|
INTERNATIONAL FLUORIDE INFORMATION NETWORK
IFIN BULLETIN No (IFIN)
- IFIN # 841
- IFIN # 851
- IFIN # 858
- IFIN # 865
-
INTERNATIONAL FLUORIDE INFORMATION NETWORK
IFIN BULLETIN: IFIN # 841: Mixed response to Fluoridation and Integrity
petition.
September 10, 2003.
Dear All,
Sorry for duplicate postings here. I am dealing with two long lists with
overlap.
On September 1, in IFIN #834, we announced the public launch of the
"Fluoridation & Integrity" petition, simultaneously in about a
dozen countries worldwide. This petition, a list of signatories and the appeal
which helped to garner over 300 signatures from scientists and public health
activists in 38 countries, can be accessed at http://www.fluoridealert.org/integrity.htm
The response from the media has been very mixed. We appear to have been
completely ignored in the US and Canada (please correct me if I am wrong on
this). One of our friends actually told us that "integrity" is a big
yawn for the North American media. He is probably right and that is why
fluoridation has got such a foothold here. Everything is for sale, including
science and our health! But that is all the more reason to celebrate and support
the scientists and public health activists who have had the integrity and
courage to speak out on this issue. Please check the list of signers to see
those who have signed on. This list could be very, very helpful in local
battles.
On the other hand the response in Argentina was remarkable, please see the the
email from Dr. Raul Montenegro below. We also got some coverage in South Africa
(where the government is pushing fluoridation right now) and Thailand (which has
two districts which are fluoridated). These press articles are printed below.
In Australia the media release was timed to coincide with the publication of Dr.
Mark Diesendorf's article in Australasian Science, and Mark continues to
get coverage on both the article and the petition. His latest success was an
article in a major newspaper in Perth, Western Australia. This is also printed
below.
Drs. Anna Strunecka and Jiri Patocka, the authors of important reviews on
the interaction of fluoride, in the presence of a trace amount of aluminum, on
G-proteins (Srunecka and Patocka, 1999, 2001) have also made valiant efforts to
get the media interested in the Czech Republic.
The most disappointing lack of coverage was in the UK, despite the fact that
we chose the launch date in the hope that the media would pick this up before
the debate in the House of Commons (September 8). They did not do so. So instead
of listening to the moral authority of scientists from around the world the
British public and politicians were dazzled by the "authority" of the
British Dental Association (the same organization which tells the public that
there is nothing wrong with mercury amalgams) and the British Fluoridation
Society (whose spokespersons can't even count up to 60!). The latter producing
their usual spin on "helping the poor" and exaggerated claims on
reduction in tooth decay, based upon an unpublished survey, and ignoring the
findings of the York University team and the major peer-reviewed and published
surveys carried out in other fluoridated countries (e.g. The US: Brunelle and
Carlos (1990); Australia: Spencer et al (1996); NZ: DeLiefde (1998), and a
review commisioned by the Ontario government in Canada: Locker et al (2001)).
All these studies and reviews indicate little difference in tooth decay in
fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities. But we must not let good science
get in the way of bad policy!
Sadly, while the media coverage in the UK has been extensive, it has not
been very sophisticated. Even The Guardian, usually pretty solid on such
matters dropped the ball. They haven't covered the issue since September 7. They
didn't print any of the numerous letters sent in by our readers from around the
world, and from what I could see they didn't even cover the debate in the House
of Commons! (again, someone, please correct me if I'm wrong, I simply used the
search button on their web page).
Just how unsophisticated was the UK coverage? I saw no mention of the fact that British
researcher, Jennifer Luke has shown that fluoride accumulates in the human
pineal gland (Luke, 2001) and lowers melatonin production in animal studies
(Luke, 1997). How could the Medical Research Council overlook this important
finding? Nor was there any discussion about the fact that the level of fluoride
which naturally occurs in mothers' milk is 100 times lower than the level added
to water in fluoridation schemes. Why is it so low in baby's first meal? Doesn't
this warrant a wee bit of thoughtful discussion from someone in the UK,
especially since it was one of the findings that Nobel laureate Arvid Carlsson
used in the successful campaign against fluoridation in Sweden? Nor was there
any discussion of fluoride's ability to facilitate the uptake of aluminum into
rat brain at 1 ppm (Varner et al, 1998). Nor any discussion of the correlation
between between the use of the most common fluoridating agents and the increased
uptake of lead into children's blood in the US (Masters and Coplan, 1999, 2000).
Nor any discussion of the correlation between the severity of dental fluorosis
(what the BDA and the BFS call a "cosmetic effect") and increased bone
fractures in children in Mexico (Alarcon-Herrera et al, 2001). Nor the lowering
of IQ in Chinese children exposed to water at 1.8 ppm fluoride (Xiang et al,
2003).
Any one of these important scientific issues could have been reviewed quickly
and easily at http://www.fluoridealert.org and http://www.SLweb.org/bibliography.html
If not science, what about common sense? Doesn't the fact that not one
member of the British Fluoridation Society is prepared to debate the science of
the issue in an open public debate warrant any slight suspicion about their
integrity and/or competence in this matter?
Well so much for the UK. Below is the coverage from the countries where the
media does seem to take "integrity" seriously.
Paul Connett.
______________________________________________________________
ARGENTINA
Dear Paul:
The most important news' agency of Argentina, TELAM, distributed a news about
our petition!!!!!!!!!!. Such release was distributed among "all" the
media of Argentina, yesterday, Tuesday 9th, at 2:29 PM. Media from all over
Argentina have been extracting paragraphs!!!!.
Early results: an article about the petition appeared today at "La Prensa"
national newspaper, one of the most traditional newspapers of Argentina
(Buenos Aires based). This morning I have been interviewed by Radio del Plata
(Buenos Aires based), from the programme of Lalo Mir, a well known journalist
(11:00 AM). It was a long interview. We are expecting more reactions. In few
hours I will be interviewed by radio Rivadavia from Buenos Aires. We can scan
most of the national newspapers, but it is not necessary. When TELAM take an
issue, it's a success. Nevertheless I will send to you scanned coverages.
Dear Paul: don't be worried!. It was an excellent work. You know better than me
that "single" releases often produce such assymetric patterns of
coverage. The only way for increasing results (=coverage) is to launch a
campaign involving one media relase each two weeks in selected target countries
during several months.
We can remember some words. "A little drop, even being quite small, jointly
with another drop produce a heavy rain". It's from our poet Atahualpa
Yupanqui (he lived in Cerro Colorado, Cordoba). The primitive translation is
mine. Our drops are producing heavy rains!!!!!!.
I'm quite happy!!!!!!!!.
Felicitaciones y un agran abrazo,
Raúl.
Dr. Raúl A. Montenegro, Biólogo.
Presidente de FUNAM (Fundación para la defensa del ambiente).
Casilla de Correo 83, Correo Central.
(5000) Córdoba, Argentina.
Tel +54-351-4557710 y 4551441 (Particular)
Tel +54-351-4690282 (FUNAM)
Fax +54-351-4520260 y 4557710
Radioaviso: Tel +54-351-4521313 (mensaje para Clave 2521)
E-mail: montenegro@funam.org.ar
Web: http://www.funam.org.ar
FUNAM es una ONG fundada en 1982.
Tiene status consultivo en ECOSOC y CSD (Naciones Unidas, Nueva York).
FUNAM es Premio Global 500 de Naciones Unidas (1987).
FUNAM is an NGO created in 1982.
FUNAM has consultative status at ECOSOC and CSD (United Nations, New York).
Global 500 Award from United Nations (1987).
______________________________________________________________
AUSTRALIA
The West Australian, Wednesday, September 3, 2003.
Alarm on fluoride dangers
By Eloise Dortch
MOTTLED and pitted tooth enamel, weak bones and joints and chemical sensitivity
have been blamed on adding fluoride to tap water.
Murdoch University adjunct professor of sustainability Mark Diesendorf says
Australia is one of only six countries which adds fluoride to drinking water.
He claims in an article in Australasian Science that health and dental bodies
have refused to re-examine a mass of scientific evidence which shows that
fluoride fails to provide significant protection from tooth decay and is
harmful.
Those most at risk from ingesting excessive amounts of fluoride are infants
bottle-fed with milk formula reconstituted with fluoridated water and athletes,
outdoor workers and people with diabetes insipidus, a complaint which affects
the kidneys and makes sufferers thirsty.
Dr Diesendorf has started a petition calling for scientific integrity on the
fluoridation issue which has been signed by people from 33 countries including a
Swedish medical Nobel laureate and former Federal health minister Doug
Everingham.
Fluoride has been added to WA tap water since 1968 after a 1966 State Act
required any drinking water system in WA supplying more than 3000 people to be
fluoridated.
A Water Corporation spokesman said all the corporation's main systems, supplying
Perth, parts of the South-West, Goldfields, Great Southern and Pilbara, had
fluoride added in a liquid or powder form at the dam or underground source to a
level of one milligram per litre.
The chief executives of the Busselton Water Board and Aqwest, which supplies
Bunbury, said they did not add fluoride to their systems because customers were
against it.
Health Department dental services spokesman Peter Jarman said Dr Diesendorf had
been a long-term campaigner against fluoridation who had twisted an overwhelming
body of evidence.
Mr Jarman cited studies comparing the dental health and prevalence of dental
fluorosis, or mottling, among children in the Bunbury-Busselton area and Perth.
A 1977 study found 10-year-olds in Bunbury were more likely to have dental decay
than their Perth counterparts and that overall both groups had less decay than
10-year-olds in 1967.
But a 1989-90 study of 12-year-olds from both regions found dental decay rates
were about equal and fluorosis occurred in 40 per cent of Perth children
compared with 33 per cent of Bunbury and Busselton children.
Mr Jarman said the benefits of protection from decay, particularly for lower
socioeconomic families who used less dental care and ate a more sugary diet,
easily outweighed higher risks of fluorosis, which could be treated
cosmetically.
"There's a saying in dental literature that holes in socks equals holes in
teeth," he said.
"The percentage of the population which gets dental disease is the poorest
and least educated.
"We've got an egalitarian situation here in protecting those in the
community who are least able to do so themselves."
______________________________________________________________
CZECH REPUBLIC.
Dear Paul
With Jiri Patocka's help, I translated and slightly modified the
"release" - see the atachment. I also attach the Czech translation of
petition. I used all ways of spreading it: It was sent by post to the Czech News
Agency, by fax to News Agency of the Slovak Republic, and by mail to radio and
to Czech internet news. Moreover, I submitted an article to one Czech lay
journal and gave an interview to the Econom journal.
We published with Jiri several articles in the Czech scientific journals and
presented several communications on various conferences considering this issue.
Nevertheless, I was "kicked out" today with the petition from Czech
and Slovak toxicological conference. It was an idea of Jiri, we are both well
known as the scientists, but the opinion of the chairmen of organizing commitee
was very strong - no petition, no activists!
best regards,
Anna.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. Dr. Anna Struneck·
ViniËn· 7
128 43 Prague 2
Czech Republic
tel. +420 2 21951769
fax. +420 2 24919704
e-mail: strun@natur.cuni.cz
astrun@cesnet.cz
_____________________________________________________________
SOUTH AFRICA
http://www.capetimes.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=273&fArticleId=221426
Stop fluoride cover-up
Hundreds of leading scientists and public health activists from across the globe
issued a joint statement yesterday, urging governments promoting fluoridation to
bring some integrity into the debate and stop the cover-up of the health risks
posed by decades of adding fluoride to public drinking water.
Water fluoridation was introduced in the 1950s to reduce dental cavities.
However, that was before the advent of fluoride toothpaste, and many studies now
point to long-term health worries.
Swedish Nobel laureate, Dr Arvid Carlsson, added his name to an international
petition, holding the signatures of more than 300 prominent individuals and
organisations from 37 countries (<http://www.fluoridealert.org/integrity.htm>www.fluoridealert.org/integrity.htm).
"The amount of fluoride in fluoridated tap water - often used for mixing
baby formula - is 100 times higher than the level in mothers' milk," said
Carlsson. "I am worried what this will do to a baby's developing brain
cells."
Dr Albert Burgstahler, editor of the journal Fluoride, echoed Carlsson's
concerns. "The latest work from China indicates a lowering of IQ in
children drinking water at less than twice the concentration we add to our
water," said urgstahler. "There's practically no margin of safety
here."
Dr Paul Connett, professor of chemistry at St Lawrence University in New York,
said: "Unless this rift between honest science and public health policy is
mended, it poses a threat to every other public health policy that relies on the
public's trust in government."
Marie-Lou Roux
Local organiser: Fluoridation and
Integrity petition
Cape Town
Published on the web by the Cape Times on September 4, 2003.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© Cape Times 2003. All rights reserved.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
THAILAND.
The Nation (Thailand).
Scientists warn against fluoridation
Published on Sep 3, 2003
Hundreds of leading scientists and health activists from across the world
yesterday issued a joint statement urging 10 governments to stop a cover-up of
the risks posed by decades of adding fluoride to public drinking water.
Though fluoridation is implemented in some area of Thailand, the country is
excluded from the list.
The 10 countries petitioned are: Brazil, Malaysia, Singapore, Canada, Ireland,
Israel, South Africa, Britain, the United States and New Zealand.
The petition contained the signatures of over 300 prominent individuals,
including Swedish Nobel Laureate Dr Arvid Carlsson, and organisations from 37
countries, demanding that the governments which promote fluoridation debate the
issue on a more scientific basis.
Reports about the pros and cons of adding fluoride to drinking water have been
around since water fluoridation was introduced in the 1950s.
The promoters claim that fluoridation reduces dental cavities while opponents
say they are worried about long-term health risks if people receive too much
fluoride.
The petition voiced the concerns of the signatories about possible long-term
health risks caused by fluoridation including dental fluorosis, arthistis, hip
fracture and accumulation in the pineal gland.
Surat Mongkolndhaiarunya, of the Department of Health's Dental Health Division,
said there was nothing to worry about with fluoridation in Thailand since only
two districts are adding fluoride to drinking water.
Pennapa Hongthong
THE NATION
© Nation Multimedia Group
44 Moo 10 Bang Na-Trat KM 4.5, Bang Na district, Bangkok 10260 Thailand
Tel 66-2-325-5555, 66-2-317-0420 and 66-2-316-5900 ; Fax 66-2-317-2071
Contact us: Nation Internet
http://www.nationmultimedia.com
INTERNATIONAL FLUORIDE INFORMATION NETWORK
IFIN BULLETIN: IFIN # 851: Public Health Warning on Fluoridation, #4.
September 18, 2003.
Dear All,
This is the fourth in a series of 14 bulletins in which I will be focussing on
public health warnings on fluoridation which are being ignored by public health
officials as well as many non-governmental organizations otherwise engaged in
protecting the public health. I urge you to forward this, and the other public
health warnings to your local, provincial or federal health
officials for their response. But do we please send them one at a time,
otherwise they will duck the issues they want to avoid. Also sending all 14 at
once will lead to serious overload!
Public Health Warning on Fluoridation, #4: The accumulation of fluoride in the
human pineal gland.
The pineal gland is a very small pine cone shaped (hence the name) gland which
is located between the two hemispheres of the brain. This little gland has long
intrigued both scientists and philosophers. Descartes called it the "seat
of the soul". Less poetically it has been called the "the penis of the
brain."
A diagram which shows the location of the pineal gland is accessible at http://www.fluoridealert.org/nrc-final.ppt
slide #81.
Starting from the amino acid tryptophan, the pineal gland produces two very
important substances: the neurotransmitter serotonin and the hormone melatonin.
It functions in some creatures like a third eye; its activity is regulated by
light. Melatonin is only produced at night, when the light is low. This hormone
acts like a biological clock. Its release and plasma
concentrations are thought to control the timing of various biological events
and cycles such as sleep patterns, the onset of puberty and aging.
Jennifer Luke , who was trained as a dentist, spent most of the 1990s studying
the pineal gland and the effect that fluoride has upon it. There were three
things which intrigued Luke about this little gland: 1) It is not protected by
the blood brain barrier; 2) It has a very high perfusion rate by blood, second
only to the kidney, and 3) most importantly, it is a calcifying tissue, i.e.
like the teeth and the bone it lays down the same crystals of calcium hydroxy
apatite. If the gland is rubbed between the
fingers it feels "gritty" and in literature on the brain, these
crystals are sometimes referred to as "brain sand".
On this basis of these three observations Luke theorized that this gland would
highly concentrate fluoride and when she examined the pineal glands from 11
corpses this is exactly what she found. The levels of fluoride on the crystals
averaged about 9000 parts per million (ppm), which is extremely high. In fact in
one case the level went as high as 21,000 ppm. The average level is as high as
you would expect in the bones of someone afflicted with crippling skeletal
fluorosis. The average projected by Luke for the whole tissue was 300 ppm, well
over the 1 ppm found to inhibit many enzymes. This work was part of her Ph.D.
thesis (1997) and has since been published in the open literature (Luke, 2001).
Luke published this in the journal Caries Research, so active dental researchers
should know of its existence.
The second part of her thesis involved examining the effect of fluoride on
melatonin production in animals. Luke wondered if the high levels of fluoride in
the pineal gland would lead to the inhibition (poisoning) of one of the four
enzymes involved in the conversion of tryptophan to melatonin.
She pursued this investigation at the one of world's leading pineal gland
research units at the University of Surrey in Guilford. She found that not only
was melatonin production lowered (or to be more precise, the water soluble
melatonin metabolite excreted in the urine, was reduced), but the animals
reached puberty earlier, as would be predicted. It is thought that
the highest levels of melatonin are produced by young animals (including humans)
and that these levels fall as the child grows to a point where the low
concentration signals the production of the sex hormones, thus leading to
puberty. This part of her work has yet to be published in the open literature,
although copies of her thesis have been made available to regulatory officials
in the US. Most recently (August 2003) copies of her Ph.D. thesis were given to
each member of the NRC panel reviewing the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of
fluoride in drinking water for the US EPA.
The important point about Luke's work is that it negates the notion that the
only tissue where fluoride accumulates is the skeleton (i.e. the teeth and
bones). Further, it also negates the idea that fluoride would never reach the
concentration in soft tissues where enzymes might be inhibited. Clearly,
fluoride reaches high concentrations in the pineal gland, and the lowering
of melatonin in animal experiments is totally consistent with enzyme inhibition.
Moreover, her observations indicating an earlier onset of puberty is consistent
with the lowering of melatonin levels.
As far as significance of Luke's work with respect to human health is concerned,
the possibilities are far reaching. Of particular interest, is the knowledge
that in the US there is an earlier onset of puberty, especially in girls, and no
one knows what is causing this. There are many possible candidates, but based
upon Luke's work on the pineal gland, fluoride should be added to the list. In
this connection it is important to note that when Luke searched the literature
on a possible relationship between fluoridation and the onset of puberty she
discovered an interesting observation in the Newburgh-Kingston study (the second
fluoridation trial carried out in the US). Schlessinger et al (1956) had
reported that the girls in fluoridated Newburgh, reached menstruation, on
average, five months earlier than the girls in non-fluoridated Kingston. At the
time the authors did not think this was a significant finding but in the context
of Luke's work this observation takes on a new significance.
Moreover, Luke did not investigate the production of serotonin. It would be even
more serious, in my view, if one of the two enzymes converting tryptophan to
serotonin is inhibited by fluoride. Serontonin is a neurotransmitter which
quietens the brain. Millions of people worldwide are taking prozac in order to
increase the residence time of serotonin, presumably because they are not making
enough of it in their brains.
So what has been the response of government agencies to this work, particularly
in the few countries that sanction the fluoridation of water?
Nothing, not a peep! What that means in my view, is that they can't challenge
the finding and they can't question the methodology. Luke took the precaution of
learning the procedures for analyzing fluoride in biological tissues in Gary
Whitford's lab. In the past, Whitford has been a strong proponent of water
fluoridation and was a key member of the 1993 NRC review panel of the MCL for
the USEPA. However, he has not been heard from much on this issue of late. As
mentioned above, Luke also did the animal part of her work at one of the world's
leading pineal gland research units, so there is little reason to believe that
there are weaknesses in her technique here.
Thus serious questions abound?
It would not take a government funded research team very long to confirm Luke's
findings on the accumulation in the human pineal gland, why has this not been
done?
When I was invited in October 2000 to present my concerns about fluoridation to
the "Fluoridation Forum" in Ireland, I described Luke's work in some
detail. However, in their final report they did not mention it at all. Why not?
Luke tells me that she made the Medical Research Council in the UK aware of her
work, but in their final report (MRC, 2002) there is no mention of accumulation
of fluoride in the human pineal gland, and no recommendation for further
research in this area. Why not?
What is there about the possible saving of, at most, six tenths of one tooth
surface out of 128 tooth surfaces in a child's mouth (Brunelle and Carlos,
1990), which forces certain governments to continue to practice water
fluoridation, and push for even more, despite a serious warning like this?
I welcome any comments or corrections.
Paul Connett.
PS. All references cited above can be found at
http://www.SLweb.org/bibliography.html
and/or
http://www.fluoridealert.org/reference.htm
INTERNATIONAL FLUORIDE INFORMATION NETWORK
IFIN BULLETIN IFIN # 858: Fluoridation propaganda exposed again.
September 25, 2003.
Dear All,
An article which appears in the July-August issue of Pediatric Dentistry (see
abstract below) exposes once again the fluoridation claims for the complete sham
that they are. All over the world unsuspecting members of the public are
beguiled with the guilt trip that if they don't fluoridate their water the poor
will suffer. However, what we are hearing in report after report from cities
across the US (e.g. Boston, New York, Pittsburg, Washington, DC and Cincinatti,
to name a few, see http://www.fluoridealert.org/f-teeth.htm#3) which have been
fluoridated for 20 years or more, is that poor kids still have massive tooth
decay problems. Fluoride is not now, and never has been, the "magic
bullet" for protecting the teeth of the poor.
The most severe dental problem for poor children is "baby bottle tooth
decay (bbtd)" on the first teeth (http://www.fluoridealert.org/bbtd.htm).
This is caused by babies sucking on bottles of sugared water, fruit juice or
milk for hours on end. It is admitted even by avid pro-fluoridation dentists
that bbtd can not be cured with fluoride, and yet this does not stop
fluoridation promoters using horrific pictures of bbtd at public meetings to
promote the use of water fluoridation.
In this article in Pediatric Dentistry, it is revealed that for children in
Kentucky, "43% had untreated caries, 47% had caries experience (early
childhood caries), and 31% had severe early childhood caries."
CONCLUSIONS of the report: "Dental caries is a major health and early
childhood development problem in high-risk preschool children in Kentucky"
And please note, Kentucky is 100% fluoridated!
What the poor need is targeted dental care in the form of free dental
clinics (80% of dentists in US won't treat children on Medicaid); better
nutrition and better education at school. What they don't need is soft drink
machines in schools, and more poison in their water, which their parents cannot
afford to avoid.
Paul Connett.
Pediatr Dent. 2003 Jul-Aug;25(4):365-72.
The 2001 Kentucky Childrens Oral Health Survey: findings for children ages 24
to 59 months and their caregivers.
Hardison JD, Cecil JC, White JA, Manz M, Mullins MR, Ferretti GA.
Division of Dental Public Health, College of Dentistry, University of
Kentucky, Lexington, Ky, USA.
PURPOSE: This study was performed to provide a 2001 benchmark of oral health
status of children in Kentucky with a comparison to the most recent state (1987)
and national surveys. METHODS: Using Basic Screening Survey protocols for visual
screenings, a sample of 572 children ages 24 to 59 months was screened in health
department clinics and physicians' and pediatric dentists' offices across
Kentucky after caregivers completed a questionnaire. Screeners were provided
modified Association of State and Territorial Dental Directors training
materials. Analyses on the sample and population estimates were done with SAS
and SUDAAN software. This weighted population estimate analysis is based on the
assumption that sampled children at participating sites are representative of
other children at that site, as well as children at refusing sites. RESULTS:
Sample data and adjusted population estimates closely approximated each other.
Population estimates indicated that 43% had untreated caries, 47% had caries
experience (early childhood caries), and 31% had severe early childhood caries.
Thirty-seven percent of the children needed early care, 9% needed urgent care,
39% had never been to the dentist, 44% had a history of "bad bottle
behaviors," and 35% of the parents had not been to the dentist within the
last year. CONCLUSIONS: Dental caries is a major health and early childhood
development problem in high-risk preschool children in Kentucky.
PMID: 13678102 [PubMed - in process]
INTERNATIONAL FLUORIDE INFORMATION NETWORK
IFIN BULLETIN IFIN # 865: Health ministers dumping the truth.
October 23, 2003.
Dear All,
The two reports below indicate that Health Ministers from the UK are Australia
are investing their efforts in cheap propaganda instead of coming clean on the
fluoridation issue.
According to a report in today's Independent newspaper, Melanie Johnson, the UK
Health Minister, says children can get rid of their toothbrushes and replace
them with fluoridated water! With such people in charge of the nation's health
the British people are in serious trouble.
It is probably pointless to suggest that she read anything other than the
propaganda fed to her by the British Fluoridation Society and the British Dental
Association, but if she did she might be puzzled by a report that appeared in
the Maryland press this August 23 - see http://www.dailytimesonline.com/news/stories/20030822/localnews/107397.html
which says, among other things:
"In a study by the University of Maryland Baltimore, 53.7 percent of the
region's school-age children had some form of untreated dental decay during the
2000- 2001 school year. The state average is 41.6 percent, and the national
average is even lower, at 23.1 percent."
According to the CDC, Maryland is 90.7 percent fluoridated. This report follows
many others which indicate serious tooth decay in many cities in the US which
have been fluoridated for years.
Unfortunately, the British government is not the only country which has health
officials which pump out propaganda on tooth decay while ignoring the real data,
especially the serious side effects on children of excessive exposure to
fluoride, on the one hand, and a lifetime's exposure on adults, on the other.
For example, see also the report below from the October 16 edition of the
Ballarat Courier (Victoria, Australia) which informs its readers that a
spokesman for Health Minister Bronwyn Pike said that the Victorian government
was "on track" to start its fluoridation campaign in Ballarat,
"imminently" and that "television and newspaper advertisements
were among several campaign ideas being investigated" and described these
as ways that they "can engage with the community."
If Bronwyn Pike was genuinely interested in engaging the citizens of Ballarat on
this issue, she could have more effectively done so by openly debating the issue
with me when challenged to do so this past July.
When will newspaper editors and others stop being led by the nose by these kind
of tactics, and insist that the officials charged with protecting the citizens'
health do their homework on this issue, instead of manipulating the media with
their half truths and outright distortions?
Paul Connett.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Independent, 23 October 2003.
Dump your toothbrush, says health minister
By Marie Woolf Chief Political Correspondent
Children up and down the country will be delighting at the latest public health
advice from ministers: throw away your toothbrush.
Drinking a glass of fluoridated water is now the "preferred method" of
preventing tooth decay, according to the public health
minister, and is cheaper and easier than brushing.
Melanie Johnson wrote to MPs last week informing them that brushing requires
"ongoing positive personal action by the
individual". But people who drink fluoridated water can protect their teeth
"without needing to take any personal action".
Ms Johnson's letter, designed to persuade MPs not to block her proposals to make
it easier to add fluoride to the public water supply, says "there are
important reasons to consider water fluoridation as the preferred method of
preventing tooth decay on a population basis".
She goes on to compare brushing with drinking fluoridated water, and concludes
that the latter brings more health benefits.
She adds: "An alternative to water fluoridation is fluoride toothpaste. But
water fluoridation delivers greater reductions in
decay than toothpaste and reaches the whole population rather than just those
who adhere to a regular cleaning regime using
fluoride toothpaste.
"It is also cheaper - water fluoridation costs around 50p per person per
year; a year's supply of toothbrushes and toothpaste
costs around £10."
Her comments have outraged MPs, who will vote today on the government proposals
in a standing committee on the water bill.
Simon Thomas, environment spokesman for Plaid Cymru and a member of the
committee, said: "She seems to be saying we should stop brushing our teeth
and should drink fluoride with water. It's crazy.
"These proposals are full of contradictions. She says that it is not
possible to encourage people to eat more healthily. But what
about all these government obesity programmes?"
A spokeswoman for the Department of Health said the government was "only
going to encourage areas with poor dental health to fluoridate water".
letters@independent.co.uk
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ballarat Courier, Ballarat, Victoria, Australia.
Fluoridation still on the menu
Thursday, 16 October 2003
THE State Government is remaining tightlipped about a community awareness
campaign promoting fluoridation in Ballarat.
A spokesman for Health Minister Bronwyn Pike yesterday said exactly when and
what the fluoridation campaign would involve was still being determined.
But the government was "on track" to launch the campaign this year,
the spokesman said.
"We are on track to start the campaign imminently," he said.
Ms Pike last month announced plans for a campaign plugging the benefits of
fluoridation to Ballarat residents.
Ms Pike said the campaign could involve television and newspaper advertisements
outlining the benefits of fluoridated water.
Yesterday, her spokesman said television and newspaper advertisements were among
several campaign ideas being investigated.
"We're looking at a wide range of ways that we can engage with the
community," he said.
Ballarat Province MLC Dianne Hadden yesterday welcomed a community awareness
campaign.
Ms Hadden said research had showed fluoridated water reduced tooth decay by 40
per cent.
"We shouldn't be disadvantaged because we live in a beautiful city and our
health shouldn't be disadvantaged," she said.
"Ballarat is one of three regions in the state that is not fluoridated. I
say let's do it and lets do it sooner rather than later."
Ballarat West MLA Karen Overington said she supported community consultation.
"I'm in favour of consulting with the community, talking about the benefits
of fluoride, listening to the concerns about fluoride and making a decision
after that," she said.
Ballarat joins Geelong on the State Government's fluoridation hitlist.
Last week, however, Geelong Province MLC Elaine Carbines told the that
fluoridating Geelong's water supply was off the State Government's agenda.
|