Wednesday, January 20, 2010

We are taken as fools by our respective governments.

And, by forcing us to drink fluoridated water they hope to make docile fools out of us. Their fallacious spin is so convincing it will fool most people. This is a practice perfected by the Nazis.

"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over... persistence is the first and most important requirement for success. Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.” - Adolf Hitler

Following is a letter by Sandy Sanderson editor of “This Month Magazine” written to Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon and replied to by her sidekick Margaret Noris, which is indicative that the minister, most likely, didn’t even read the letter and Sandy just got the normal form letter, pre-printed and pulled from a drawer. The people of Australia are experiencing the same helplessness we experienced under the Nazis in Germany; to talk sense to them was futile, they knew what was best for you, without asking whether you wanted it or not. Click on picture to enlarge.

Our politicians are not listening to the ordinary people anymore, and they are experts in the art of obscurantism, just like the Nazis. - Werner
* * * * * *
The Fluoride Deception, by Christopher Bryson. Click on this link to hear the truth.
* * * * * *
Sandy Sanderson is taking the Federal Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, to task for not answering her questions about the safety of fluoride and is challenging her to show her proof that fluoride is safe.
* * * * * * *
Dear Nicola Roxon and Margaret Noris,

Thank you for your letter in reply to my concerns about water fluoridation, however you have failed to answer the serious questions posed.

It is completely irresponsible to say that, "fluoride in the water system is safe and effective for people of all ages" when there is clearly a mountain of evidence from numerous international studies that it is unsafe for chronic human consumption.

I don't trust your opinion and would certainly not be reassured by you merely on the endorsement of certain commercial organisations that have vested interests in promoting fluoridation, including Colgate.

Here are the failures in your fiduciary duty of care to protect the public:

1) You do not know the amount of fluoride being consumed by individuals when you account for volume of water consumed, consumption of foods made with fluoridated water, pharmaceuticals containing fluoride etc. You have authorised not merely the cleaning treatment of drinking water, but the indiscriminate dosing of a drug to the population without checking how much is being consumed or the resulting adverse health effects.

2) You have not conducted your own 'independent' randomised clinical trials regarding the safety of chronic ingestion of industrial waste silicofluoride chemicals from drinking water. You cannot possibly know it is safe because there have been no studies anywhere in the world that show it is safe - for any age group. You cannot possibly know if it is contributing to Alzheimer, cancer, osteoporosis (skeletal fluorosis), arteriosclerosis, kidney disease or diabetes if you are not checking. I challenge you to show me the proof.

PROFESSIONALS CALLING FOR THE END OF FLUORIDATION:

Professor Sheldon of the famous University of York study into fluoridation said in a subsequent letter dated 2004, "The review did not show water fluoridation to be safe."

According to Hans C Moolenburgh, "For the detoxification and neutralization of these toxins, we depend on our enzymatic system and it is of course the height of folly to add a vicious and general enzyme-inhibitor like fluoride to our water supplies."

Professor Roger D Masters has challenged our health department ministers to a live televised debate on the subject: ‘Silicofluorides are Toxins that Harm Behaviour and Public Health’, but no official has had the gumption to stand up and publicly defend their pro-fluoridation position because it is so untenable and the evidence of fluoridation's harm is so strong. Roger D. Masters is Research Professor at Dartmouth College, and also the Nelson A. Rockefeller Professor of Government, emeritus. Recently, his research has focused on cognitive neuroscience, the nonverbal behaviour of leaders, and the effects of toxic metals (such as lead and manganese) on human behaviour. He is President of the Foundation for Neuroscience and Society, and serves on the editorial board of Evolutionary Psychology. He is co-author of ‘Water treatment with silicofluorides and lead toxicity,’ with Myron J. Coplan, International Journal of Environmental Studies, 56 (4, 1999): 435-449.

Fluoride lowers IQ in children: Emeritus Professor Paul Connett said recently in the Sunraysia newspaper Mildura, "In one of 23 studies published on this matter (see http://www.FluorideAlert.org/brain ) the authors found a 5-10 point IQ difference in children between a village with fluoride levels in well-water below 0.7 ppm and another village with well-water between 2.5 and 4.5 ppm. The authors estimated that IQ would begin to be lowered at 1.9 ppm. A child drinking two litres of water at 1 ppm would get a higher dose of fluoride than a child drinking one litre at 1.9 ppm, thus it is preposterous to claim that this study is irrelevant to Australia. There is no adequate margin of safety to protect Australian children from this.”

In a sworn Indian court affidavit, A.K. Susheela Ph.D said, "Fluoride is potentially a dangerous chemical and a poisonous substance, which does no good to the human body. With a high degree of scientific accuracy and certainty, I conclude that artificial fluoridation of drinking water is an ineffective means of improving dental health, and is in fact quite dangerous to those forced to consume it."

There are thousands more professionals from around the world calling for the end to water fluoridation as an outmoded and dangerous practice belonging to the era of DDT, Thalidomide, Lead in Petrol and Asbestos poisoning. See www.fluoridealert.org or read about how the legal profession are now becoming involved in the fluoride issue in the UK with a Judicial Review at www.ukcaf.org

You owe it to the people of Australia to do your own due diligence in this very important health issue. I hold you and all other ministers and bureaucrats that agreed to, pushed for or are in any way associated with the fluoridation of Australia, personally liable for damages. If you fully understood the harm you are inflicting on people with fluoridation you would realise that it makes the asbestos poisoning issue pale into insignificance in comparison. You have no recourse to say you didn't know about the harmful effects of fluoridation. Consider yourselves duly served with sufficient information to conduct a further 'independent' investigation, hopefully leading to the cessation of this abhorrent assault on people's health.

Yours sincerely
Sandy Sanderson
Nerang Qld 4211
- 19 January 2010



30 comments:

margaret Phillips said...

When you look at our Health Minister, you would have to assume she is a victim of fluoride poisoning herself. lank hair and enlarged thyroid indicate she has either overdosed on fluoride or underdosed on iodine. or maybe iodine can't get in where fluoride already lurks!!!?
Is it any wonder she can't comprehend the issues?

BlueyBlogger said...

What most people don't know about the Water Fluoridation Act 2008, is
the fact that it contains hidden new property laws as well as search & seizure laws. However, after doing a little syntaxing on the Act, we found that it actually says nothing at all, and is a complete lie.
The Act is just a re-hashed 1963 Act with some dastardly new laws inside. Anyone wishing to see the proof? Call me.
Bluey Morgan 40532908

Anonymous said...

Fluoride is beneficial! No, fluoride does not make you susceptible and docile, there is absolutely no evidence! Simply mentioning Hitler and the Nazi regime is your way of injecting fear into society. The small dosage used in our water supplies poses no threat to our health whatsoever.
* * * * * *
A note from the blogger: Although I have requested no anonymous comments, but have decided to publish this comment anyway, because it opens the debate – but I don’t want to encourage anonymous comments, so in future I might not publish them. - Werner Schmidlin

Sonja Hardy said...

Anonymous, you clearly haven't looked any further than government and Dental Association propaganda to form your opinion about fluoride, or you would know that it DOES pose a considerable threat to our health - even in small doses, which accumulate in the body over time. As for your comment about Hitler and Nazis - medicating the entire population of Queensland without their consent is dictatorial, and certainly has parallels to Hitler's Nazism.

By the way, using your real name would show you have the courage to stand by your convictions - misguided though they are.

Fluoride Fighter said...

Anonymous, please do some independent research before helping to perpetuate the myth of fluoridation - " ... the greatest case of scientific fraud of the 20th century, if not of all time" according to Dr Robert Carton, former US EPA scientist. A good place to start is at the Fluoride Action Network website on www.fluoridealert.org .

Lorraine Albright Edge Hill said...

Werner, I have a strong gut feeling that the anonymous comment came from Desley Boyle’s office.

Mitch Barclay said...

First of all, I am sorry for the anonymous comment, I was not aware of the blogger's request for no anonymity, nor do I believe it showed I was lacking courage.

Sonja, yes my research has gone further than governmental sources and the Dental Association's so called "propaganda". Again, no Fluoride does not pose any considerable threat to our health. Yes, the nutrient has been found to accumulate in the Pineal gland, a gland in the brain that produces hormones. However, after numerous experiments, no conclusions have been made as to whether or not Fluoride interferes with the Pineal gland's function. I can understand your anger in regards to the fact that many Cairns residents did not give their consent over this controversial issue, however, this is about society's benefit. Do you really believe Anna Bligh is plotting to poison the people of Cairns?

"Fluoride Fighter" (basically anonymous, right?), yes I too can find a quote to support my argument:

"Although antifluoridationists have gained much publicity in their attempt to create the illusion of scientific controversy about fluoridation, claims of a health hazard from water fluoridation are unfounded. Fluoridation has probably been the most thoroughly studied community health measure in recent history. The American Dental Association cites extensive research demonstrating that fluoridation does not increase the incidence or mortality rate of any chronic condition, including cancer, heart disease, intra-cranial lesions, nephritis, cirrhosis, and Down syndrome. Results of recent studies failed to find any correlation between fluoride in the water supply and cancer in human beings." - Journal of the American Dietetic Association.

Yes, I know many of you will again label this source unreliable and "propaganda". I find it amusing that you all believe the experts who support your argument are correct, yet the experts who support mine are evil conspirators.

And finally, Lorraine Albright, no I am not from Desley Boyle's office, and am proud to say so. My support for Fluoride says nothing about my opinions of those in politics. I just know the nutrient is beneficial.

Sonja Hardy said...

Mitch, thank you for your response. Yes, I do believe your sources are unreliable. Having read widely about the history of fluoridation, I believe much pro-fluoride research has been paid for by those with vested interests. There is also a long history of manipulation of statistics and hiding of any evidence that does not support fluoridation. I highly recommend you read the following publications, and you might reach the same conclusion:

The Fluoride Deception (Seven Stories Press, New York, 2004) by award winning investigative journalist Christopher Bryson - a meticulously researched exposé of the history of fluoridation, that “reveals how a secretive group of powerful industries, all of which faced extensive litigation for fluoride pollution, collaborated with officials from the National Institute of Dental Research to launder fluoride’s public image.” This is a fascinating book.

Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death? (Newleaf, Dublin, 2001) by Barry Groves is well researched, easy to read and uses evidence to refute every pro-fluoride argument of the British Fluoridation Society.

Fluoride Fatigue (Paua Press, Dunedin, 2008) by Dr Bruce Spittle is also well researched, describes undeniable ill effects of water fluoridation, and how they can be reversed by avoiding the consumption of fluoride.

Why I changed my mind about water fluoridation by Dr John Colquhoun, former Chief Dental Officer in Auckland, NZ. This is easily found on the internet.

Also easily found on the internet are papers by Dr Hardy Limeback, Professor of Preventive Dentistry at Toronto University. Look for his apology to former students and patients for misleading them about fluoridation.

I could quote other papers that refute your claims – but don’t have time right now to dig them out. I will be out of the country without access to a computer for the next few weeks, but look forward to re-entering this debate when I return – hopefully after you have delved into some of the reading I have suggested.

Sandy Sanderson said...

So dentists are now supposed to be experts in toxicology? In cancer? In heart disease? Are you kidding? Now for some real science posted by scientist and toxicologist Paul Connet. This is a peer reviewed study on cadavres of people that had lived most of their lives in fluoridated areas by Dr Jennifer Luke from University of Surrey:
"The soft tissue of the adult pineal gland contains more fluoride than any other soft tissue in the body - a level of fluoride (~300 ppm) capable of inhibiting enzymes. The pineal gland also contains hard tissue (hyroxyapatite crystals), and this hard tissue accumulates more fluoride (up to 21,000 ppm) than any other hard tissue in the body (e.g. teeth and bone). After finding that the pineal gland is a major target for fluoride accumulation in humans, Dr. Luke conducted animal experiments to determine if the accumulated fluoride could impact the functioning of the gland - particulalry the gland's regulation of melatonin. Luke found that animals treated with fluoride had lower levels of circulating melatonin, as reflected by reduced levels of melatonin metabolites in the animals' urine. This reduced level of circulating melatonin was accompanied - as might be expected - by an earlier onset of puberty in the fluoride-treated female animals." Re: http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/pineal/ And melatonin regulates your body clock and determines your rate of ageing. So in other words, fluoride ages you faster.

Sonja Hardy said...

Mitch, thank you for your response. Yes, I do believe your sources are unreliable. Having read widely about the history of fluoridation, I believe much pro-fluoride research has been paid for by those with vested interests. There is also a long history of manipulation of statistics and hiding of any evidence that does not support fluoridation. I highly recommend you read the following publications, and you might reach the same conclusion:

The Fluoride Deception (Seven Stories Press, New York, 2004) by award winning investigative journalist Christopher Bryson - a meticulously researched exposé of the history of fluoridation, that “reveals how a secretive group of powerful industries, all of which faced extensive litigation for fluoride pollution, collaborated with officials from the National Institute of Dental Research to launder fluoride’s public image.” This is a fascinating book.

Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death? (Newleaf, Dublin, 2001) by Barry Groves is well researched, easy to read and uses evidence to refute every pro-fluoride argument of the British Fluoridation Society.

Fluoride Fatigue (Paua Press, Dunedin, 2008) by Dr Bruce Spittle is also well researched, describes undeniable ill effects of water fluoridation, and how they can be reversed by avoiding the consumption of fluoride.

Why I changed my mind about water fluoridation by Dr John Colquhoun, former Chief Dental Officer in Auckland, NZ. This is easily found on the internet.

Also easily found on the internet are papers by Dr Hardy Limeback, Professor of Preventive Dentistry at Toronto University. Look for his apology to former students and patients for misleading them about fluoridation.

I could quote other papers that refute your claims – but don’t have time right now to dig them out. I will be out of the country without access to a computer for the next few weeks, but look forward to re-entering this debate when I return – hopefully after you have delved into some of the reading I have suggested.

Mitch Barclay said...

Sandy, in my previous comment I too stated Fluoride accumulates in the pineal gland. However, it has not been concluded that Fluoride actually interferes with the pineal gland's function. Below is the conclusion of Dr. Jennifer Luke's findings which you failed to highlight:

"In conclusion, the human pineal gland contains the highest concentration of fluoride in the body. Fluoride is associated with depressed pineal melatonin synthesis by prepubertal gerbils and an accelerated onset of sexual maturation in the female gerbil. The results strengthen the hypothesis that the pineal has a role in the timing of the onset of puberty. Whether or not fluoride interferes with pineal function in humans requires further investigation."

Although it is known that Fluoride actually accumulates in the gland, it is not known whether the nutrient actually interferes with its function. Last three words: REQUIRES FURTHER INVESTIGATION.

Sonja, I look forward to reading the many sources you have presented to me. In regards to:

"The Fluoride Deception" - One personal question. Why do YOU think Anna Bligh actually intends to harm society?

"Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves To Death?" - There is also evidence to refute antifluoridationist's argument. For example: "Fluoride was banned in Europe, so why would we want it in out water?!"
The truth? That is a myth. Europe's water piping system is much older than Australia's so they found it more cost effective to fluoridate their SALT instead.
Example 2: "Fluoride causes cancer!"
Again, myth. The U.S. Public Health Service expert panel concluded that Fluoride has no link to cancer or any other disease.
This is just one of the many myths that antifluoridationists use to scare society into believing Fluoride is dangerous. If this information can't be trusted, can other sources claiming Fluoride is hazardous not be trusted either?

"Fluoride Fatigue" - Yes there are ill effects of Fluoridation. However, this is in regards to dosage! If too much Fluoride is added to the water supply, a condition known as Dental Fluorosis can occur, which results in staining on the teeth. However, the Cairns Council have done their research! The ideal dosage of Fluoride has been added to our water supply in that Fluorosis cannot occur.

As for the rest of your sources, I have yet to investigate them. I too look forward to the rest of this debate.

BlueyBlogger said...

I challenge "Anonymous" to come forward to share in a public debate on the concerns and FACTS about fluoride. The only people in my books who use the word anonymous, are usually cowards, idiots with NO knowledge, or government spin doctors. So come on anonymous, show your true colours, or hush your mouth

Fluoride Fighter said...

To Mitch Barkley, re “Fluoride Fighter” being anonymous. I gave my name, address and phone number to the blogger, so he could ring me if he wanted to – so I’m not anonymous to him. I went under a nickname for a reason. Did you give your contact details to Werner?

Lorraine Albright said...

Thank you Mitch for clearing it up for me that “Anonymous wasn’t Desley Boyle’s office. Please answer me the following questions:

1. Why has all the water to be fluoridated when only a small amount is consumed – and certainly not by the young. Why did Bligh, whose government is broke, would want to spend 40 million dollars on fluoride infrastructure; a flawed practice that most countries in the world have banned? And now, our regional council is lumbered with an extra half million dollars.
2. Why does the water we shower, wash the dishes and clothes, water the plants need to be fluoridated?
3. What about the large population with dentures, what benefit do they derive from fluoridated water?
4. Have you seen the dismal dental record of Tasmania that has been fluoridated for 50 years?

What is getting people’s bristles up is that they are forced to ingest this poison and weren't given a choice, which should be a basic democratic principle. Bligh never asked anybody whether or not we wanted it.

Werner Schmidlin said...

Hi Mitch,I would like to point out to you, that there is a link in the posting you commented on to “The Fluoride Deception” by Christopher Bryson.

Furthermore, I also have the CD and the book and would be only to happy to lend them to you.

Mitch Barclay said...

"BlueyBlogger", clearly you have not been reading this debate. This "coward" has come forward already. Mind you, commenting under the name "BlueyBlogger" is anonymity aswell (a bit hypocrytical?).

"Fluoride Fighter", no I have not given my contact details to Werner. I have no intentions of long phone conversations or organising dinner parties.

Lorraine, to answer your questions:

1. It's tap water. This water is used throughout the household, not just for drinking. All the water has to be fluoridated because simply fluoridating the water we drink can't be done. A flawed practice? In some cases, that is true. For example, in China, after fluoridating water, the nation saw a reduced number of cavities, however, an increase in Dental Fluorosis. Because of this, Fluoridation was halted. This only occured becuase the Fluoride concentration was set too high. Like I stated in my previous comment, the Queensland government have done their research! They have added the ideal concentration of Fluoride to our water so that this will not just be another "flawed experiment".

2. As seen in my answer to question 1, tap water is being Fluoridated. Tap water is also used in our showers, to wash dishes, and to water the garden. Why should this matter?

3. So we should stop the majority of Cairns' people receiving beneficial dental care, just because a percentage of the population have no teeth?

4. Fluoride is not the ONLY key to fighting tooth decay. Although Tasmania's water has been Fluoridated for 50 years, the state is also known for poor dental care. For example, in Sally Glaetzers article "Dentist Shortage = Bad Teeth", it is highlighted that Tasmania has an alarming shortage of dentists. The average amount of dentists per 100,000 people nationally is 49.5. However, Tasmania has only 31 dentists per 100,000. Frightening, isn't it? Poor dental records cannot be linked to Fluoride when there are statistics such as those just mentioned.

BlueyBlogger said...

Something about the government which EVERYONE seems to have forgotten about is this;
Anna Bligh did NOT organise the fluoride thing.
Every Premier of EVERY State, NEVER organises anything, they just follow orders, with most of the lackeys (those who lack knowledge), doing the dirty work, especially when it comes to Natural Resources. The Post Office is responsible for ALL Natural Resources...everywhere!!
Secondly; The Water Fluoridation Act 2008...has anybody read it?
I have, and it is the most dastardly piece of legislation ever drafted...by Joh Bjelke's government, then Peter Beattie.
Hidden inside the Act, are NEW search & siezure laws from beyond Joh's grave, and nobody has taken the time to see it. I'm sorry to say that I have. I have now also syntaxed the fiction in the Act to prove that it actually says NOTHING!!!
I will demonstrate this fact to all who come to the next Bluey Morgan Quantum Language technology seminars in Kuranda and Cairns.
Watch this space!!

Jeanie, from Brisbane said...

Hi Mitch, I think it’s great that you have posted a comment. It is a brave comment in light of the current research. To suggest that there is documented evidence with problems in the pineal gland is just another acknowledged problem.

Already the National Health and Medical research Council of Australia have said that NO fluoride should be given to babies under six months and then just a small amount at one year old (and this is not possible with fluoridated water), AND, the NRC American report suggests that there are issues with thyroid function at low dose fluoride, AND the Lancet Medical Journal contributors have suggested that fluoridated water should be considered as neurotic.

In view of this research data and with the knowledge of the recent Australian Oral Health data showing that all states had similar tooth decay, but the state with the most fluoridation had the worse tooth decay - more than Queensland with least fluoridated water. It leaves the dental media mill with "egg on face". It all comes back to science, and, if one can't read a science paper as has been noted with the inaccurate data by the Qld Dental/Qld Health folk on the oral stats here in Qld, then there is nothing left but "spin".

However the spin machine will only last so long. Let us know if you need some actual data and actual research papers, maybe Werner can find room for these.

Anna Hill, Townsville said...

Incredulous!! Reading the answers by Mitch Barclay to Lorraine’s questions sounds like it would have been answered Anna Bligh and her cohorts. You would have to be joking.

Just analyzing one of your answers in regards to the terrible tooth decay record in Tasmania , for which you gave the following reason: “Tasmania has only 31 dentists per 100,000 . . . “
How pathetic, if fluoride would do the job, we are fallaciously told it would do, then you wouldn’t need 31 dentists. None are as blind as those who don’t want to see. I rest my case.

Mitch Barclay said...

Jeanie, the ideal dosage of Fluoride that is injected into our water supply is 0.7 - 1 ppm (parts per million). This means that per litre of water, there is approximately 0.7 - 1mg of Fluoride. Now first of all, a baby 0-6 months of age would never consume 1L of water. They literally have sips of water per day in conjunction with their breast-feeding. The adequate intake of Fluoride for a baby under the age of 6 months, is 0.01 mg/day (the extremely small number is most likely why the NRC American Report would have simply stated NO Fluoride). Therefore, a baby who consumes very little water daily, would be experiencing this ideal intake.

In regards to Fluoride and its affect upon the thyroid, again, it is all about dosage. Fluoride has been found to POSSIBLY affect the thyroid at 1.3ppm. However, the dosage in our water supply ranges from 0.7 - 1ppm. How, after years of water and salt Fluoridation in the US and Europe, no affects upon the thyroid been acknowledged? Most likely because there aren't any.

Anna Hill, of course my answers would be similar to Anna Bligh and her cohorts. We support the same argument! In your post you stated that because of Fluoride we shouldn't need dentists. Are you kidding? Fluoride is no substitute to dentistry! If your trips to the dentist have been substituted with a nice, cold glass of water, then clearly you have been misinformed. Fluoride must be taken in combination with regular brushing and dentist trips. Your case is hardly rested.

Colin Bishop said...

Mitch Barclay said...
First of all, I am sorry for the anonymous comment, I was not aware of the blogger's request for no anonymity, nor do I believe it showed I was lacking courage.

Leave your comment

No anonymous comments please. Werner

There are several people posting on this site that know me as the "Fluoride Fighter". The comments may on this site are all under my real name - as you can see.

Malcolm Smith said...

Fluoridation is a waste of tax money

Even if fluoride was helpful to teeth, distributing any drug in drinking water is the most expensive and wasteful method. As a Civil Engineer, I know that people drink only 1/2% (one-half percent) of the water they use. The remaining 99.5% of the water with toxic fluoride chemical is dumped directly into the environment through the sewer system. For example, for every $1000 of fluoride chemical added to water, $995 would be directly wasted down the drain in toilets, showers, dishwashers, etc., $5 would be consumed in water by the people, and less than $0.50 (fifty cents) would be consumed by children, the target group for this outdated practice. That would be comparable to buying one gallon of milk, using six-and-one-half drops of it, and pouring the rest of the gallon in the sink.

Janice Bourke said...

So a pea sized blob of toothpaste contains less fluoride than an 8oz glass of water - so we can let children swallow toothpaste?

And what about the tins of baby food - chicken - mecanically deboned chicken processed with fluoridated water can contain up to 2 ppm - look beyond the tap and consider the accumulation of this toxic waste in our environment - why do you think the government will not allow a total environmental exposure assessment.

Google "The Fluoride Glut".

And look at this:

http://www.yourottawaregion.com/news/article/1241274--council-seeks-learned-advice-on-fluoride-in-water

You would think that they would know all about fluoride after 50+ years? But most Yanks and Canadians haven't got a clue what fluoride actually is? WHY? Beacuse the governments, dentists etc have concealed the facts and the truth right from the start.

Martin Ching said...

As an added bonus, one you were not aware of, is understanding the relationship between water fluoridation and increased lead and aluminum uptake in children and adults. Masters and Coplan took blood samples of over 400,00 school children in Mass. and NY: the children living in fluoridated areas had 50 to 100% greater blood-lead serum levels. Their studies of violent crime like road-rage, multiple murders/school shootings-the perps all came from fluoridated areas and/or were on Prozac. I can make their studies available to you. They also did a study showing that not being fluoridated versus fluoridated in terms of violent crimes statistcs, could prevent a determinable amount. And, since it takes $20-50,000 to process a case in court and legal costs and $30-50,000/year to house inmates, a County could drop $millions of dollars to their bottom-line in savings.

As an added bonus, one you were not aware of, is understanding the relationship between water fluoridation and increased lead and aluminum uptake in children and adults. Masters and Coplan took blood samples of over 400,00 school children in Mass. and NY: the children living in fluoridated areas had 50 to 100% greater blood-lead serum levels. Their studies of violent crime like road-rage, multiple murders/school shootings-the perps all came from fluoridated areas and/or were on Prozac. I can make their studies available to you. They also did a study showing that not being fluoridated versus fluoridated in terms of violent crimes statistcs, could prevent a determinable amount. And, since it takes $20-50,000 to process a case in court and legal costs and $30-50,000/year to house inmates, a County could drop $millions of dollars to their bottom-line in savings.


http://radiolibertyarchives.gsradio.net:8080/110111c.mp3

Sincerely, Kurt Irmischer
Citizens for Safe Water

Janice Bourke said...

Will you hold a referendum in conjunction with the next Queensland state election to allow the people to decide if they want Fluoride in their water? The American Dental Association warns mothers not to make up infant formula with fluoridated water and there are now 25 studies showing that Fluoride lowers IQ. Fluoride and the silicon delivered with it are threats to human health in numerous ways. Over 2.5 million people have turned off fluoride in their communities in just the last year. See www.fluoridealert.org
Vote!

Martin Ching said...

Thank you for your further emails of 10 and 11 November 2011 to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) regarding water fluoridation. Jessica has passed your complaint to me for further consideration and response.

I understand from your emails that you are concerned with the safety of fluoridation in public water and you feel that the various government departments responsible have never tested the chemical and cannot guarantee its safety. You also assert that the ACCC should investigate for breaches of the Consumer Protection Act.

As mentioned previously, the role of the ACCC is to ensure compliance with the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, which is designed to encourage fair trading and discourage anti-competitive conduct through a specific set of competition and consumer protection rules.

The introduction of fluoride into public water and its continued monitoring and safety is endorsed by state governments and enacted in various legislations. The Competition & Consumer Act 2010 (the Act) applies only to persons engaged in trade or commerce. The government authorities responsible for the introduction and continued safety of water fluoridation are carrying out their statutory functions and therefore unlikely to be considered to be carrying on a business for the purposes of the Act. It is therefore the view of this office that the actions of these various government departments are likely to fall outside the ACCC’s jurisdiction.

The ACCC is constrained by its jurisdictional limits. It does not have the authority to pursue conduct which is not in breach of the legislation it administers. The legislation lays down a specific set of competition and consumer protection rules and the ACCC must operate within the legislative framework

Thank you for contacting the ACCC with your concerns and I regret that I am unable to provide you with further assistance in relation to this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Davin
Assistant Director, ACCC Infocentre
1300 302 502

Conrad Berghoff said...

http://www.hansard.act.gov.au/hansard/1989/pdfs/19890823.pdf

There is nothing new about the dangers of fluoridation - but they continue with this evil.

I think that it is time to get the dolls and the needles out!

A. Dentist said...

Even though fluoride has been
successfully used to inhibit dental caries, its availability
through dietary fluoride supplementation programmes or through regular use of fluoridated dentifrices does not appear to result in teeth being more resistant to erosion. Teo et al.7 found, in a comprehensive study,
that systemic fluoride use during childhood provided little protection against erosion lesions, even though it inhibited caries development.

http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/public_health_nut7.pdf

Conrad Berghoff said...

I for one will look forward to the day when we can say:

"Bligh is gone, may God now bless democracy".

Martin Ching said...

Recent studies have failed to note differences in the composition of the plaque flora of individuals exposed to high and low F levels (19, 26). These results suggest a lack of an effect of F ingested via the water supply or supplements on the ecology of the micro flora.

Our results may indicate that effects of F on the metabolic activities of the plaque flora are also unlikely except perhaps at uncommonly high F concentrations.

Effect of Human Saliva on the Fluoride Sensitivity of Glucose Uptake by Streptococcus mutans
GREG R. GERMAINEL2 * AND LOIS M. TELLEFSON'
Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry,' and Department of Microbiology, Medical School,'
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Received 23 April 1981/Accepted 21 July 1981

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC350950/pdf/iai00158-0243.pdf