christmas, a belated happy Hanukkah, a wonderful holiday no matter what you celebrate during this season, and a most healthy New Year.

The word "merry" at this time kind of sticks in the throat. How can we be merry at a time when so many people are losing their livelihoods, their homes and even their lives?  But I am reminded of that the story of a Christmas day during the worst of all wars (World War I) when both sides laid down their arms and sang carols together in No Man's Land. A recognition perhaps of the difference between the immediate and the eternal. 

We wish all our supporters a truce: a time to reflect on the eternal joy in their lives and the friendships which last a lifetime and beyond. Those friendships continue to inform and sustain our movement.  Enjoy Christmas Day.

Thank you, 

Paul Connett
Executive Director

How to Make a Tax-Deductible Donation

• Online, using our secure server.
• If you should experience difficulty in donating online please email: Ellen@fluoridealert.org
   
• Or by Check, payable to the Fluoride Action Network. Mail your check to:

Fluoride Action Network
c/o Connett
105 Kingston Road
Exeter, NH 03833

From F.A.N.

 Dear Friends,

Things slowed down a little yesterday, even so we managed to reach one mini-goal ($50,000), but we are 98 donors short of our other mini- goal of 500 donors by midnight Christmas Eve.

Our current totals stand at $51,211 from 402 supporters. We are thrilled with this support as we know this has been a difficult year for so many.

However, our difficult task for the next two days is to get 98 more donations of any amount a) to reach our 500 donor goal and secure milestone bonuses of $450 and $500 when we reach 450 donors and 500 donors respectively and b) to get our important message out to more people.

So can you help beat the bushes - if you haven't done so already - among your friends and family to make a small contribution ($5 or $10)?

As you do this you can explain the urgency of our cause. Please tell them about the high quality US government funded studies that indicate that fluoride lowers IQ and increases symptoms of ADHD - and no agency or organization other than FAN is trying to warn pregnant women and bottle-feeding parents to avoid fluoridated water. All the information they will need on this is on our terrific - science-packed  - website: www.FluorideALERT.org 

Meanwhile, fluoridation zealots are taking advantage of the distractions of Covid and introducing mandatory fluoridation in NZ and the UK, and re-introducing it into Canadian cities like Calgary. 

Never has FAN been more needed in this enormous battle than now. We need financial support to maintain our professional effort in court, and in the court of public opinion locally and globally. 

DONATIONS DOUBLED & WIN A WATER FILTER: Donations are being doubled up to $51,759. And please see yesterday's bulletin for your chance to bid on a brand-new water filter donated by Jack Crowther.  There are no bids yet - so you could win it with a bid of $11. Your bid must end with a "1" (i.e 11 up to, but not higher than, 991). A correction from Jack: this filter, produces one quart of waste water ("backwash") for every 4 gallons of water treated - not one gallon.

Thank you for all you are doing to help end this dangerous practice.  

Paul Connett
Director

How to Make a Tax-Deductible Donation:

• Online, using our secure server.
• Or by Check, payable to the Fluoride Action Network. Mail your check to:

Fluoride Action Network
c/o Connett
105 Kingston Road
Exeter, NH 03833

From Ann Wills

The media are now interested in why Boris has lost the support of many of the public, which he’d previously enjoyed.  So it’s a good time to write a short letter to the press “Letters” & tell them of one reason:   Boris’s stated plan to add fluoride to tap water.  This means no freedom of choice as forced to drink it – a totalitarian measure.  Yet the Conservatives claim to stand for individual freedom of choice.   It’s the opposite to what we would have expected.

Ann

From Paul Connett

 Here is the letter I sent the NYT yesterday - twice - neither were acknowledged so I am assuming it will not be published. FAN and our supporters are left trying to educate the American public alone.

Dear Editor,

It is sad that the Times has spent more column inches on this story, “Ancorage mayor briefly shut off fluoride in City’s water system” (Dec 17) than it has on US government-funded studies that have linked fluoride exposure to IQ loss in fluoridated communities in Canada  (Green, 2019 and Till 2020). These 2 studies are among 19 that have reported IQ loss associated with fluoride exposure between 2017 and 2021.

Without the public being informed on these serious findings pregnant women and parents who bottle-feed their infants are not being warned to avoid fluoridated water. Meanwhile, fluoridation promoters are blatantly ignoring this science and charging ahead with the expansion of fluoridation programs around the world. A few weeks ago the NZ parliament voted in mandatory fluoridation for the whole country and the UK House of Commons has done the same – only the House of Lords stands in the way.

Will the Times please sound the alarm on this matter which threatens the mental development of our children and do a professional job of following the science on this issue?

Paul Connett, PhD
Director of the Fluoride Action Network,
www.FluorideALERT.org
and co-author of The Case Against Fluoride (Chelsea Green 2010)

More horrifying than fluoridation

F.A.N. Newsletter Will Utilize Artificial Intelligence To Protect Drinking Water

 FAN Will Utilize Artificial Intelligence To Protect Drinking Water

In yesterday's bulletin I explained how the CDC, ADA, and a chemical manufacturer will be using and promoting new technology starting in January to force fluoridation chemicals on an additional 19 million Americans, and likely millions more in Canada and Australia over the coming months and years.  As the ADA said, this is "game-changing" technology, and it means that the Fluoride Action Network needs to respond adequately to this threat, or the "game" will be lost and many more children and adults will be harmed by this practice for many years to come. 

Throughout most of North America—and the world—the decision to add fluoridation chemicals to the public drinking water is made at the local level.  While federal agencies may promote the practice, the Safe Drinking Water Act in the U.S. prohibits them from mandating it.  City councilors or municipal water directors usually make the decision, but this varies across the country, and can include local decisions by water boards, health boards, private water companies, water authorities, and ballot initiatives or citizen referendums.

Since 2010, we’re aware of nearly 300 communities that have ended or rejected fluoridation chemicals; many using FAN’s educational materials, network, and guidance. While this is already far more than have started the practice during the same time period, we believe the number of communities that have actually ended fluoridation due to cost, corrosion, worker safety, and the known health hazards posed to the public is significantly higher than 300.  Occasionally, a Freedom of Information Act request to state drinking water agencies requesting lists of communities that have ended fluoridation will confirm this suspicion, as we discover numerous smaller towns that rejected fluoridation without media coverage or input from outsiders.  

If a local rejection of fluoridation isn’t reported in the media, and a local decision maker, water operator, or organizer hasn’t reached out to FAN, it’s less likely that we would know about it. As you can imagine, tracking tens of thousands of local government proceedings each week is logistically impossible, or at least it WAS impossible until recently. In the past, this often worked in our favor, as communities worked quietly to remove the chemical without fanfare to avoid irrational personal attacks against decision-makers and unscientific scrutiny from the dental lobby.  However, with the opponents of safe drinking water now targeting small and rural communities, an inability to track their actions has become a significant problem rather than an advantage.   

This week, FAN subscribed to a new service called Curate that utilizes artificial intelligence and machine-learning technology to scan and filter through hundreds-of-thousands of municipal documents, meeting minutes, and agendas of local councils, agencies, boards, and committees to find any mention of fluoride, fluoridation, additives, water infrastructure, etc. We will be using this technology to provide an early warning system for our campaigners and professionals on fluoridation-related activity in conjunction with the various tracking strategies we've utilized up until now. We will also be using this technology to dig deeper into problems associated with fluoridation, since we're already discovering documents detailing spills, corrosion, overfeeds, and exorbitant costs associated with the practice, along with examples of how our opponents indoctrinate and reward water employees.

While the media and other environmental and safe water nonprofits continue to avoid the issue of fluoridation and are doing nothing to respond to this huge public health threat, we are taking immediate and meaningful action to combat our well-financed opponents.  We searched for a solution, and found a new technology that should give us the best chance at stopping the dental lobby and chemical industry's New Wave Tablet and Feeder system.  We hope this explanation helps our supporters see just one example--out of many--of how we're using our budget to defend the public's drinking water.  

Thank you,

Stuart Cooper
Campaign Director
Fluoride Action Network

F.A.N. Newsletter

 The Greatest Threat To Non-Fluoridated Communities Is Here

The U.S. Centers For Disease Control (CDC) has partnered with the chemical industry to target 19 million residents in 32,000 small and medium sized communities across the United States that do not add fluoridation chemicals to the public drinking water. Using your tax dollars, the CDC provided funds to private business to develop a fluoridation delivery product for water systems serving between 50 and 10,000 people.  The widespread sale and promotion of this new product will start in January throughout the US, Canada, and Australia. The American Dental Association (ADA) has joined the CDC in pushing this new strategy. FAN is responding with our own new technology to defend the public's drinking water, which we will explain in tomorrow's bulletin.

In July, the CDC held a "Public Health Grand Rounds" presentation on fluoridation.  While there was no mention of the large number of new studies linking low levels of fluoride and fluoridated water to neurotoxicity, this was essentially an infomercial for a new technology that the CDC and ADA were calling "a game changer" in their efforts to expand fluoridation.  Below is a slide from that presentation, where you can see they intend to increase the percentage of fluoridated water systems from 73% to 77%--representing 19 million people on 32,000 water systems--by 2030. 

This goal isn't exactly new.  The CDC and ADA have utilized a number of strategies over the past decade to expand the practice, but largely due to FAN and our network of local volunteers and professionals, the number of fluoridating communities has actually decreased, while the population served has increased slightly due to urban growth. Some tactics they've tried, and continue to utilize, included introducing statewide mandate legislation in places like New Jersey and Hawaii, as well as providing federal and state funding for fluoride equipment and public relations campaigns. FAN has successfully helped fight off these mandates, working closely with legislators, local organizers, and private water companies.  And while the equipment grants have certainly slowed the trend of communities ending fluoridation when aging equipment breaks, it hasn't stopped it, because now more communities are also considering the numerous studies showing harm.

Now the pro-fluoridation lobby has a new strategy:

To accomplish this significant increase over the next 8 years they intend to utilize a new fluoridation system specifically designed to be simple and cheap enough for even the smallest water systems, which could include private systems, or even colleges and public schools.  They're calling it the "New Wave Fluoridation System." It utilizes compacted sodium fluorosilicate in a tablet form designed to dissolve over time in a small amount of water, much like the deodorizer tablets used in urinals.

We have learned that this process started in 2013, when CDC's Chief Fluoridation Engineer, Kip Duchon, suggested that the CDC help develop a product that was feasible for small and rural communities. Soon thereafter the CDC announced a Small Business Innovation Research grant opportunity for private business to develop and test the idea.  KC Industries, of Mulbery, Florida was awarded two large grants, one to develop the tablet and the other to develop the injection/feeder system.   

KC Industries is a small chemical manufacturer with a handful of employees.  According to their website, “The plant was built by Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation and began producing Sodium Fluorosilicate in 1957 as a raw material to manufacture aluminum.”  KC Industries purchased the facility in 1999 and appears to have focused heavily on the “dry” fluoride drinking water additive market with Sodium Fluoride.  Here is their page on their Sodium Fluoride product; it’s worth a quick look.

Over the past twenty years, more communities have switched their additive to fluorosilicic acid, which is an incredibly dangerous and corrosive liquid, but is cheaper.  This led to a massive decline in sales of dry additives, and KC Industries' profits. According to their press release, they were struggling until the CDC's grant, which they say provided "a new lease on life" for the chemical company. They're expecting "an immediate return on investment" as communities clamor for the new system.

The New Wave Fluoridation system will be marketed by DuBois Chemicals throughout North America starting on Jan. 1, 2022. KC Industry representatives have said that interest in the system has come from around the world — including Canada and Australia — and that they expect to be implementing the system soon in communities in Colorado and Georgia, followed by an additional half-dozen communities within the first few months.

The CDC employee who initiated this process, Kip Duchon, has retired from the CDC and is now a consultant to the ADA’s National Fluoridation Advisory Committee.  Even as a CDC employee he apparently worked closely with the pro-fluoridation lobby.  Here’s a photo of him as a government employee alongside a co-founder and board member of the American Fluoridation Society, wearing their t-shirt.

I suspect Duchon's consulting services to the ADA's fluoridation advisory committee will focus on promoting this new technology. The ADA has already called it a "game-changer" and lobbied Congressional members to include taxpayer funding for this technology in the recent Infrastructure Bill. FAN also reached out to these congressional members, and while the ADA's efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, the Infrastructure bill does provide some general funding for drinking water improvements focused on sustainability, security, and lead removal. I suspect the ADA will continue to lobby for federal funding in future budgets and bills, and will attempt to have local and state governments re-allocate and misuse some of these infrastructure funds in the meantime. FAN will continue to track and combat any of these attempts.

Meanwhile, the CDC continues to give very large taxpayer funded grants to states to pay for public relations campaigns to promote fluoridation.  FAN asked them to suspend this practice, and in response they agreed to organize a meeting with experts on fluoride neurotoxicity.

FAN will be working to stop this expansion of fluoridation. We have to, because our health and the safety of our drinking water depends on it.  Please join us in this effort.

Thank you,

Stuart Cooper
Campaign Director
Fluoride Action Network

Then and now

 Thanks to the sleuthing of Jennifer Marrett from Guelph, Ontario we have been made aware of a 6-minute film made by US Public Health Service in 1952. This film was made just two years after the PHS had endorsed fluoridation. The message from promoters has changed very little for decades since, with its huge emphasis on benefits, endorsements and how cheap the practice is. Little, if any, science is offered on potential health risks. What has changed recently – especially since 2017 -is high quality studies on fluoride’s damage to the developing brain -funded by the US government. What a tragedy we had to wait nearly 7 decades for such studies! And an even greater tragedy this science is being denied by promoters, professional bodies, and health agencies in fluoridated countries today.

We think you will find it very enlightening to view this video side by side with the video of Lord Reay’s speech in the House of Lords delivered just a few days ago on Dec 8.

THEN: US Public Health Service, 1952

 

NOW: Lord Reay, December 8, 2021

 23rd October

Joanna Blythman: Don't let this man poison Scotland's water
By Joanna Blythman
Columnist

IN A recent interview, Westminster Health Secretary Sajid Javid prefaced his remarks with the phrase, “I’m not a medic but ….” before going on to make yet another emphatic pronouncement on public health.

Why, when politicians are elevated to a cabinet role, are we expected to laugh off the fact that they have no relevant background experience in their designated portfolio?

Civil servants and advisors should make up for their lack of qualification for the post, but ministers with a knowledge deficit in their appointed field are easily manipulated.

They adopt the most simplistic proposition laid on their plates and become reliant on a cabal of advisors who do not represent the breadth of discussion and research on a given subject, because they push the agenda of political and industry lobby groups.

Who knows whether Javid is lazy, thick, or merely diligently following instructions? But in the arena of public health, his strings are surely being tugged by battle-hardened hawks who see a window to resurrect old campaigns that they already lost.

Such is the case with Javid’s plan to impose blanket water fluoridation throughout the UK, a measure approved by the Chief Medical Officers of Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales.

I had thought water fluoridation was a lost cause. This proposition has been quashed in Scotland previously.

The desire to heap this industrial chemical into our drinking water stemmed from a 1950s school of scientific thought that it was an unproblematic measure that would improve the teeth of poor children.

But independent scientists have shown that it isn’t. That’s why fluoridating tap water is permitted in just 24 countries around the globe, and only 2% of tap water drunk in Europe is treated with the chemical.

What’s at stake here?

Naturally-occurring fluoride in water is made up of the minerals fluorspar, fluorapatite and cryolite, but the fluoride that Javid wants to flow from our taps is a chemical waste, most commonly fluorosilicic acid.

This substance, a by-product of phosphate fertiliser manufacture, is highly corrosive and so classified as a hazardous waste.

The Fluoride Action Network, which seeks to broaden public awareness about the toxicity of fluoride and the health impacts of fluoride exposure, says that there are no available studies on the safety of this toxin in water.

Yet in his report setting out his rational for off-loading this substance in our water, England’s Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty dismisses all risks in a couple of paragraphs.

He admits that there are adverse associations between much higher levels of natural fluoride in drinking water and the prevalence of dental mottling, (fluorosis) and notes studies which suggest an association with hip fracture, Down’s syndrome, kidney stones, bladder and bone cancer, before asserting that “there is no significant association between water fluoridation and these conditions.”

Whitty’s blithe dismissal of risk has enraged toxicologists.

“The way the CMOs have treated the health effects posed by fluoridation is a gross dereliction of their duty to protect the health of the British people”, says toxicologist Professor Vyvyan Howard, of the UK Freedom From Fluoride Alliance.

Whitty’s laid-back assessment of risk relies on a solitary review, carried out in 2000, that mainly examined weak studies from the 1940s and 1950s, since superseded by higher quality ones.

Now a substantial body of human and animal studies indicate that fluoride is a neurotoxin and an endocrine disrupter.

Currently in the US, where most tap water has the chemical added, the Environmental Protection Agency is being sued by Food and Water Watch and others in US Federal court to prohibit the deliberate addition of fluoride chemicals to the public drinking water because of the threat they pose to the developing brain.

What bothers Professor Howard and other toxicologists in the UK is that Whitty and his chief medical officer colleagues have ignored high-quality US government-funded studies published since 2017 that have found effects on the developing foetus and infant at the very same fluoride water levels Whitty is proposing.

Such effects include lowered IQ (between 5 and 9 IQ points reported) and increased ADHD symptoms.

“These findings make complete nonsense of the CMOs claim that health effects only occur at much higher levels,” says Professor Howard.

A further major study in 2019, funded by the US National Institutes of Health linked a doubling of symptoms indicative of sleep apnea in adolescents to levels of fluoride in drinking water.

The same study reported that exposure to fluoridated water led to a reduction in kidney and liver function among adolescents.

The crazy thing is that it’s questionable whether fluoridation even does what it says on the tin, that is, prevent tooth decay.

In 2015, when Cochrane, a global scientific collaboration that gathers the best evidence from research evaluated 155 studies on the effects of water fluoridation on the prevention of caries, it concluded that there was “insufficient evidence that [fluoride] water treatment programmes resulted in a change of incidence or distribution in caries across socioeconomic classes."

You wonder if Whitty and his devolved colleagues have even read these studies.

I’ll bet Javid hasn’t a clue either. He’s been handed a happy-ever-after-for-your-health script and has dutifully sneaked this controversial fluoridation measure into the Health and Care bill.

I don’t know about you but although I could install a reverse osmosis filter to remove fluoride if Javid, Whitty et al get away with it, I don’t see why I should have to fork out to safeguard my health from a hazardous chemical I don’t need and don’t want.

There are many bright lawyers who would see an opportunity here. When Catherine McColl applied for an interdict to restrain Strathclyde Regional Council from fluoridating the water supplies, the Court of Session hearings ran for 201 days from 1980-1982 making it one of the longest and costliest cases in Scottish legal history.

Here’s another cause célebre crowd-funder in the making, to which I’d be delighted to contribute.

From Joy

 Fluoride Free Alliance UK (FFAUK)

Petition on the Parliament Website (2021-2022)

The Petitioner is asking for the cessation of Government attempts to roll out Water Fluoridation across the Nation. 

Go to:

https://www.ukfffa.org.uk/petition-against-fluoridation

From F.A.N.

 As the House of Lords in the United Kingdom considers a proposal to mandate fluoridation in the National Health and Care bill, esteemed British scientists are continuing to speak out in opposition. In October, three scientists--Vyvyan Howard, MB, ChB, PhD, Spedding Micklem, PhD, and Paul Connett, PhD--published a public statement to Boris Johnson, ripping apart the proposal using the latest science and slamming politicians for ignoring the well documented side-effects that will impact millions of residents.

We would like to share excerpts from a statement written in March by another british scientist. It was a formal evidence submission to the House of Commons Health Select Committee--which the author is an expert advisor to--during their inquiry into the white paper on the Health and Care proposal. The letter was written by Stephen Peckham, BSc, MA, a professor of health policy at the University of Kent and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Peckham was the lead author of a 2015 study published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community linking community water fluoridation to increased rates of hypothyroidism in the UK.  It attracted widespread attention at the time. Now we must bring that same attention to this and other statements from those experts who have quite literally "done their research." 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Excerpts from the written evidence submitted by Professor Stephen Peckham

...The lack of water fluoridation has certainly not been a problem and I would suggest that if the Secretary of State was looking for ways to improve oral health then water fluoridation should not even be considered given its lack of effectiveness. More attention should be given to schemes such as ChildSmile in Scotland which has been proven to reduce inequalities, reduce admissions for tooth extractions and provide broader public health benefits beyond oral health. Such a scheme links very clearly to addressing obesity issues as well. The need for more action on oral health issues is clearly identified in the recent Public Health England report on oral health inequalities. Focusing on water fluoridation is somewhat misguided

I am also concerned about the inaccuracy of statements in the White paper in relation to the effectiveness of water fluoridation as a public health intervention. The White Paper claims that:

“Water Fluoridation is clinically proven to improve oral health and reduce oral health inequalities. It has a protective effect which reduces the impact of a high sugar diet or poor oral hygiene. Around 10% of the population of England currently receive fluoridated water. In the most deprived areas fluoridation of water has been shown to reduce tooth decay in 5-year olds by a third”

Comprehensive and systematic reviews of water fluoridation do not support these claims and where such claims have been made they are based on inconclusive evidence and predominantly studies carried out pre 1975 – before the wide use of fluoride toothpastes (See limitations noted in the 2015 Cochrane Review and earlier 2000 NHSCRD review). There is also increasing evidence of neurological harm affecting IQ  in recent studies funded by the National Institutes for Health in North America and I am therefore surprised that this rather outdated, and ineffective intervention is given priority in the current White Paper proposals. We should not be considering any new schemes given the increasing amount of evidence linking fluoridation to harmful health effects.

In addition, in 2013 when decisions about water fluoridation were transferred from the NHS Strategic Health Authorities to local government the specific reason given was that local communities should have a stronger say. The current proposal would seem to shift that control to central government and the Department of Health and Social Care. This effectively removes a significant degree of community engagement and will likely reduce any subsequent proposals to simply being consultation exercises that give local people very little involvement in the process...

See References Below The Update / Read The Full Letter

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Peckham's letter is especially important because his speciality is in health policies and he is currently an adviser to the British government on these matters. It is extraordinary therefore that his advice has been ignored in favor of a white paper that was written by oral health specialists who were hopelessly out of date with respect to the US government-funded fluoride-IQ studies and the other harm that fluoridation may cause. By ignoring Peckham the government is setting itself up for a very embarrassing situation when the real science becomes known to decision-makers and the general public. Lord Reay's 6 minute speech in the House of Lords (transcript here) on Tuesday will hopefully shorten the time it takes for that reality to be achieved if enough people in the UK get to see and hear it.

Stuart Cooper
Campaign Director
Fluoride Action Network

Legislature Moves Forward With Bill Banning Fluoridation

Legislature Moves Forward With Bill Banning Fluoridation The largest State Legislature in the U.S., with 400 members, is poised to be the first to pass a bill prohibiting the addition of fluoridation chemicals to the public drinking water.  After two public hearings and a year of consideration, the Resources, Recreation, and Development committee in the New Hampshire House of Representatives has recommended HB611, an act abolishing fluoridation, as “ought to pass” by a bi-partisan vote of 12-9. The bill will now go to the House floor in January, where legislators have a history of voting with the committee report more than 80% of the time. HB611 was introduced in December 2020 by a bipartisan team of sponsors, including veteran legislators and members of legislative leadership.  The prime sponsor, Rep. Leah Cushman, is a nurse who has loved ones with dental fluorosis as a result of overexposure from community water fluoridation.  She authored a powerful OpEd prior to the public hearing last January explaining why NH residents ought to support the bill.  At the first public hearing in January, committee members heard and received testimony about the harms of the practice from a variety of professionals including a pharmacist, a veterinarian, nurses, scientists specializing in neurotoxicity, dentists, and doctors. They also heard from many residents, including parents of children with dental fluorosis and citizens with hypersensitivities to fluoride and concerns over potential thyroid and kidney affects. Much of this testimony was coordinated by the Fluoride Action Network working with local stakeholders.  Due to the pandemic slowing the legislative progress of all bills in 2021, the bill was retained and studied over the summer.  In November, a work session was held, where committee members were updated on the new science since the previous hearing, including a benchmark dose analysis on fetal neurotoxicity. Of course, the bill was not without opposition from the public health industrial complex.  Opponents included the NH Oral Health Coalition, the NH Dental Society, and representatives of the NH Department of Health and Human services and NH Department of Environmental services, which oversees drinking water regulations. However, committee members had been provided the most recent science prior to the hearing, and it became clear to them that the opposition was relying on inaccurate and outdated talking points and speakers had little personal knowledge of the issue.  A key moment at the public hearing occurred when I urged the committee members to challenge opponents on the neurotoxicity research and ask if they had actually read the studies or were relying on statements from the American Dental Association and CDC. When asked this very question by a member, a representative from Health and Human services admitted he was in-fact reading talking points, but "trusted the people and agencies that produced them." NH has a long and enviable history of regulating environmental toxins years before federal agencies and corporate polluters admit harm is being caused and take action.  In 2020, the NH legislature passed a bill requiring the lowest allowable PFOA levels in drinking water.  In previous years, they were leaders in removing MTBE from gasoline, and banned BPA from infant bottles despite FDA and EPA assurances--since proven wrong--that no action was necessary. HB611 is the result of a multi-year education effort by the Fluoride Action Network. In 2012, responding to the skyrocketing rates of dental fluorosis, we put together a sponsorship team, bill language, and a campaign that ultimately led to the same House committee--Resources, Recreation, and Development Committee--passing HB1416, requiring a statement sent to all water consumers in NH’s fluoridated communities notifying them of the CDC’s warning not to reconstitute infant formula with fluoridated tap water, as this is when children are at greatest risk of overexposure to fluoride.  This bill was passed by the House and Senate, and signed by the Governor.  It has now been law for the past 9 years: RSA 485:14-b.   The NH legislature’s action was prophetic, because two years later in 2014 the US Department of Health and Human Services lowered the recommended level of fluoride in public water supplies throughout the country by 40% from 1.2ppm to 0.7ppm due to the CDC’s data showing overexposure in fluoridated communities.  Ten of NH’s public water supplies were fluoridating at a level of 1.0ppm during this time, so our levels dropped by 30% to 0.7ppm.   Years later, this warning and the reality that the legislature acted correctly despite pleas from the dental lobby, set the stage for this years bill.  Prior to voting to recommend HB611, legislators referenced the infant warning statement, and couldn't understand why we'd continue adding an additive that harms bottle-fed infants.  They also commented on NH being in the top three states with lowest dental decay for 3rd graders, along with Vermont, despite both states having some of the lowest rates of fluoridation in the country.  When they compared those rates with the states with the highest decay, they noticed most of them have had statewide fluoridation mandates for 30+ years and are 90+% fluoridated. The bill will now go to the House floor for a debate and vote.  If passed, it will then have a public hearing in a Senate committee some time in either February or March, followed by a vote by the full Senate, then will go to the Governor for his signature or veto.  If successful, this bill could be law by this summer.  The best way you can help this hopefully precedent-setting effort is to support the Fluoride Action Network.  Your support will allow us to help coordinate the best grassroots and grasstops campaign possible over the next several months.  Success in NH will undoubtedly have a domino-effect across the country, as we're already seeing with a similar bill having been introduced in Massachusetts and another likely to be introduced in Hawaii. Stay tuned, as I will provide more information on our legislative activities in future bulletins. Thank you, Stuart Cooper Campaign Director

Fluoride Action Network  Binghamton, New York  info@fluoridealert.org