FLUORIDATION – LEGAL WINS AND ARGUMENTS +

 We want Queenslanders to have, what most countries
on this planet have - no artificial water fluoridation!

Truth is on our side; so to win is inevitable.

history-is-on-the-side-of-the-fluoride-opponents

 OPEN LETTER TO THE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT  

The Queensland State Government may be in breach of sections
204 & 240 of the Queensland Criminal Code – 1899, 
by deliberately adding of the toxic heavy metals & poisons,
fluorides, in any quantity, into drinking water.

radial-lin-blue

WATER FLUORIDATION IN QUEENSLAND IS ILLEGAL 

We suspect that any private citizen, company, corporation
(which includes Queensland Government, now registered as a corporation**),
or terrorist, would be expected to face the full force
of the law for such a criminal act as fluoridation.

Note: The people of Queensland were not consulted, fully informed and 
no referendum was held on the matter of water fluoridation.

radial-lin-blue

→ ** Queensland – A Corporate Entity -  

 The State of Queensland Australia is
registered with the US Securities and Exchange
Commissions under No. 0001244818 :

On the 15 July 2002, The Corporations (Q) Act 1990 (Q) Reprint No 3 created in
Qld. a Corporate Government. The State of Queensland Australia is registered
with the US Securities and Exchange Commissions
under No. 0001244818.

f-is-a-crime-f

radial-lin-blue

radial-lin-blue

This is NOT about fluoride, but has legal
implication for manditory fluoridation ↓

  Mass Action of Liability  

radial-lin-blue

new-info-arrow-down

justice-rISRAEL STOPS FLUORIDATION   justice-l

The $4 billion NIS  Class Action ($500 NIS for each Israeli
citizen),
 accuses “Mekorot” of providing the Israeli
citizens with false
 information regarding their
drinking water content and causing
environmental damage for
the past 10 years.

Razor wire devider

merilyn-calls-for-royal-f

f-action-aust-logo

A damning critique and analysis of the NHMRC’s 2017
“Sham” review of water fluoridation and 
an appeal for a Royal Commission Inquiry:

Razor wire devider


abc-tv-4-corners-logo

Some say this is the worst pollution in Australia’s history – over 70 sites, but
the Australian media, except ABC TV  ’Four Corners’ are ignoring it 

                        ↑  WATCH ↑

“The Protected Pollutant” Fluoride is NOT mentioned by name!

We have not finished with this, – many long term legal battles are yet to come.
Hopefully this will bring the dangers fluoridation into focus.
But don’t hold your breath.
_______

badgesupremecourtofcanada

 … IN 1957, THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA RULLED: ( [F. Not Legal ] )
that this added fluoride is medication for a special health purpose
and the law then did not allow the use of municipal water supplies
for this intent and delivery-  (Supreme Court of Canada).

To this day, no provincial law–not the Safe Drinking Water Act, Public Health Act or the Fluoridation Act–authorizes the use of public drinking water to deliver any substance meant to treat or prevent disease when consumed. This fact alone calls for an immediate review of PEO’s current policy (or lack thereof) that enables and condones municipal water fluoridation in Ontario on the basis of reports from professional engineers…

Razor wire devider


Shine Lawyers has welcomed the Federal Government’s
proposed new range of protections for
Australian corporate whistleblowers.

October 2017

Draft Bill To Increase Whistleblower Protections

Razor wire devider

LET IT BE KNOWN:

Fluoridated water is a ‘Therapeutic Goods’ and also a Medicine
as per the definition of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989.

The NHMRC, All Australian Health Departments, State and Federal and the Australian Dental
Association claims on fluoridation by definition bring the practice within the definition of this Act.
Whether fluorides are delivered by needles, tablets or delivered via the public water supply,
it is against the law to administer any medicine without the consent of the patient. –
No exceptions.
All Governments, State and Federal are hereby advised to terminate
fluoridation immediately, before someone ends up in court…


Razor wire devider

Mosaic logo  copy

7  OCTOBER 2015 Mosaic Fertilizer was fined $2 BILLION
Mosaic Fertilizer,  one of the largest sellers of
“fluorosilicic acid” that cities add to
public drinking water [USA].
It is described by EPA  a “hazardous waste.”

 The chemical used in Australia contains the same contaminants.

‘Mosaic’ updates it’s MSDS giving a warning for children!

Razor wire devider

Justice l                                       Justice rFLUORIDATION -LEGAL WINS AND AGU...Recent-law-courts

See-below

Ruby,Shiller,Chan&Hasan F. legal.

image-of-paper-clip

MEMORANDUM TO:

Liesa Cianchino, Chair of Concerned Residents of
Peel – to End Fluoridation

FROM: Nader R. Hasan – DATE: June 23, 2014

You have asked me to provide an opinion on the lawfulness of the Region of Peel’s fluoridation program. In short, if an Ontario resident can properly present the existing scientific and medical evidence to an Ontario court, then there is a reasonable possibility that an Ontario court would declare the Fluoridation Act and municipal fluoridation programs in Ontario to be unconstitutional and thus invalid.   Read on

line brown& white

Judge-F.

seal-of-pennsylvania-court

CITY SUED OVER FLUORIDATION

Razor wire devider

a-protection-racket-f

The TGA, The Drug Industry and Your Health

Razor wire devider

Potential criminal charges

Human Rights, Civil Liberties, and Water Fluoridation.

      Credit to:

Douglas Cross, BSc,CBiol,EurProBiol,FSB

 1862 crim code

Matthews & Associates Lawers

Utah questions toxic fluoridation. The state has just come to realize that it is getting many extra toxins – tramp contaminants – at no extra charge, along with its monthly medicinal poisonings from fluoride. Utah is becoming the first state to question the criminally stupid absurdity of paying chemical companies to dump toxic waste into its drinking water.   MORE

Razor wire devider

SUPPRESSION OF CIVIL RIGHTS IN AUSTRALIA REGARDING FLUORIDATION

Razor wire devider

In 1992, “Americans spent more than $700 million on inhome filters”
and more than $2 billion on bottled water in efforts to
avoid drinking contaminated water.

PACE ENVIRONMENTAL LAW REVIEW

Volume 14, Number 2 Summer 1997
Copyright © 1997 by Pace University School of Law All rights reserved
reprinted here with permission
Fluoridation of Public Water Systems:
Valid Exercise of State Police Power or Constitutional Violation?

Razor-wire-devider

R.H.Jackson

Nuremberg trials UN
  HERE  

Nuremberg code

   HERE  

F.Known toxin -conspiracy..

[The atrocities committed by Nazi physicians and researchers during World War I
prompted the development of the Nuremberg Code to define the ethics of modern
medical experimentation utilizing human subjects. Since its enunciation,
the Code has been viewed as one of the cornerstones of modern bioethical thought.]

Nuremberg Trial Pictrue f

Razor wire devider

The Protocol For The Prohibition Of  The Use In War
Of Asphyxiating Poisonous Or Other Gases, And
Of Bacteriological Methods Of Warfare.
Was Signed at Geneva: 17 June 1925
See  ⇒  Sarin in Syria

Razor wire devider

FLUORIDE – THE NEXT ASBESTOS

Razor wire devider

⇓ The Longest Court Case in Scottish History 

” NO FLUORIDE — ‘SCOTLAND THE BRAVE “

Razor wire devider

rita-Bernett-Rose-+-School-heading

Rita's extract
…Justice Yetka believed that the state’s intrusion was
neither reasonable nor the least intrusive method
to provide the alleged public health benefit….

Links to Rita’s site →   HERE

More →  HERE

Razor wire devider

FDA’s Official Definition of → “Safe and Effective”

Razor wire devider

“Like all nostrums, fluoridation will soon pass away.
In 50 years from now it will be known as the
greatest hoax in medical history.”

Judge R.C. Tarter.  – [ The 50 years are nearly up! ]

Tampering with Public Water Systems
Full text →   HERE

Razor wire devider

“When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing and when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favours and when you see that these men get richer by graft and by their pull – not by their work.  When your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you and when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice
You may now know that your society is doomed.” – Ayn Rand

Razor wire devider

anna-bligh-2

The Queensland State Government may be in breach of sections of:

**   THE CRIMINAL CODE 1899 – SECT 87

f-is-a-crime-f

This is NOT about fluoride but has legal 
implication for fluoridation:

new-info-arrow-down

  Mass Action of Liability   

Razor wire devider

More pay outs for fluoride damage than for any other pollutant !

Mostly “Out-of-Court” settlements.

buffalo-lameeness-f

you-tube-f

 Industrial Fluoride Pollution YouTube

$    $   $  $  $  $  $  $  $  $  $  $   $    $

hydrogen-fluoride-image

Hydrofluoric Acid aka Hydrogen Fluoride

Dr. Richard Sauerheber & James Robert Deal

 Hydrogen Fluoride more information  →  HERE

 

We all have something to loose F.

tried-and-found-wanting-f

stop-f-ff

fair-use-notice-f

Fluoridation Queensland Logo

Including


new-skeptics-logo

FLUORIDATION – LEGAL LETTERS

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT:

Dear all,

It is time to come clean and green on fluoridation

4-images-of-qld-gov

Our small critique of  your policy on fluoridation:

 

1)  Site security.

extrac-1

OUR COMMENTS:

Fluoridation plants represent a security risk – an easy target for terrorists and vandals - 
therefore, only each daily requirement of chemicals, should be stored at each plant site, under lock and key.
The bulk of the chemicals, should be stored under the security of a military standard…
off-site and delivered daily.

 

 

2) Impurities in the product:

 

extract-2

OUR COMMENTS:

Queensland is using a product with the
same contaminates as
   Mosaic’

See ↓

      ‘Mosaic’ updates it’s MSDS giving a warning for children! 

Maximum Impurity Content values (MICs) is provided in Table 1. ( QUEENSLAND HEALTH )

Fluoride dosing concentrations are far too high.
Most of these heavy metals, like the fluoride, are accumulative.

 

3)  The fluoridation of water, is in contravention of Queensland’s own law.

      Queensland Criminal Code – 1899 – SECT 87

OUR COMMENTS:

As such, all Queensland Government Employees, involved in Queensland Water
and fluoridation promotion, are liable. 

 

OUR RECOMMENDATIONS:

a)  We therefore believe the Queensland Government
should close down all fluoridation plants in the state.

We want Queenslanders to have, what most countries on this planet have -
no artificial water fluoridation.

 

b)  All reticulated water outlets, domestic, commercial and industrial, should be potable water –  
fluoride free.  -  ( Preferred sterilizing agent chlorine dioxide , rather than chlorine. )

 

c)  However, if you consider it necessary, for any person wishing to have access to fluoridated water, taps marked as being – ‘Dosed with Fluoridated Water’ – could be sited at convenient locations around major Queensland towns. 

 

 

d) Dental authorities who might complain, can be referred to recent events in Israel. :

       …         High Court Case Number 8173/12

 

As you can see, we have the science and history – and we are determined.

 

 

We are convinced that our web site alone, has amassed sufficient evidence, to justify these recommendations. We are anxious to support you in these endeavours.

 

 

 

What we are asking for, will save the Queensland Government, and many of its
shires, a fortune, and increase your popularity.

Yours in health,

 

Fluoridation Queensland

Fluoridation Queensland Logo


Black Lines separate

LETTERS SENT TO QUEENSLAND PREMIER – ANNA BLIGH

Justice l                                 Justice r

Fluoridation Finished in Israel – Final

FLUORIDATION-LEGAL-WINS-AND-AGU...

image-of-paper-clip

NEW YORK LETTERS

Black Lines separate

qld-consolidated-acts-logo

CRIMINAL CODE 1899 – SECT 87 – Official Corruption

Black Lines separate

Mosaic logo  copy

MOSAIC FERTILIZER FINED TWO BILLION DOLLARS

The contaminates in the fluoridation products sold by Mosaic,
are the same as used by the Queensland Government !

Black Lines separate

” NO FLUORIDE — ‘SCOTLAND THE BRAVE “

Black Lines separate

“Safe and effective”  (Same as Vioxx!)

Black Lines separate

CRIMINAL CODE 1899 – SECT 87 – Official Corruption

 anna-bligh-f-red

ab-sig

notice-of-complaint-F.
Black Lines separate

Tampering with Public Water SystemsFull text  →  HERE

Black Lines separate

We all have something to loose F.

IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHO OWNS YOU,
FIND OUT WHO YOU CAN’T CRITICISE – VOLTAIRE

Razor wire devider

It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. – Voltaire

new-info-arrow-down

→   BIASES – EXAMPLES IN THE 2016 NHMRC DRAFT REPORT   

Razor wire devider

European Court Ruling Ends Water Fluoridation By Doug Cross

Razor wire devider

image-of-paper-clip

You may need more than one cup of coffee for this one

 The Sugar Industry – Its Influence On Dentistry

tried-and-found-wanting-f

logo-aust-f-skeptics

new splash

 

 

NO FLUORIDE – ‘SCOTLAND THE BRAVE’

“Sir Richard Doll was paid by chemical companies.
He denied the (proven) carcinogenic effects of Agent Orange.
Though some people may have been shocked, I was not surprised at all
Doll was one of the fervent promoters of fluoridation”.

Scotland-the-brave-Mrs.-Mc.Coll-L-300x245

Mrs-C.-Mcoll

Public health officials argued that putting fluoride in would bring huge reductions in the appalling tooth decay among a sweet-toothed nation. Catherine McColl, a Glasgow pensioner disagreed. She secured legal aid to fight Strathclyde Region and the case lasted three years. The epidemiologist Sir Richard Doll later described his time as an expert witness as the worst two weeks of his life. The issue remains controversial to this day.

Source: Lord Jauncey. Opinion of Lord Jauncey in causa Mrs Catherine McColl (A.P) against Strathclyde Regional Council. The Court of Session, Edinburgh, 1983.

“If fluoride is a medicine, evidence on its effects should be subject to the standards of proof expected of drugs, including evidence from randomised trials.” 

“There have been no randomised trials of water fluoridation.”

R.Doll

 Sir Richard Doll

Extract from Wikipedia:

After his death, controversy arose over some of his work because his papers, held at the Wellcome Library, showed that for many years he had received consultancy payments from chemical companies whose products he was to defend in court. These include US $1,500 per day consultancy fee from Monsanto Company for a relationship which began in 1976 and continued until 2002. He also received fees from the Chemical Manufacturers Association, Dow Chemicals, and ICI. Some donations, including a £50,000 gift from asbestos company Turner and Newall, were given in public ceremony to Green College Oxford where his wife was Warden [citation needed], but most fees and payments remained undisclosed to the public, Oxford University and colleagues until his death. His defenders point out that his connections to industry were widely known by those in the field, that he did his work before formal disclosure of commercial interests became commonplace and that on occasion, he came to conclusions that were unpalatable to the companies who consulted him. His own view, as reported by Richard Peto, was that it was necessary to co-operate with companies for access to data which could prove their products to be dangerous.

PRO-FLUORIDE FRAUD

Extract from Nexus Magazine – May 2007

In Global News last issue [vol. 14, no. 21] you published the fact that Sir Richard Doll was paid by chemical companies. He denied the (proven) carcinogenic effects of Agent Orange. Though some people may have been shocked, I was not surprised at all. Doll was one of the fervent promoters of fluoridation. When Dean Burk and John Yiamouyiannis (I allude to them from here as B&Y) in 1975 published their findings about the 10 per cent extra death rate from cancer in fluoridated cities, the whole fluoridation lobby hastened to disclaim their findings. Of course, Doll was among them. Here is part of what happened.

In order to refute B&Y’s findings, the group claimed that B&Y had not corrected their figures for age, race and sex and that, when these corrections were made, the increase in the cancer death rate disappeared. (I follow closely Yiamouyiannis’ book - Fluoride: The Aging Factor.) During the fall of 1977, two congressional hearings were held. The Hoover group opposed B&Y.

It was then discovered that Dr Hoover and other National Cancer Institute
officials had purposely withheld information from B&Y and,
moreover, clandestinely sent erroneous data to Dr Leo Kinlen
and Sir Richard Doll, professors at Oxford University,
who published the erroneous data as if they were their own.
Thus the illusion was wilfully created that independent research
by two eminent professors had confirmed the data of the
Hoover group, which was completely untrue.
Precise calculation later confirmed the findings of B&Y,
estimating in excess of 10,000 extra cancer deaths a year in the
USA caused by fluoridation.

My dear deceased friends Dean Burk and John Yiamouyiannis would
    have been pleased with your publication about Richard Doll.
        
Sincerely Yours
           Hans C. M., Haarlem, The Netherlands

Fluoride: Lies, Brown Envelopes, Subterfuge And More Lies 

See also ‘Scottish Dental’ → HERE

♦ See our Rogue’s Gallery’

Editor’s note:

There Is No Fluoridation In Wales

logo-aust-f-skeptics

new splash

Comments are closed.

CODEX ALIMENTARIUS AND THE TGA (Aust.)

THE TGA & CODEX ALIMENTARIUS & THE TGA (Aust.)  -

who-says-drugs-f

 Are we to be hung out to dry – again?

The TGA have tried to outlaw the growing of some medicinal wild
roadside weeds and garden plants previously – without success.

  • No dietary supplements sold as food can exceed potency dosages set down by the Codex Commission. Dietary supplements of higher potency are to be sold as “drugs” by pharmaceutical or phyto-pharmaceutical companies. Supplements without a recommended daily allowance (RDA), such as co-enzyme Q10, will be illegal to sell because they will be considered as “drugs”. ($ V health)

  • All new dietary supplements will be banned unless they have undergone extensive Codex testing (via scientific risk assessment) and final approval. (Too costly for small producers.)

  • Only supplements made from a list of 15 minerals and 13 vitamins will be allowed – in ultra-low potencies mirroring levels that were originally set during World War II to stave off malnutrition.

  • The Codex preamble expressly forbids the use of nutrients to “prevent, treat or cure any condition”.

  • Herbs to be put under a closed committee of the WHO where they are now held to be “untested drugs”.  There is only a short list of “approved herbs” that may be used for specific conditions. While some complex oriental herbal formulas may be permitted, most will not. Ayurvedic, Tibetan, tribal, Aust. indigenous and other traditional medicines that use herbs and natural substances to be forbidden in WTO Member Countries (Aust.). Herbal, shamanic and energy-based medicines are to be forbidden forms of treatment. 

    [Her majesty Queen Elizabeth II uses some of these.]

  • Genetically Modified organisms (GMO’s) to be legal in foods [unlabeled?]

  • Codex is to set permissible upper levels for pesticide residues, toxic chemicals, hormones in food and other environmental contaminants that may be many times greater  than those advocated by chemical and pesticide industry lobby groups.

  • Codex mandates that animal feed can be treated with antibiotics, hormones and growth stimulants. 

  • Codex Further mandates that the irradiation of food go ahead, despite the arguments of food safety experts.

Although the above list may seem extreme, it is difficult to have confidence

in the TGA based on their past performance, e.g. continuing support for fluoridation.

...oo0O0oo...

WHAT YOU CAN DO !

Do your web searches; complain to your Federal politician in writing, write to the newspapers; get on the radio; and most of all, tell ALL of your friends, and then remind them again and again !

The TGA has done little protect the Australian public in the past.

It is working to restrict the $4 billion Australian supplements industry that is rapidly gaining markets over Big Pharma’s control of the medical industry.

Any of the above proposals if approved would cause:

  • More unemployment therefore more people on the dole

  • A loss of tax revenue to the Australian Government

  • The importation of more foreign goods

The Australian public would loose access to health maintaining supplements which;
would also disadvantage sports people, body builders (and pets).

These products and services are consumer funded.

To change the system would put an extra load on the existing over used and

under financed government health system.

Most medical doctors have little knowledge of traditional medicines and nutrition.

Many of these plants and minerals have supplied health to millions people around the world for centuries.

GUNPOINT MEDICINE ?

The TGA have tried to outlaw the growing of some medicinal wild roadside weeds and garden plants previously without success.

Some of these new proposals will force the Australian population to grow, import and produce these health-promoting products ‘illegally’ and or go underground. The government does not have the resources to fully enforce these proposals; which would extend the dole queues, disadvantage the health of Australians, reduce revenue to the Australian Tax Office and restrict the choices of you the reader. 

Green strip

As President Kennedy said:

“If you cannot enforce a law, you do not have a law.

” The TGA’s income is based entirely on fees and charges paid by users of

its services, namely the pharmaceutical industry in Australia.”

gov-today-commerce-f

Fluoridation Queensland Logo

New-Splash

 

EPA Scientist Blasts EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Standard for Fluoride

During that investigation, I have discovered that
the government, 
in its assessment of the risks of fluoride
exposure, 
violated accepted standards of professional conduct.

EPA SCIENTIST BLASTS DRINKING WATER STANDARD FOR FLUORIDE

R. Carton

EPA Scientist Blasts EPA’s

Safe Drinking Water Standard for Fluoride.
The following is an excerpt from a legal affidavit filed in 1993

by

Dr. Robert Carton, Past-President of EPA Headquarters Union
in Washington D.C.  To read the complete affidavit,   click here.

1. I am an environmental scientist currently with the U.S. Army. From September 1972 until May 1992, I was employed full-time by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I spent approximately 15 of those years in the Office of Toxic Substances, managing risk assessments. For two years I was responsible for writing regulations under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. I was also program manager for compliance of new pollution sources with the National Environmental Policy Act.

2. I was President of the union of EPA professionals for two terms. This union, the National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 2050, represented then, and still does, 1100 lawyers, scientists, and engineers at EPA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

3. I received my B.A. in chemistry from La Salle University, Philadelphia, PA, my M.S. in environmental science from Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, and my Ph.D. in environmental science from Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.

4. I recently published an article on the U.S. Cancer – Fluoride situation (Exhibit____), and have managed the preparation of a long list of reports and studies while an employee of EPA.

5. My field of study, interest and expertise, and my previous responsibilities as president of the union of EPA professionals, has led me to consider thoroughly, and, in an impartial manner, the scientific basis for the government’s claims as to what constitutes a safe level of fluoride in drinking water.

6. During that investigation, I have discovered that the government, in its assessment of the risks of fluoride exposure, violated accepted standards of professional conduct.

7. In the spring of 1985, allegations of scientific misconduct in the development of EPA’s fluoride in drinking water standard were made to the union by an EPA professional intimately familiar with the work on the standard.

8. In November of that year, EPA set a new Recommended Maximum Contaminant Level (RMCL) for fluoride in drinking water of 4 mg/l, which approximately doubled the dose considered to be safe (the previous standard was 1.4 to 2.4 mg/l).

9. As union president-elect, I investigated these allegations and concluded that the scientific documents supporting the decision to raise the RMCL were fraught with tendentious errors and omissions of key data, to the point of constituting scientific fraud.

10. My conclusions were summarized in a statement, given at a meeting of the Drinking Water Subcommittee of the EPA Science Advisory Board, Arlington, VA., on November 1, 1991 (Exhibit____). In that statement I noted the following.

a. The fluoride in drinking water standard, or Recommended Maximum Contaminant Level (RMCL), published by the EPA in the Federal Register on Nov. 14, 1985, is a classic case of political interference with science.

b. The regulation is a fraudulent statement by the Federal Government that 4 mg/l of fluoride in drinking water is safe with an adequate margin of safety.

c. There is evidence that critical information in the scientific and technical support documents used to develop the standard were falsified by the Department of Health and Human Services and the EPA to protect a long-standing public health policy.

d. EPA professionals were never asked to conduct a thorough, independent analysis of the fluoride literature. Instead, their credentials were used to give the appearance of scientific credibility. They were used to support the predetermined conclusion that 4 mg/l of fluoride in drinking water was safe.

e. The EPA management ignored the requirements of the law to protect sensitive individuals such as children, diabetics or people with kidney impairment. Contrary to law, they made the criteria for considering health data so stringent that reasonable concerns for safety were eliminated. Data showing positive correlations between fluoride exposure and genetic effects in almost all laboratory tests were discounted.

f. EPA management based its standard on only one health effect: crippling skeletal fluorosis. In setting the safe level at 4 mg/l, however, they ignored data showing that healthy individuals were at risk of developing crippling skeletal fluorosis if these individuals happened to drink large quantities of water at the “safe” level of 4 mg/l. EPA’s own data showed that some people drink as much as 5.5 liter per day. If these people ingested this amount of water containing 4 mg/l of fluoride, they would receive a daily dose of 22 mg. This exceeds the minimum dose necessary to cause crippling skeletal fluorosis, or “20 mg/day for 20 years” as stated by the EPA and Public Health Service. Most unsettling is the fact that EPA and the National Academy of Sciences can not document the scientific basis for the 20 mg/day threshold.

g. In a recent series of letters between National Academy of Sciences, Ms. Darlene Sherrel, and Sen. Graham of Florida, the NAS was forced to admit that it could not document the derivation of the chronic effect level for crippling skeletal fluorosis. As already mentioned, crippling skeletal fluorosis is the single health effect upon which the fluoride in drinking water standard is based. The threshold is probably lower.

h. There is evidence, ignored by the EPA, in a study by Dr. Geoffrey Smith, that exposure to fluoride at 1 mg/l in drinking water over a long period of time may calcify ligaments and tendons, causing arthritic pains, and may be responsible for the alarming increase in cases of repetitive stress injury. (Exhibit____)

i. EPA management relied upon a report from the Surgeon General which they knew was false. This report claimed to represent conclusions of an expert panel (on which the EPA was present as an observer) when in fact the concerns of this panel for the effects of fluoride on the bones of children, for its effects on the heart, for dental fluorosis, and for the overall lack of scientific data on the effects of fluoride in US drinking water were deleted. It has been reported in the press that these changes were made in the final report without the knowledge or approval of the expert panel.

j. The EPA accepted the falsified report from the Surgeon General’s office and asked a contractor to turn this into an “assessment.” The contractor dutifully collected only literature that supported the report. The report was submitted for public comment, but was never altered to incorporate the volumes of information sent in by world class experts. Any opinions contrary to the report were dismissed. The result is actually a “Draft” stamped “Final.”

11. The apparent coverup of fluoride risks within EPA prompted the EPA professionals’ union, Local 2050 of the National Federation of Federal Employees, to attempt to file an amicus brief in support of the Natural Resources Defense Council, who sued EPA in 1986 over the fluoride standard. I was responsible for managing the preparation of the brief, which was prepared by the law firm of Lord, Day and Lord of New York City.

12. EPA has also attempted to silence scientists who do not follow the party line. Last year, EPA fired Dr. William L. Marcus, Ph.D. from his job as senior toxicologist in the Office of Drinking Water, EPA. Judge, David A. Clarke, Jr., declared in his decision on this case on December 3, 1992, that “the reasons given for Dr. Marcus’ firing were a pretext….his employment was terminated because he publicly questioned and opposed EPA’s fluoride policy.” Judge Clark ordered Dr. Marcus to be reinstated and provided with back pay, fringe benefits and interest, attorneys fees, and payed $50,000 in compensatory damages. I testified at length at this hearing.

13. I believe there is a high probability of significant harm to public health from fluoridation and that it is unacceptable as a public health measure.

14. My conclusions regarding the lack of safety of both EPA standards and of fluoridation are based in part on the following:

A. As noted in my statement to the Subcommittee of the Science Advisory Board, EPA management relied upon a report from the Surgeon General which it knew was false. (Exhibit____).

B. Dental fluorosis is considered a visible sign that potentially destructive effects of fluoride are also occurring in bone. EPA reported in 1985 that mild dental fluorosis occurs in areas with fluoride levels in drinking water as low as 0.2 mg/l. Objectionable dental fluorosis, i.e. pitting and staining of enamel, was reported by EPA to occur in some individuals at 0.7 mg/l.

C. Despite this knowledge, EPA, even though aware that the report of the Surgeon General’s expert panel had been altered, nevertheless followed this altered version and declared in 1985 that dental fluorosis was not an adverse health effect. Transcripts of the closed-door testimony of this panel, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, show that they in fact voted to declare dental fluorosis an adverse health effect. Their declaration was doctored by unknown individuals to achieve a political end: If objectionable dental fluorosis were declared an adverse health effect, as it should be, then fluoridation at 0.8 to 1.2 mg/l would be in violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act.

D. Crippling skeletal fluorosis is the only adverse health effect accepted by EPA, and the only one it considered in setting the MCL of 4 mg/l. According to EPA, this effect occurs when an individual is exposed to more than 20 mg/day for 20 years or more. EPA, however, cannot document the rationale for selecting this effect level in accordance with accepted regulatory procedures. In fact, the government does not know what level of fluoride in water can cause crippling skeletal fluorosis. Thus, its 4 mg/l standard has no scientific basis.

E. In violation of standards of scientific conduct requiring that the MCL protect all citizens, EPA set a level that will cause crippling skeletal fluorosis in 20 years for about 1% of the population, according to its own stated toxic dose of 20 mg/day, and its own data showing 1% of the population drinks more than 5.5 l/day.

F. In further violation of professional ethics, it can also be demonstrated that EPA did not consider, in deriving its standard, arthritic pains – the earliest sign of crippling skeletal fluorosis, and did not derive a safe dose for this effect. Thus, while recommending the addition of fluoride to drinking water, the government does not know the lowest effect level for this stage of the disease. There was evidence available to EPA in 1985, which it ignored, that exposure to fluoride at 1 mg/l in drinking water over a long period of time calcifies ligaments and tendons causing arthritic pains, and may be responsible for the alarming increase in cases of repetitive stress injury.

G. It is clear that fluoride is mutagenic, and that it may well cause cancer, although both are continuously denied by the government. Buried in the report of the National Toxicology Program study on the effects of fluoride in rats and mice were the results of a battery of four genetic toxicology studies showing fluoride to be a mutagen. Three studies were positive for mutagenicity and one was negative. The negative study was invalid based on testimony of the originator of the test itself, Dr. Bruce Ames.

15. It is my best judgment, reached with a high degree of scientific certainty,
that fluoridation presents unacceptable risks to public health,
and that the government cannot prove its claims of safety.

See also:  ↓

Dr. William Hirzy ff copy

Why the EPA’s Headquarters Union of Scientists Opposes Fluoridation

logo-aust-f-skeptics

new splash

 

HOW WE GOT FLUORIDATED – Philip Heggen

Industry and these government agencies have been largely
successful in obscuring the facts. This has been brought
about by authoritarian endorsement and opinion,
by making claims unsupported by valid
science, and by repetition…

how-we-got-fluoridated

 ↓ ORIGINAL HERE ↓

How We Got Fluoridated

by Philip Heggen  …  April 1999

Throughout the world, and from the beginning, virtually all living creatures have been exposed to fluoride.
It’s nothing new. Fluoride is one of the most abundant elements in the earth’s crust – cumulative and toxic to all forms of life at remarkably low dosage.

Sixty years ago U.S. dental researchers had identified areas in sixteen states where disfiguring mottled enamel was a serious problem. Thirty years ago, the World Health Organization had noted that high concentrations of fluoride are found in areas of every continent and that dental fluorosis is a problem from Finland to South Africa and from England to Japan.

But fluoride affects more than just developing teeth. Even dinosaurs have ingested water and vegetation contaminated by fluoride from volcanic gases and ash – and suffered the consequence in terms of painful arthritic effects.

Industrial mining and manufacturing, like mini-volcanoes, bring up fluorides from the earth into the biosphere, with similar effects on human communities. In the past century or so, man has spawned these “mini-volcanoes” without fully understanding the consequences. Modern well-drilling equipment has provided much needed water from deep within the earth – and this, too, has resulted in fluoride poisoning. This has not been a conspiracy in the usual sense of the word … but rather, a colossal blunder.

“The problem is enormous, unbelievable,” says Andezhath Susheela of the Fluorosis Research and Rural Development Foundation in Delhi, India. She has been unraveling the national story for a decade during which time her estimate of the number of people leading “a painful and crippled life” from fluorosis has risen from one million to 25 million and now to 60 million – six million of them children – spread across tens of thousands of communities. “In some villages three-quarters of the population are seriously affected.”

This paper is a chronicle and overview spanning the history of modern industry. It shows the rise of fluoride pollution and how economic motives have overridden concerns for human health. We take you back to the early metal refinery pollution in Europe and show the record of lawsuits for fluoride damage. This reveals the basis for American industry’s fear of being shut down by lawsuits. We also document the steps taken by industry to divert public attention away from fluoride air pollution. This chronicle shows that the origin of water fluoridation is in these fluoride fears of industry – not in concern for children’s teeth.

During the 1940s, the development of the atom bomb required handling huge amounts of fluoride in the production of nuclear weapons. Documented here is a major safety study by the Atomic Energy Commission. As a result of this extensive study, the federal government became involved in the suppression of information about fluoride poisoning. Formerly restricted government documents now made available under the Freedom of Information Act have filled in some blank spaces in this chronology.

Thus, both big government and big industry, for different reasons, became involved in the cover-up. The succeeding collaboration of industry and government is documented in detail.

The difficulties in maintaining a deception over an extended time are significant. This is especially true with an ongoing issue like fluoridation. A compounding of dishonest statements and actions is required to maintain the original deception. At a certain point, the truth of the situation becomes obvious. These consequences are now coming to bear on the defenders of fluoridation. The Epilogue deals with this coming confrontation.

Introduction

During the last half of the Nineteenth Century, ore refineries and chemical plants were introduced in Europe. In these early years of the industrial revolution came serious air pollution problems. Iron and copper refineries or smelters were the worst culprits. Fumes and fallout from their smokestacks caused obvious injury and sickness to people, livestock, crops, and other vegetation in the surrounding communities and countryside.

Unknown in the early years of the industrial revolution, the most deadly chemical killer in this effluent was hydrogen fluoride (HF), now known to be toxic in a concentration of parts per billion. The term fluorine, rather than fluoride was then commonly used in referring to the air pollutant. Hydrogen fluoride was itself first identified in industrial emissions after the turn of the century, but its effects had been clearly seen in the areas surrounding these industrial polluters.

Early European Chronology

1855

Smelters in Freiburg, Germany first paid damages to neighbors injured by fluorine emissions.

1893

The smelters in Freiburg paid out 880,000 marks in damages for fluorine contamination injuries and 644,000 marks for permanent relief.

1900

The very existence of the smelting industry in Germany and Great Britain is threatened by successful lawsuits for fluorine damage and by burdensome laws and regulations.

1907

A disease of cattle that had been endemic around Freiburg for some 20 years was identified as fluorine poisoning from the smelters.

1912

Fluorine poisoning of cattle was reported near a superphosphate plant in Italy. During the 1890s there had been numerous complaints of damage to vegetation around superphosphate fertilizer plants.

1918

The cattle around a Swiss aluminum plant became poisoned. Aluminum smelters, utilizing the fluxing agents flourite (49% fluorine), and cryolite (54% fluorine), were to become major sources of fluorine air pollution.

Part I   Overview

In America, the term fluoride replaced fluorine in referring to air pollution – as fluorine rarely occurs uncombined with other elements, due to its extremely high reactivity. This is the basis for its toxic effect on virtually all biological systems.

The many successful lawsuits for airborne fluoride damage in Europe were seen as a threat to American Industry. This feared risk produced a strong incentive which resulted in attempts to suppress the facts and sidetrack public concerns about hydrogen fluoride air pollution.

As American smelting industries expanded and smokestack emissions increased, the threat of legal action and regulatory controls worried these industries. Bringing about changes in people’s attitude about fluoride was seen as critically important . The original strategy was to get people to believe that water was the chief source of fluoride, and that other sources were unimportant.

In 1931, this camouflage began with the announcement by Alcoa’s chief chemist, H.V. Churchill, that the mottled teeth of children in the Pittsburgh area had been caused by fluoride in the water. Pittsburgh, of course, was the location of Alcoa’s aluminum smelters. This trick is documented in the Pittsburgh Press for May 31 under the headline, “Scientist Here Finds Secret Poison Which Blackens Teeth of Children”. Churchill’s announcement left the public with the idea that it was only fluoride in the water that caused “mottling”. Today the blame has shifted to toothpaste.

Alcoa’s deception had the effect of covering up major airborne fluoride damage in Pittsburgh. The success of this ploy resulted from the public’s acceptance of Churchill’s expert opinion as unbiased, when it was strongly biased. It does not take an expert to see the circumstances pointing to bias. The tendency of many people to quickly and uncritically accept expert opinion has been utilized as a propaganda device. In fact, it was to become the principal tool and stratagem of the fluoridation campaign. If one looks through profluoridation literature, it is found to be full of authoritarian endorsements (expert opinion), but no hard evidence.

Later, it would be claimed that people need fluoride, and that fluoride should be added to the water supply so everyone could get it. This strategy was to provide an enormous outlet for waste fluorides. Shaping people’s attitudes about fluoride had now begun and was to continue unabated for seven decades. Since the mid-1960s, television advertising has been intensively used to achieve this purpose, with $30 million spent on advertising Crest fluoridated toothpaste in just one year.

In 1931, it became widely known that mottled tooth enamel is caused by fluoride poisoning of the tooth buds while the enamel is being formed. Fluoride in the bloodstream reaches the tooth buds before the teeth erupt through the gums. Fluoride in the drinking water does not directly contact the tooth buds. For this reason dental fluorosis is clear evidence of systemic fluoride poisoning. Also, dental fluorosis is often caused by hydrogen fluoride in toxic air pollutants. It can likewise be caused by foods prepared from crops grown in fluoride contaminated soils and air.

Along with the shaping of public attitudes, industry influenced key government agencies. The US Public Health Service (USPHS), and later, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cooperated, to a surprising degree, in the economical disposal of industry’s toxic fluoride waste materials. As a result of agency appointments and hiring of industry-funded scientists, these government agencies became closely identified with the motivations of industry. In the process, they have had to ignore serious adverse effects on human health – from fluoride as well as a number of other toxic chemical compounds. In the easy choice of catering to industry, these Agencies incrementally abandoned their own basic charge of promoting human and environmental health.

This identification with industry was true regarding air pollution, and later epitomized in water fluoridation, with the USPHS eventually setting the goal of mandatory national fluoridation by the turn of the century. EPA later rationalized this goal by calling it an efficient way to recycle waste.

As a consequence of the realignment of the Public Health Service into a strong supporter of fluoridation, research in academic institutions also came under the control of big industry on this feared pollution issue. Control over research in academic institutions was brought about through the giving and withholding of government grants and research contracts. All government support of academic institutions was channeled through the industry biased Public Health Service. These pressures and incentives grew as industry grew. Applied relentlessly over the years and decades, the fluoride industry’s influence on academia has now spanned most of the 20th century.

By way of economic incentives the American Dental Association (ADA) also became a prominent and active promoter of fluoridation. This came about through the influence of a small clique pretending to speak for all dentists. While the public has tended to see ADA as an unbiased professional organization, it is, in fact, a trade group, with predictable motivations. The role of ADA in fluoridation has been that of an opportunist. It has received ongoing financial support from the USPHS, itself a virtual arm of big industry. ADA alleged an ethical role on the part of dentists based on their claim that fluoridation would reduce dentists’ income. But expensive cosmetic dentistry required to hide the effects of fluorosis actually increased the incomes of dentists. As a result, the dental trade association has become an ideal front for big industry in their scheme to dump fluoride waste products at a profit.

Influencing the US medical community was also of crucial importance to the success of the fluoridation scheme. Thousands of American Medical Association members came to be dependent on grants from the National Institutes of Health (a part of the USPHS) for most of their support. A majority of medical schools also came to recognize their increasing dependence on government grants via USPHS. One effect of this influence was minimizing the subject of fluorosis in medical texts. Consequently, the majority of dentists and physicians know very little about chronic fluoride poisoning.

Industry’s unstated motivation behind water fluoridation was to find an economical means for disposal of their accumulating fluoride waste products, and to avoid claims for compensation by workers harmed by airborne fluoride on the job. USPHS supports this industrial strategy while at the same time actively assisting industry in a cover-up of their fluoride air pollution problems. Today, through regional and county health offices, USPHS influences city councils to override previous ballot decisions against fluoridating public water, thereby subverting the basic principles of democratic government, as well as compromising public health.

With such pervasive influence of industry on government, academia, dentistry and medicine, it soon became political suicide for professionals to challenge or even question the fluoridation of drinking water. Individuals who had the boldness to do so soon found that their jobs were in jeopardy. Even outspoken dentists, the supposed experts, were ostracized from their trade organization (ADA) and saw their professional careers threatened. The ADA and their industrial backers were clearly out to destroy the opposition.

Of critical importance to industry was a complete knowledge about the chemical hazards associated with fluoride. Initially concerned with the fluoride-based refrigerant, freon, the Kettering Laboratory was founded in 1925 with gifts from Ethyl Corporation, General Electric, and DuPont and supported by other concerned industries. Kettering was to investigate chemical hazards in American industrial operations. It was Kettering policy to keep such research away from public view.

Since 1925, the great bulk of research in America having to do with fluoride poisoning has been financed by the concerned companies. It has been kept secret because it was done to protect the companies who funded Kettering. The Director of the Kettering Laboratory at the University of Cincinnati, Dr. Robert Kehoe, was also Medical Director of the Ethyl Corporation, and consultant to the Atomic Energy Commission – as well as the Division of Occupational Medicine of the USPHS. All three of these affiliations were with those having strong motives for suppressing the dangers associated with fluorides.

Fluoride research sponsored by industry was done by Kettering Laboratory so that it could be tightly controlled. Research supported by the federal government was channeled through the Public Health Service, which had become a virtual arm of big industry. With its strong bias, USPHS influenced the direction of fluoride investigations as well as what got published. It even censored reports after their publication. In this way, the concerned industries came to control nearly all of the fluoride research originating in the this country.

Research conducted in European countries and in Asia has not been subjected to such constraints. Their research has more starkly exposed the dangers of fluoride. This has led to the outlawing of fluoridation in 98% of Europe and clearly verifies the bias in American fluoride research. Since the classic work on Fluorine Intoxication published by Kaj Roholm in 1935 and 1937, the foreign medical literature has contained ongoing research reports on a wide variety of serious disorders stemming from fluoride poisoning. The same is true of the US veterinary literature. But our own medical literature suffers from the secrecy imposed on Kettering research and from the bias and censorship brought to bear by the Public Health Service.

Part I   Chronology – 1909 to 1938

1909

Alcoa was now producing 16,500 tons of aluminum per year and releasing 132 tons of hydrogen fluoride air pollutants per year.

1909

Pennsylvania law prohibits use of fluoride compounds in food – including water.

1916

The National Research Council, a subgroup of the National Academy of Sciences, is organized as an independent, non-government group. It would provide a close liaison between the USPHS and American Industry, and came to represent industry through the affiliations of its membership. Government agencies came to pass on their chartered responsibilities by taking recommendations from NRC, instead of using their own professional staff. Decisions affecting industry came to be handled this way, to the great advantage of industry.

1922

Aluminum cookware is introduced in the US. Aluminum production increases, along with production of the toxic waste product, sodium fluoride.

1925

The Kettering Laboratory is set up by an industrial consortium to do contract research work on chemical hazards in industrial operations. The research findings are hid from public view.

1925

Andrew Mellon becomes US Treasurer. The USPHS is under the direct jurisdiction of the Department of the Treasury. Andrew Mellon was a founder and major stockholder of Alcoa, the main producer of toxic fluoride waste materials. During the 1920s there was growing concern abroad, and in our own Department of Agriculture and Bureau of Mines over fluoride as a public hazard – but not in the Public Health Service. During this decade, no mention of fluoride can be found in the official USPHS publication, Public Health Reports. Also in 1925, the Mellon Institute was founded by Andrew and Richard Mellon, former owners of Alcoa.

1930

The world’s first major hydrogen fluoride fog disaster occurred in the Meuse Valley, Belgium. Six thousand people became violently ill, and sixty died in this episode. Many cattle were also killed. The Danish scientist, Kaj Roholm studied the aftereffects of this episode and the subject of fluorine poisoning. His classic work, Fluorine Intoxication, published in London and Copenhagen, is unique to this day, as it examined in detail substantial numbers of human subjects poisoned by a well defined and dated episode.

1931

A considerable portion of Kettering Laboratory’s facilities are dedicated to the study of fluorides, initially with investigations into Freon 12 gas. Under contract, the studies are not released to the public. Hydrogen fluoride air pollution from Alcoa’s Pittsburgh smelters were causing mottled teeth in the area’s children. Alcoa’s chief chemist ignores this known relationship and announces that fluoride in the drinking water is responsible. That successful camouflage was to be used later as a reason to fluoridate water supplies of cities with the worst fluoride air pollution, thereby diverting attention from air pollution

1931

USPHS dentist, H. Trendley Dean, is dispatched by Alcoa founder, Andrew Mellon, to certain remote towns in the Western US where water wells have a naturally high concentration of calcium fluoride. Dean’s mission would be to find out how much calcium fluoride young children could tolerate before there was obvious visible damage to their teeth.

1933

Dr. Lloyd DeEds, Senior Toxicologist with the Department of Agriculture published a sixty page review on chronic fluorine poisoning (Medicine 12:1-60 (Feb)1933): “Only recently, that is within the last ten years, has the serious nature of fluorine toxicity been realized, particularly with regard to chronic intoxication. It is from the viewpoint of chronic intoxication that fluorine is of importance to the public health.” He discussed poisoning of vegetation and livestock near aluminum plants; and pointed out that superphosphate plants were annually pouring 25,000 tons of fluorine into the air and adding 90,000 tons to the topsoil each year.

1935

From now on, and in the face of growing fluoride air pollution, the USPHS described “mottling” as a “water-borne disease”, and began investigating the extent of the disorder in the US.

1938

H. Trendley Dean and the USPHS conduct the “Galesburg-Quincy” study, one of the two studies upon which water fluoridation rests (the other is the “21 cities” study, done in 1939 and 1940). On these two studies rested the “fluorine-dental caries hypothesis” which was to be tested in the experiments at Grand Rapids, Michigan, Newburgh, New York, and Brantford, Ontario.

Note: These studies were later examined by non-government expert statisticians and found to be statistically flawed, as well as having a significant number of other serious problems, making the studies worthless. (see Fluoride the Aging Factor by Dr. John Yiamouyiannis, p. 119-123. also: Fluoridation Errors and Omissions in Experimental Trials, by Philip R. N. Sutton, DDSc, LDS, Senior Research Fellow, Dept of Oral Medicine and Surgery, University of Melbourne, in collaboration with Sir Arthur B. P. Amies, Dean of the Dental School, University of Melbourne) It is interesting to note that Dean visited Galesburg earlier on a mottled enamel survey in 1934 and listed Galesburg as a city that “lacked the requisites for quantitative evaluation”.

PART II

A Federally Funded, National Strategy Supporting Big Industry

It was a quirk of fate that the early industrial secrecy surrounding fluoride in America was to be strongly reinforced by the federal government for reasons of national security. Fluoride was the key chemical compound in the production of the atomic bomb, and extensive government information on the serious health risks of fluoride was kept secret both during and after World War II. This helps explain how the fluoride industries were able to get virtually total cooperation from government agencies in covering up industry’s fluoride pollution.

When the concept of water fluoridation surfaced around 1939, it was quickly seized by big industry and turned into a relentless, no-holds-barred drive for universal fluoridation. This drive was soon to be implemented by the US Public Health Service as if it were a military mandate – a “mission”.

USPHS was ideal for this mission, being organized in a similar way to the US Armed Forces. Its officers are commissioned and expected to obey orders of the Surgeon General. The common public view of the Surgeon General as an impeccable and totally objective authority is often naive. In the real world the Surgeon General is expected to support and carry out current policy. If a particular policy, such as water fluoridation is supported successively by two or more Surgeons General, it would be naive to think this proves the policy is based on science.

USPHS has a Dental Corps which is closely associated with those in the American Dental Association (ADA) and holds interlocking memberships on its boards, committees, and councils. Significantly, officers of the USPHS also sit on the editorial boards of every important medical and dental journal in the United States.

The national strategy for universal fluoridation utilized state and regional health departments as ersatz field headquarters. Strongly biased literature was used, such as the Kettering abstracts published in 1963, and the key ADA propaganda piece, Fluoridation Facts, first published in 1960, and used to this day, although it is proved lacking in credibility by its own references. As this pamphlet was published more than three decades ago and is still uncorrected, one can only call it fraudulent. This promotional material was distributed to health departments and agencies throughout the country.

The disinformation campaign conducted by USPHS has been extended since the 1960s down to local health districts, sometimes employing state or field fluoridation coordinators. With a national communications network of state and regional health departments in place, community assessments can be made and those showing the least resistance are targeted first. The most successful tactics used in previously fluoridated communities are employed on prospective communities. The USPHS campaign has involved literally hundreds of such intrusions on communities, and has become a fine-tuned operation. District health department officials typically contact city councils with a strongly biased sales pitch and promises of federal funding. The attempt is often made to get city councils to vote and rule on the fluoridation issue without a public vote. In some cases, where it is legal, this may involve overriding previous public vote, even though it directly affects all the people in the community on a daily basis.

When a community is overrun by such tactics, the victory often gets wide publicity, as practiced in psychological warfare. Further, there is strong circumstantial evidence that the USPHS campaign includes overturning state laws that interfere with the USPHS “mission”. For example, in the State of Washington, the State Code prohibiting city councils from directly overriding previous public vote was successfully used in Spokane in 1984 to stop fluoridation in that city. The following year that State Code was overturned with no motivation from within Washington. When viewed in the larger context revealed in this chronicle, such circumstantial evidence is compelling.

It has been a priority of big industry to settle lawsuits out of court. This prevents legal precedents being set on fluoride damage, which could open the way for further litigation. A good example involved the Troutdale, Oregon aluminum plant east of Portland, which was operated by Alcoa during World War II. After the war some millions in damage suits were filed, and many hundreds of thousands of dollars were paid in settlements from the new renter of the plant, Reynolds Metals Co.

One such suit was for serious injuries to members of the Paul Martin family. It was considered so important by big industry that an armada of six corporations all joined in the suit as “friends of the court.” They were Alcoa, Kaiser, Harvey Aluminum, Olin-Mathieson, Victor Chemical, and Food Machinery and Chemical. When it appeared that the Martin family might win their case, an out of court settlement was arranged by purchasing the Martin ranch at an inflated price. Once again, a potentially important legal precedent did not get into the legal record.

PART II    - 1939 to 1959

1939

The concept of fluoridation arises as an alternative method of disposing of industrial waste chemicals, where disposal expense is replaced by profit. This fact was confirmed with approval in a 1983 letter written by Rebecca Hanmer, Assistant Administrator, from EPA Office of Water.

1939

The Hatch Act was passed after revelations that employees of the WPA, a New Deal agency, were pressured to make political contributions. The new Act protected against a politicized federal work force. It also prohibited any federally funded agency, whether county, state, or federal, from trying to influence public referenda. Since the beginning of the effort to fluoridate water in the 1940s, however, the Hatch Act has been repeatedly and flagrantly violated

1939

On Sept 29, Mellon Institute scientist, Gerald J. Cox, begins his major role in the promotion of fluoridation by saying, “the present trend toward removal of fluorides from food and water may need reversal”.

Note: Scientist Cox also had this to say in 1939: “Fluorides are among the most toxic of substances. Mottled enamel results from as little as 0.0001 percent of fluorine in the drinking water. Every use of water must be examined before fluoridation can begin”. (Journal of the American Water Works Assn. pp. 1926-1930, Nov 1939). Despite all of this, Alcoa sponsored biochemist, Gerald J. Cox, fluoridates rats in his lab and mysteriously concludes that “fluoride reduces cavities”. He makes a public proposal that the US should fluoridate its water supply. Cox begins to tour the US, stumping for fluoridation.

1939

The American Water Works Association decided there was sufficient evidence about fluoride to classify it as a hazardous material, like lead and arsenic. It then suggested that drinking water should contain no more than 0.1 ppm fluoride.

1941

Instead of forbidding the dumping of fluoride in water, the USPHS regulations set 1.0 ppm of fluoride as the maximum tolerance allowed in a public water supply. This allowed industries to continue to dump fluoride wastes into rivers.

1941

In December, Japan attacks Pearl Harbor. All anti-pollution regulations are suspended. Many parts of America now suffer hydrogen fluoride air pollution on an unprecedented scale. Major fluoride hazards develop in war materials production of WWII, consolidating government collusion with big industry on a coverup of fluoride hazards.

1942

In England, a Lancet report showed that out of 589 London children, 28% had mottled teeth. According to Alcoa’s chief chemist and the USPHS, London’s drinking water should contain well over one ppm fluoride to account for this. Tests showed just 0.19 ppm. Clearly, hydrogen fluoride was the cause. In this case, it was surely related to the heavy use of coal for fuel, a known source of HF.

1942

Hydrogen fluoride supplants sulfuric acid as a catalyst in the production of high test gasoline in Los Angeles. One such plant required 500-750 tons of HF yearly (Fluorine Industry Chem. and Met. Eng., 52:94-99 Mar. 1945).

1943

Planning began on the Newburgh, NY, Fluoridation Demonstration Project. Atomic bomb program scientists played a prominent but unpublicized role in this first US fluoridation experiment. Fluoride was the key chemical in atomic bomb production. Millions of tons of fluoride were needed for the manufacture of bomb-grade uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons. Today, memos released under the Freedom of Information Act show that scientists from the atomic bomb program secretly shaped and guided the Newburgh fluoridation experiment. This reveals the US government conflict of interest and its motive to prove fluoride safe.

1944

Oscar Ewing is put on the payroll of the Aluminum Company of America as an attorney, at an annual salary of $750,000.

1945

Program “F” is implemented by the US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). This is the most extensive US study of the health effects of fluoride – a key chemical component in atomic bomb production. One of the most toxic chemicals known to man, fluoride was found to have marked adverse effects to the central nervous system. But much of the information was classified “secret” in the name of national security because of fear that lawsuits would undermine full-scale production of atomic bombs.

1946

With no new evidence of safety, and no stated reason, USPHS raised the maximum tolerance level of fluoride in public water supplies to 1.5 ppm.

1947

Alcoa lawyer, Oscar Ewing, is appointed head of the Federal Security Agency, later HEW, a position that places him in charge of the USPHS. He is the second Alcoa executive (after Andrew Mellon) to direct the course of the Public Health Service, completing its mutation into a virtual pawn of big industry. Under Ewing, a national fluoridation campaign rapidly materializes, spearheaded by the USPHS. Over the next three years, eighty-seven cities were fluoridated. This included the control city of Muskegan in the original Michigan experiment, thus wiping out the most scientifically objective test of safety before the test was half over.

Ewing’s public relations strategist was Edward L. Bernays, Sigmund Freud’s nephew, who pioneered Freudian theory toward advertising and government propaganda (see Bernays’ 1928 book, Propaganda). Because of Bernays, people would be induced to forget that fluorides were toxic poisons. Opponents to the fluoridation program were painted as deranged. In 1996 they would be painted as civil rights activists, crackpots, and right-wing loonies. As the newspapers were heavily influenced by industry advertisers, they became key dispensers of such propaganda.

1948

The Donora Death Fog was the second major air pollution disaster in history. It was caused by the accumulation of stagnant hydrogen fluoride gas from steel and zinc smelters in a narrow industrialized valley. Six thousand of the 13,000 residents of this Pennsylvania town’s population became ill, and on the fourth day seventeen died. A leading forensic chemist, Philip Sadtler, investigated the tragedy and reported strong evidence of acute fluoride poisoning. His report appeared in Chemical and Engineering News under the headline, FLUORINE GASES IN ATMOSPHERE AS INDUSTRIAL WASTES BLAMED FOR DEATH AND CHRONIC POISONING OF DONORA AND WEBSTER. The USPHS whitewashed the incident in their report (see Public Health Bull. No. 306, Washington, D.C., 1949). Their conclusion was: No pollutant present could have caused the disaster. The following are excerpts from a critique of that report by Frederick B. Exner, MD:

“A 173-page report tells us that there had been no unusual kind or amount of pollution, and that no pollution present could have caused the trouble. Sampling methods of doubtful reliability were applied at arbitrarily selected times and places, and the results averaged with no attempt at proper weighting. Calculations therefrom, replete with arithmetical errors and discrepancies, were combined with outright guesses to arrive at estimates of emission.

They guess that 210 tons of coal burned in homes emit 30 lb. of fluorine but that 213 tons burned in the blooming-mill boilers emit only four lb. No possible reason for the difference is offered.

On page 104, waste gas from the blast furnace contains 4.6 mg of fluorine per cubic meter. On page 108 it contains one-tenth as much.

Calculations for open-hearth emission show a discrepancy of several thousand fold, with no way to know where the error lies.

The biological studies and general air sampling are similarly inappropriate and meaningless. Air samples at twelve arbitrarily selected points between Feb. 16, and April 27, 1949, can tell us nothing about concentrations during the episode.”

Test results of a study made of the Donora disaster by US Steel have been withheld from public view to this day. This is unmistakable evidence of an effort to cover up highly toxic HF emissions.

1948

As a direct consequence of the Donora disaster, USPHS began quietly sampling fluorides in the air over 27 major cities across the country. This sampling turned up serious HF air pollution (up to 80 ppb) in the following twelve cities: Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Buffalo, Denver, Oklahoma City, and Indianapolis (see Register of Air Pollution Analyses, US Department of Health, Education and Welfare. USPHS, Washington DC, 1949-1961).

1950

The new hydrogen fluoride air pollution data collected by the USPHS presented a major problem. Data gathered showed HF contamination up to 80 ppb, more than ten times what had been proposed for standards.

Strong circumstantial evidence suggests that the camouflage strategy adopted more than a decade earlier by Alcoa in Pittsburgh was to influence the strategy adopted by the USPHS: If the nation’s twelve cities with the most serious HF air pollution were fluoridated, this expensive-to-correct problem would be camouflaged. Dental fluorosis could then be attributed to the water, and authorities could describe mottled teeth as an “acceptable trade-off” for the claimed caries preventing properties of fluoridated water. To bring this about, the Great Fluoridation Experiment underway in Grand Rapids and three other cities was declared a success in June 1950, five years before the experiment would be complete. Before a single tooth had fully developed under the influence of the experimental fluoridated water, USPHS claimed a reduction in tooth decay of between 50 and 60 percent. (Dean, H. T. et al., Studies on Mass Control of Dental Caries through Fluoridation of the Public Water Supply, Public Health Report 65, 1950).

This “success” then allowed USPHS to rush out to fluoridate the twelve cities with major HF air pollution and thereby camouflage the toxic air problems. All twelve cities were fluoridated in the following five years. The same camouflage was to be carried out two years later by Alcoa in Australia.

1950

Two years after the disaster in Donora, when the USPHS found serious HF air pollution across the country, their analytical method was changed from measuring the level of HF to measuring the level of fluoride ions in the air. Deception clearly motivated this change. Fluoride ions, like fluorine gas, are relatively rare toxic air emissions. By pretending that fluoride ions, not the far more harmful HF, was the concern in contaminated air, the USPHS avoided exposure of incriminating HF data which it thereby managed, once again, to ignore.

1950

From 1950 to 1951, Alcoa advertises sodium fluoride for addition to water supplies.

1950

The Journal of the American Dental Association, (30:447, 1950), features an article by Dr. G. J. Cox, University of Pittsburgh, who says, “To solve the esthetic problem for victims of mottled enamel, porcelain facings, jacket crowns, or even dentures may be required”. Note: The public is expected to bear the cost of what is being done to them while the dental industry profits.

1951

Early in 1951 Oscar Ewing allocated $2 million to “promote fluoridation nationwide”.

1951

Oscar Ewing was sponsoring a bill which the conservative American Medical Association claimed would be the first step toward socialized medicine. The AMA appealed to its members for a “fighting fund” to defeat the Bill and $3 million was raised. But at the AMA convention in Los Angeles, Ewing notified the committee that the bill was to be withdrawn. That same committee, which had never before considered the subject, suddenly released a statement saying that the AMA totally endorsed the “safety of fluoridation”. At that time there was not one published paper providing evidence to support the AMA endorsement. But from then on, the AMA left fluoridation to dentists – and to those powerful forces which were manipulating the dental trade association (ADA).

1952

The ADA Journal instructs its dentists not to discuss their personal opinions about fluoride. Here is blatant evidence of ADA political bias.

1952

In London, the greatest toxic fog disaster in history occurred from December 5-9 in a temperature inversion. Hydrogen fluoride (HF) gas was the culprit, as in the two earlier major disasters. During those five days there were 2,000 excess deaths in London, and some 10,000 more people were wiped out in the surrounding Thames Valley. Similar episodes, both before and after this one, occurred in London. In 1945, a noxious fog brought death to 600; in 1956, to 500; and in 1957, to 400 (Air Pollution, published on behalf of the World Health Organization, Columbia University Press, N.Y., 1961, p. 175).

Shocking as it is, the toll of lives does not tell the whole story. Neither the assessments of the toxic air disasters, nor tests establishing maximum contaminant levels, take into account the widespread effects on mental function brought about by HF poisoning. Human behavior is exquisitely sensitive to minute traces of hydrogen fluoride – in the parts per billion range. In London, it is likely that millions were so affected. This includes symptoms of confusion, fatigue, partial loss of memory, and mental dullness and apathy. The condition identified in 1982 as chronic fatigue syndrome is currently of undetermined origin, and is now increasingly widespread. The same symptoms are caused by HF air pollution. Research on hydrogen fluoride is lacking, and funding is not available.

1952

USPHS officials, Drs. Dean, Arnold and McClure, concentrate their efforts to introduce fluoridation into Australia and New Zealand, providing more evidence for an underlying industrial motivation.

1952

Alcoa starts construction of the first aluminum smelter in Australia, two miles from the small town of Beaconsfield, Tasmania. The following year, Beaconsfield became the first town in all of Australia to install water fluoridation. Dental fluorosis could then be attributed to the water as an “acceptable trade-off” for prevention of caries (unproven). Beyond coincidence, here is more evidence of the industrial strategy to camouflaging airborne HF poisoning by fluoridating the water supply.

1955

The Kettering Laboratory in Cincinnati has become the largest organization of its kind in the world with a staff numbering about 120. Its specified purpose is to investigate chemical hazards that develop in American industrial operations (to prevent a replay of the litigation that plagued European industry and gave American industry a competitive edge).

1956

On Jan 26, Procter & Gamble ran a full page ad in the New York Times, proclaiming Crest toothpaste “an important milestone in medicine”, comparing it to Dr. Fleming’s discovery of penicillin. P & G published no evidence supporting their extravagant claims. Harold Hillenbrand, secretary of ADA responded saying there was no evidence that any fluoride paste could prevent tooth decay. Initially there was an FDA warning label on Crest, but it disappeared in 1958, without explanation, and did not reappear until nearly forty years later.

1957

Alcoa announces the direct sale of sodium fluoride to cities and towns – for fluoridation of drinking water. A decade later, when it was found that phosphate fertilizer companies could sell fluorides from their smokestack scrubbers for even less money, Alcoa was priced out of the fluoride dumping market.

1957

The American Dental Association receives $6,453,816 in federal funds, from 1957-1973.

1958

The World Health Organization (WHO) establishes an Expert Committee in Geneva to study fluoridation. At least five of the seven committee members had promoted fluoridation in their own countries. The American proponent, Professor H. C. Hodge, had some of his research financed by the Atomic Energy Commission, which was confronted with serious fluoride disposal problems from uranium processing. Professor Ericsson, the member from Sweden and a prominent advocate of fluoridation in Europe, was the recipient of a USPHS grant and received royalties from Sweden’s toothpaste industry. Such are the sources of the WHO endorsement of fluoridation.

1959

Reynolds Metals Co. built an aluminum smelter on the Gulf of St. Lawrence, upwind of a Mohawk Indian Reservation. Fifteen-hundred Mohawk Indians farmed on their island Reservation. Forty-five farmers had forty cattle barns and 364 dairy cattle. Cattle became lame and many cows died. In 1977, there were just 177 left. The farmers themselves were found to have muscular and skeletal abnormalities. The Mohawk way of life became the victim of a preventable man-made plague caused by hydrogen fluoride.

PART II   Chronology – 1960 to 1999

 

1960

In Canada, the Committee on Fluoridation meets in Toronto. Dr. G. E. Hall guides the deliberations. His daughter was employed by an aluminum corporation with fluoride pollution problems. He was himself serving as honorary advisory director for a leading fluoridation promoting organization, and his University (U. of Western Toronto) was the recipient of grants from the US Public Health Service (three conflicts of interest). Predictably, fluoridation of all public water supplies throughout Canada was advocated.

1960

In August, the ADA suddenly endorses the “safety and effectiveness” of Crest fluoride toothpaste, with no scientific evidence available. P & G stock rose by $8 per share. Toothpaste manufacturers around the world, including Colgate-Palmolive, Unilever and Beechams, jumped aboard the fluoride bandwagon.

1961

USPHS again raises the maximum tolerance level for fluoride in water supplies, this time to 2.4 ppm, in spite of the fact that one USPHS investigator said that at 1.5 ppm, the safety factor was zero.

1963

At the bequest of its industrial sponsors, The Kettering Laboratory collected US research articles on fluoride and “sanitized” them by rewriting their findings in published abstracts in a book titled, The Role of Fluoride in Public Health. Sponsors included Alcoa, American Petroleum Institute, Columbia-Geneva Steel Company, The Du Pont Company, Harshaw Chemical Company, Kaiser Aluminum and Chemicals Corporation, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, Pennsylvania Salt Manufacturing Company, Reynolds Metals Company, and the Universal Oil Products Company – all concerned about regulations bearing on fluoride air pollution and worker health problems.

This book of 158 sanitized abstracts was then distributed to all health agencies throughout the US, thus becoming the standard reference work for state and county health departments. Busy health professionals relied on these convenient and readily available abstracts, rather than searching the literature for the original (unsanitized) research. In this way, many key professionals throughout the country were duped on the issue of fluoride poisoning.

1967

On October 15, the Pittsburgh Press reported that 98% of Pittsburgh school children 13-15 years of age had crooked teeth. It was not mentioned that chronic fluoride toxicity from childhood induces such malocclusion. Hydrogen fluoride poisoning from Alcoa aluminum smelters in the Pittsburgh area had not been monitored. Significantly, the Pittsburgh water supplies were fluoridated fifteen years earlier, in 1952.

1968

EPA chemist Ervin Bellack noted that recovered phosphate fertilizer acid waste contains about 19% fluorine. He reported that this concentrated scrubber liquor, which is 23% fluorosilicic acid, could be used as a water fluoridating agent – instead of sodium fluoride. Further, this waste product was available in enormous quantities – enough to fluoridate the entire nation’s water supply. The EPA and USPHS approved and promoted this source of fluoride waste for public water supplies, without conducting any tests for safety.

Note: Legal disposal of the scrubber liquor as a waste product would cost about $1.40 per gallon due its highly toxic contents. Instead, it could now be sold to municipal water departments for upwards of sixty cents per gallon. Its toxic contents are called out in detail in the supplier’s specification sheet.

The amount of this scrubber liquor sold annually for water fluoridation has been above one hundred thousand tons for many years. The scale of this business is in the millions of dollars annually. In this perspective, it is easy to appreciate the lengths to which big industry will go to try to rationalize and legitimatize the scheme. Sad to say, it now permanently compromises the health of more than one hundred million Americans.

The only answer ever given to the above charge is that “toxicity is a function of concentration”, and that at one ppm in water, fluoride is not harmful. This glib statement ignores the most important fact concerning fluoride poisoning: it accumulates in the body. Half the daily dosage will produce the same poisoning effects in twice the time period. Chronic fluoride poisoning is a time bomb that the majority of Americans now face in their senior years. It can both cause and aggravate arthritis, a condition which affects virtually all who reach the age of retirement.

1970

Over 90% of toothpaste now contains fluoride. This is the result of an intensive advertising campaign backed by a profit oriented dental trade association which is mistakenly perceived as an unbiased authority. This advertising has tended to establish the image of fluoride as a beneficial, even essential element, while, in fact, it is officially rated more toxic than either lead or cadmium. Have Americans been brainwashed? You decide.

1971

Germany bans water fluoridation.

1971

Birmingham, Alabama, the steel capitol of the South, experienced a calamitous air pollution disaster. Thousands suffered smarting eyes and scratchy throats. Eight deaths were reported. Mayor George Seibels said the disaster was caused by stack gasses from steel works in the area. The emissions hung over the city for three days in a temperature inversion. Unfortunately, the city had no standards for hydrogen fluoride (HF) and never monitored the air for these gases. Newspapers throughout the country blamed the disaster on “high particulates,” but had no information on the particulates.

GASP, a local environmental group turned to EPA for help, but no federal standards had been set, and even though human deaths occurred no one could be cited. Two months later the independent National Research Council hastily contrived a report for EPA stating, “Airborne fluoride currently presents no direct hazard to man.” This could be technically correct, if they were referring to ionic fluoride, which is rare in industrial emissions. The culprit in this disaster, however, was hydrogen fluoride, which NRC must have known. Furthermore, no committee can make a scientific judgement about safety when there are no standards and no data. Clearly, federal air pollution policies protect polluters and poison people.

1972

The February issue of the ADA’s own Journal reports that dental incomes and dental costs per person are higher in fluoridated communities. Dentists don’t mention that fluorides embrittle rather than toughen tooth enamel. Resultant cracks and chipping make tooth repair more difficult – and more expensive. Also, fluoride makes enamel porous, thereby increasing the wear rate of the tooth surface. These facts alone warrant ruling out fluoride treatment for teeth.

1972

Sweden bans fluoridation of public water.

1973

The Netherlands constitution bans water fluoridation.

1976

The CBS News almanac showed there were 76.7 dentists per 100,000 population in fluoridated cities, and only 59.2 in non-fluoridated cities. This was based on a study of thirty representative cities. The real surprise came in looking at the three US cities that have been fluoridated the longest: Grand Rapids, Michigan, Newburgh, NY, and Evanston, Illinois. These cities averaged 121 dentists per 100,000 population, which was more than double the national average – after 25 years on fluoridated water. It is easy to see why ADA promotes fluoridation so aggressively.

1980

From March 1980 to December 1980, the Houston Health Systems Agency allocated $1,399,822 federal tax dollars to promote fluoridation in Texas. The Texas Department of Health gave instructions to the Health Systems Agency on how to promote fluoridation. It stated: “A low profile of government pressure will be maintained. Convince citizens that they will receive personal health benefits without local tax money expenditures.” Here is evidence of the USPHS campaign.

More than $94,000 was spent on media promotion of fluoridation in Portland, Oregon, and $5000 for the poll on why fluoridation failed to pass.

Of a $90,000 federal grant for fluoridation, that city officials in Phoenix, Arizona had never requested, $38,000 was earmarked for media promotion. Here is more evidence of the USPHS campaign.

1982

The Water Chemicals Codex is published from Washington DC showing all fluoride products used in public water supplies are lead contaminated. Further, it is widely known that fluorides are extremely corrosive and leach lead from pipe joints. When water stands in pipes, the lead contamination in the water can easily double or triple. It is also widely known that fluoride has a synergistic action on lead in the water, increasing lead’s absorption in the human body.

1982

USPHS conducts its first group of studies on animal cancer and fluorides, mandated by the Congressional Hearings in 1977. The study lasts until 1984, and is then scrapped because of flaws in design and progress.

1985

USPHS contracts a second set of studies on animal cancer and fluoride, mandated by the 1977 Congressional Hearings, eight years earlier. USPHS again contracts Battelle Memorial Institute in Ohio, which conducts a study lasting until 1987. The results are released in 1988.

1985

The cost of dental services in the US rapidly increases – from $13.6 billion in 1979 to $27.1 billion in 1985 – in parallel with the increasing environmental saturation of fluoride from many sources. This is almost exactly a doubling of dental costs in six years. Inflation cannot account for changes on such a scale.

1985

EPA raises the maximum contaminant level for fluoride in drinking water to 4 ppm (4mg per liter). It was raised by USPHS in 1961 to 2.4 ppm. Both of these official increases were made without any scientific evidence or rationale. The EPA professionals union thereupon initiated legal action to stop this political decision by EPA management.

1986

Production of lead free gasoline in the US is growing rapidly. The process involves the use of HF to achieve high octane ratings without using lead. HF is now present in automotive exhaust gases instead of lead, even though it is more toxic than lead (see Townsend N. and Campbell D., Deadly Risks of Lead-free Petrol. New Statesman, 20 Ocober 1988).

1987

A series of hydrogen fluoride accidents in Texas City, Texas, Torrance California, and Tulsa, Oklahoma, demonstrate that industrial hydrogen fluoride sites are a major public safety threat. Small amounts of HF liquid will release a dense ground hugging gas cloud, lethal for several miles. The first symptoms of exposure to trace amounts of HF are psychological, including confusion, fatigue, partial memory loss, and mental dullness.

1988

Battelle Memorial Institute releases its studies on fluoride and animal cancer, for the USPHS, reporting highly specific fluoride-related cancers. The data is turned over by USPHS to the National Toxicology Program (NTP), who gives the data to the Experimental Pathology Labs, who reclassify and delete items damaging to the pro-fluoridation faction. The altered data is then submitted to the “pathology working group” on Dec 6, 1989, after a year of reworking – all this with the full knowledge of EPA. USPHS had data from the National Cancer Institute, as well as Procter and Gamble, indicating that fluoride causes bone cancer, but chose, likewise, to cover up those studies. By these inordinate delays spanning more than a decade, USPHS was able to make a travesty of the 1977 Congressional mandate.

1990

Procter and Gamble spends $30 million advertising Crest on US television. On March 5th the ADA News published a photo of ADA President Mike Overbey accepting a check for $100,000 from Procter and Gamble: “to commemorate the 30th Anniversary of ADA’s recognition of Crest.”

1990

Dr. William Marcus, a senior scientist at the US Environmental Protection Agency, was fired for exposing a coverup in a government study showing clear evidence that fluoride causes cancer.

1991

Dr. Robert J. Carton, Vice President of the Union representing twelve hundred scientists, engineers, and lawyers at EPA headquarters, presented the Drinking Water Subcommittee of the Science Advisory Board of EPA with evidence of scientific fraud in the preparation of EPA’s fluoride in drinking water standard. No follow up by the Science Advisory Board was ever made.

1991

Over 143,000 tons of toxic fluorides were dumped into US public drinking water this year. Most of it was fluorosilicic acid from the fertilizer industry, still untested by the federal government.

1992

In December, Dr. William Marcus was vindicated when Administrative Law Judge, David A. Clark, Jr., ordered EPA to give him back his job, with back pay, legal expenses, and $50,000 in damages. EPA appealed, but the appeal was turned down in 1994, by Secretary of Labor, Robert Reich, who accused EPA of firing Dr. Marcus in retaliation for speaking his mind in public. Reich found, among other things, that EPA had shredded important evidence that would have supported Dr. Marcus in court. The original trial proceedings also show that EPA employees who wanted to testify on behalf of Dr. Marcus were threatened by their own management. EPA officials also forged some of his time cards, and then accused him of misusing his office time.

1997

The Union of professionals at EPA headquarters in Washington, D.C., voted unanimously to co-sponsor a safe drinking water initiative that would reverse California’s 1995 mandatory fluoridation law. Local 2050 of the National Federation of Federal Employees has charged EPA management with “fraudulent alterations of data and negligent omission of facts to arrive at predetermined Agency positions regarding fluoride”. The above major news item on EPA went largely unreported across the country, clear evidence of the effective blackout on factual news concerning fluoride.

1997

Administrative “mandates” for fluoridation have been rejected at the polls in Pennsylvania, Kansas, and Washington States and in several other communities within the last year. This indicates growing public concern and a new emergence of public awareness.

1998

It was determined that over the past 50 years industries have released more than 25,000,000 tons of fluoride gases and particulates into the atmosphere. Arthritis, one of the most common physical symptoms of HF, is now found in the bulk of the senior population in the US. Why is this striking synchronism not being investigated? The answer is simple: Industry does not support it.

1998

The financial motivation of dental trade organizations are high. In California, in September of this year, Delta Dental Plan of California pledged $100,000, and the California Dental Association pledged $30,000, to help fund-raising efforts for fluoridating the State of California.

1999

Jan 21 Newswire/ — Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM today urged cities and municipalities to disconnect water fluoridation equipment during the Y2K rollover to prevent possible fluoride fatalities. Over the last 25 years fatalities have occurred when fluoride saturation levels ran too high; some

due to faulty flow control systems. In 1994, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study of a fatal fluoride overdose incident in Alaska, and dozens of verified fluoride “overfeeds” have occurred in cities and schools across the country. The risk of a fatal fluoride overdose is highest in schools, where the low body weight of children increases the risk. Saturation devices based on embedded systems or computer controls should be considered “unsafe” until proven otherwise.

EPILOGUE       The Approaching Confrontation

Alcoa responded to the human health issue in Pittsburgh with the initial plan to change public perceptions in order to protect industry. Andrew Mellon and Oscar Ewing, from Alcoa, the largest fluoride polluter, were both appointed to positions in control of the US Public Health Service. These appointments spanned the better part of two decades and had the effect of redirecting an agency established to protect people’s health into an agency to protect industry. EPA took on a similar role since its inception in 1971, led by William Ruckelshaus. At that time there existed a longstanding need for national standards on hydrogen fluoride emissions. During the first EPA press conference in January 1971, Mr. Ruckelshaus solemnly pledged to do so before the National Press Club. Neither he nor his successor, Russell Train, ever did.

Industry and these government agencies have been largely successful in obscuring the facts. This has been brought about by authoritarian endorsement and opinion, by making claims unsupported by valid science, and by repetition – the devices used by advertisers and propagandists. At the same time, opposition and even open discussion on the subject of fluoride pollution has been widely suppressed in the media. All of this has resulted in an erroneous public mindset. The best antidote is an investigation of the facts, and making this material widely available. Radio talk shows, television programming, and informative internet websites are now beginning to erode the deceptive mask constructed over decades by industry and their propagandists.

This historical review poses a challenge to the citizens of this country. Is this the Brave New World of Aldous Huxley? Has democracy become a total fiction? Tens of millions of people in this country now have mottled teeth, all caused by fluoride. The severity of dental fluorosis is increasing, as are the number affected. Are we actually being conditioned to accept this as normal and a mere “cosmetic effect”?

Recent studies have implicated fluoride in many chronic diseases, and also in more subtle impairments of the central nervous system. But current law is concerned with only one health effect: crippling skeletal fluorosis. To stop fluoridation we must first focus on enforcing existing law.

EPA is responsible for enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act. That this Law is being subverted is incontestable. If EPA were forced to comply with the law, fluoridation of public water would clearly be illegal in America. A Congressional Investigation of the details of EPA’s violation of this Law could bury fluoridation nationally.

References

  1. Caldwell, Gladys and Philip Zanfagna, Fluoridation and Truth Decay, Top-Ecol Press, 1974

  2. Exner, F. B., Economic Motives Behind Fluoridation, Aqua Pura, Jan 1966

  3. Griffiths, Joel and Chris Bryson, Fluoride, Teeth, and The Atomic Bomb, 1997

  4. Ronsivalli, L. J., Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies, Mermakk Pub, 1998

  5. Smith, E. G., The Secret War and The Fluoride Conspiracy, Epeius Pub, Australia, 1997

  6. Valerian, V., Analytical Chronology of Fluoridation,

    Leading Edge International Research Group, 1997  ← HUGE RESOURCE HERE

  7. Government document summaries on fluoride, hydrogen fluoride, sodium fluoride, and fluorosilicic acid, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

February 13, l999

U.S. Department of Justice

Environmental Crimes Division

601 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 6th Floor

Washington, DC 20004

Subject: Safe Drinking Water Act

Maximum Contaminant Level

for fluoride in drinking water

When EPA set the maximum contaminant level for fluoride in drinking water at four milligrams per liter, they based their calculation on incorrect dosage figures, which they described as 20 mg/day for 20 or more years. The calculation should have been based on a minimum of 10 mg/day for 10 or more years. This figure represents the total daily fluoride dosage according to the National Research Council which might cause crippling skeletal fluorosis.

EPA also erred in failing to consider individual tolerances and lifetime exposures. Twenty years does not a lifetime make.

EPA further violated the essence of the Safe Drinking Water Act in failing to consider arthritis (phase 1 and 2 skeletal fluorosis) as an “adverse” health effect … and in classifying disfiguring dental fluorosis as not an adverse health effect but merely “cosmetic.”

EPA has set the MCL at a level too high to provide the legally required margin of safety. In addition to the errors mentioned above, EPA also neglected to consider background levels of fluoride which, unlike the situation fifty years ago, can be several times the dosage delivered in drinking water. In short, EPA has relied on outdated and inaccurate information.

EPA must re-calculate the MCL according to law. Their minimum dosage figures 20 mg/day for 20 years for crippling skeletal fluorosis, were the result of an error in arithmetic, miscalculated by Harold C. Hodge, Ph.D., in 1953 and corrected by Dr. Hodge in 1979.

NAS/NRC corrected their figures in 1993. The minimum is currently estimated to be 10 mg/day for 10 years, or far less, on a daily basis, when ingested over a lifetime, or by individuals who are more vulnerable to the toxic effects of soluble fluorides. EPA management, however, has steadfastly ignored these facts.

I am writing to you today to ask your assistance in forcing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to obey the law.

References:

  • The Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300f, et seq.

  • National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Fluoride, Federal Register, 50(220): 47142-47171, Nov 14, 1985.

  • National Academy of Sciences / National Research Council, HEALTH EFFECTS OF INGESTED FLUORIDE, 1993, p 59.

  • U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, REVIEW OF FLUORIDE BENEFITS AND RISKS, 1991, page 46.

  • See images of the USDHHS symptoms & NAS/NRC dosage figures at: http://move.to/stopfluoride

Sincerely,

Philip Heggen

Thank you Philip

logo-aust-f-skeptics

new splash

 

CITY SUED OVER FLUORIDATION + MORE LEGAL INFO.

Contrary to what has been said by promoters of artificial fluoridation
of public water supplies, Judge Flaherty’s jurisdiction to make
and enter his findings on November 16, 1978
was expressly sustained and upheld…

seal-of-Pennsylvania-Court Judge-F.

Judge John P. Flaherty, [on right ]

CITY-SUED-F

Over the course of five months, the court held periodic hearings, which consisted of extensive expert testimony from as far away as England. At issue was the most recent time-trend study of Dr. Burk and Dr. Yiamouyiannis, which compared cancer mortality in ten cities which fluoridated their water systems with ten cities which did not fluoridate over a period of twenty-eight years from 1940 to 1968. The study concluded that there was a significant increase in cancer mortality in the fluoridated cities.

Contrary to what has been said by promoters of artificial fluoridation of public water supplies, Judge Flaherty’s jurisdiction to make and enter his findings on November 16, 1978 was expressly sustained and upheld as appears in Aitkenhead v. West View, 397 Atl. 2d 878 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1979).
Nor were his findings ever disturbed on appeal.

In 1988, Justice Flaherty re-affirmed his convictions that fluoridation is a very dangerous practice.

In a letter dated January 26, 1988 to Ms. Evelyn Hannan, he stated:

“It has been years now since the case involving fluoridation was before me as a trial judge,
but since that time nothing I have seen changes my view of the serious hazards occasioned
by public fluoridation.  To the contrary, what I have read convinces me all the more that
in-depth, serious, scientific effort should be undertaken before further expanding a
questionable practice. Those who belittle critics of fluoridation do the public a mis-service,
yet it seems in the face of strong, uncontradicted prima facie evidence,
that is the tactic most often employed.

Whether government has the right to force what it perceives as a benefit to the public was not directly before me in the case, but that also is to be pondered.

My hope is that groups such as yours will spur the scientific community into an objective posture on this issue.

I enclose an essay which was sent to me a few years ago focusing on the issue presented by analyzing epidemiological law data. Perhaps resolution of this narrow question will provide the answer.

More recently, some people have pointed out that Judge Flaherty’s decision was overturned on appeal and they assumed that therefore fluoridation wasn’t really proved to be harmful. Now a member of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Justice Flaherty clarified that his decision to end fluoridation was overturned only on the grounds that his court did not have jurisdiction to decide the issue.


 [ Does this infer that fluoridation is beyond the law?
 If this trial had been held in Scotland the results would have been different! ]

♦ John P. Flaherty, Jr. (Born 19 November 1931)was a Justice of the
   Supreme Court of Pennsylvania from 1978 to 2001 and
Chief Justice of the Court from 1996 to 2001.
                He retired at the end of 2001.

Green strip

❝   It is not the function of our Government
to keep the citizen from falling into error,
It is the function of the citizen to keep the
Government from falling into error.  

Green strip

Green strip

R.H.Jackson

Robert Houghwout Jackson

Chief Judge at the War-Crimes Tribunal in Nuremberg

NurembergWar Crimes Trial

20th November 1945.  to 1st October 1946.

The Doctors Trial considered the fate of twenty-three German physicians

who either participated in the Nazi program to euthanize persons

deemed “unworthy of life” (the mentally ill, mentally retarded,

or physically disabled) or who conducted experiments on

concentration camp prisoners Without Their Consent.

The Doctors Trial lasted 140 days.
Eighty-five witnesses testified and almost
1,500 documents were introduced.
Sixteen of the doctors charged
were found guilty, severn
were executed.

Nuremberg Trial Pictrue f

SUPPRESSION OF CIVIL RIGHTS IN

AUSTRALIA – REGARDING FLUORIDATION

   VICTORIA

In November 1994 the Victorian Parliament passed an amendment to the Fluoridation Act by changing the Constitution to stop the Supreme Court from hearing cases agains Fluoridation. If you are poisoned by fluoride in Victoria tough luck, there is no protection under law. -

   TASMANIA

The Tasmanian Government in 1995 passed a Bill through the Lower House to prohibit the holding of meetings on the subject of Flouridation anywhere at all in Tasmania. Called the Consequential Amendments Bill it was later withdrawn but is being re-worded. Outside of Tasmania, no outcry, no boycotts, why?

   NEW SOUTH WALES

A draconian law was enacted in NSW in 1989. Because of this law, a Council cannot cease Fluoridation of its own water supply, after requests by public demand, unless it gets permission from the Health Department. And there is little chance of that.

Australia is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966). This U.N. law states that ‘no one shall be subjected without his consent to medical or scientific experimentation.’ The Health Dept. cannot produce one double blind scientific study which proves absolutely the safety and efficacy of fluoridation. It seems we are all experimental subjects.

If fluoridation is so safe and effective, why this repressive legislation ?

BLUE-RED-BLUE strip

FLUORIDE THE NEXT ASBESTOS ?

BLUE-RED-BLUE strip

AFFIDAVIT OF GERARD F. JUDD, Ph.D.

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

State of Arizona, County of Maricopa

STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT FOND

DU LAC COUNTY
SAFE WATER ASSOCIATION,

INC., Plaintiff,
 vs. 
CITY OF FOND DU LAC, Defendant. Case No. 92 CV 579

Full Original Text → HERE

Gerard F. Judd, Ph.D., being first duly sworn on oath and with personal knowledge of the information contained herein, respectfully states to the Court as follows:

BACKGROUND

1.) I have been a professor of Chemistry at Phoenix College, Phoenix Arizona, since 1965.

2.) I received my B.A. in chemistry from the University of Utah in 1943.

I received my M.S. from the University of Portland in 1948. I received my Ph.D. in physical and organic chemistry from Purdue University in 1953. I did Postdoctoral research at Purdue University, on fluorinated organometallic reactions in 1954.

3.) A few of my more recent research, academic and service honors include:

a. Elected to Emeritus Member of American Chemical Society, 11/92.

b. “20 Year Outstanding Teaching Award and Pin” from Maricopa County Community College District, Dr. Paul A. Elsner, Chancellor, 2/92.

c. Reviewed two fundamental chemistry textbooks for publishers, 5/91.

d. Received “Speaker’s Gold Plated Champion’s Award for Research, Communication and Education,” regarding better teeth, health and government. Arizona Breakfast Club, Harry E. Everingham, President, 11/24/90.

e. “Faculty Appreciation Gift for Outstanding Contributions to Teaching,” Maricopa County Community College District, Phoenix, Arizona, Dr. Paul A. Elsner, Chancellor, 3/4/85.

4.) I have devoted thousands of hours during my career to studying the chemistry of fluoride. In addition, in preparing this affidavit, I have specifically researched and summarized the following professional and technical literature on the epidemiological effects of fluoride:

a.  Journal of Fluoride, August 1992 – January 1983.

b.  Chemical Abstracts, August 1992 – January 1989.

c.  Index Medicus, May, June and July 1992.

d.  Fluoridation The Great Dilemma, a 421-page book by George L. Waldbott, M.D. in collaboration with Albert W. Burgstahler, Ph.D. and H. Lewis McKinney, Ph.D.

e.  A Struggle With Titans, Forces Behind Fluoridation, a 383-page book by George L. Waldbott, M.D. (a scientist’s look at fluoridation).

f.  Fluoridation, the Aging Factor, a 203-page book by John Yiamouyannis, Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and world-leading authority on the biological effects of fluoride.

g.  Fluoride, The Freedom Fight, a 207-page book by Dr. Hans Moolenburgh, M.D. (The Netherlands).

h.  Fluoridation, a 264-page book by Isabel Jansen, R.N.

i.  The Fluoride Question, Panacea or Poison?, a 176-page book by Anne-Lise Gotzsche, medical journalist (England).

J.  Hello, Test Animals… Chinchillas or You and Your Grandchildren, a 180-page book by W. R. Cox, chinchilla breeder and researcher.

k.  The Grim Truth About Fluoridation, a 128-page book by Robert M. Buck, journalist.

l.  Fluoridation, Poison on Tap, a 460-page book by Glen S. R. Walker, consultant in strategic metals, munitions, and chemical industry, registered by the National Association of Testing Authorities in Australia.

m.  Fluoride in Australia, a Case to Answer, a 159-page book by Wendy Varney, journalist.

5.) During the past two years I have personally discussed the effects of artificial fluoridation of drinking water with many individuals possessing outstanding background on the subject of fluoridation, including the following:

a.  Dr. Albert Burgstahler, Ph.D., University of Kansas;

b.  Dr. Mel Ruber, Ph.D., Columbia, Maryland;

c.  Dr. Robert Carton, Ph.D., former head of EPA Employees Union, Environmental Protection Agency,   Washington, D.C.;

d.  Dr. William Marcus, Ph.D., epidemiologist, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.;

e.  Dr. William Foulkes, M.D., Vancouver, Washington, former head of Ministry of Health in British Columbia;

f.  Dr. John Colquhoun, Ph.D., Titi Rangi, New Zealand;

g.  Dr. Albert Schatz, Ph.D., chemistry researcher, retired, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;

h. Dr. Cornelius Steelink, Ph.D., Chemistry Professor, University of Arizona;

i.  Dr. John Yiamouyiannis, Ph.D., Delaware, Ohio;

j.  Dr. John R. Lee, M.D., Sebastopol, California. EVIDENCE AGAINST THE SAFETY OF FLUORIDATION

6.) My research, communication and discovery concerning the epidemiological effects of fluoridation has provided me with solid scientific evidence on which to base the following conclusions.

7.) Fluoride has never been established as, and is not, essential in nutrition for soft tissues, bones or teeth.

8.) There are no experiments or data which establish that fluoride in any form or in any concentration is harmless when put into drinking water for human consumption or usage.

9.) Fluoride at low levels has been shown to unsnap hydrogen bonds in the enzyme cytochrome oxidase, and thus ruin its ability to handle oxygen in humans, animals or plants. (Exhibit).

10.) It is well-established in academic and industrial chemical industry that the hydrogen-fluoride hydrogen bond is stronger than the hydrogen-nitrogen or hydrogen-oxygen hydrogen bonds characteristic of human enzymes. Therefore, human enzyme systems (thousands of enzymes) are subject to destruction when water containing fluoride is consumed. After a few weeks for some, and a lifetime for others, a large enough reservoir of fluoride is built up to cause serious ailments.

11.) At least 63 human, animal and plant enzymes are for the most part destroyed or modified by fluoride.

12.) A summary of important epidemiological effects of fluoride from Chemical Abstracts, 1992-1989 (53 pages); Journal of Fluoride, August 1992-January 1993 (42 pages); and Index Medicus, May, June and July 1992 (3 pages) failed to produce even one article proving fluoride to be harmless.

13.) Contrariwise, hundreds of experiments on test animals, humans, plants, and their cells, have invariably demonstrated harmful effects.

14.) A large number of epidemiological effects in the way of ailments and allergies caused by fluoride have been clinically established by competent authorities, including those below.

15.) Forty-nine or more serious allergenic conditions were established by George Waldbott, M.D. These were proven by removing patients from drinking water with fluoride in it, in which case they were cured. This was followed up with single- or double-blind tests with fluoride tablets.

16.) Eight of Dr. Waldbott’s side effects were confirmed through double-blind tests organized by Dr. H. Moolenburgh, with 12 other physicians, one pharmacist, and one attorney. (Exhibit). Only one of these side effects presented in court was sufficient to cause the Holland Ministry of Health to discontinue fluoridation of water in that country. These side effects are listed in Waldbott’s book, pp. 123-125.

17.) Genetic changes in bone cells and sperm cells of mice were thoroughly studied, re-studied and established by Dr. Albert Taylor.

This work has been confirmed by numerous other researchers.

18.) Fluoride as a factor in cataracts has been established by statistical studies of Dr. Ionel F. Rapaport and confirmed by the research of Dr. Burgstahler. This has also been confirmed by analysis of cataracted and un-cataracted eye lenses. The older the person, the more the fluoride in the lens. (Exhibit).

19.) SIDS (crib or cot death) has been related to fluoride poisoning by Dr. J. Colquhoun (exhibit), Dr. Bruce Spittle, and others.

20.) Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), and chronic fluoride toxicity (CFT) have been found to be very closely related in their symptoms (Exhibit).

21.) RSI (repetitive stress injury, or carpal tunnel syndrome) has been linked to the accumulation of fluoride in the bone by Dr. Geoffrey E. Smith. Additional work supporting this link was found by Dr. Sutton. (Exhibit).

22.) Dental fluorosis has been shown recently to occur at fluoride levels as low as .3 ppm, as opposed to earlier studies of Dr. H. Trendly Dean, who set 1.0 as a tolerable limit, allowing 24 percent fluorosis. The degree of fluorosis depends on the nutritional status of the person.

23.) Dr. Waldbott had over 400 cases of pre-skeletal bone fluorosis in patients, which he established was caused by their drinking fluoridated water. (Exhibit) This has been further confirmed by many other studies. The degree of bone fluorosis is strictly related to bone fluoride content.

24.) Embrittled bones are caused by drinking fluoridated water, as well as by administration of tablets to “harden bones.” (Riggs study, Exhibit; Utah study, Exhibit; Jacobson’s study, Exhibit; Cooper’s study, Exhibit; and Sower’s study, Exhibit.

25.) Increased infant mortality and birth defects (two to three times increase) was established by Dr. Albert Schatz to be present in Chilean children administered fluoridated water in an experimental study in Curico, Chili, with San Fernando and La Serena as a control towns. (Exhibit). Dr. Schatz found fluoridation did no good for teeth, and caused enormous increase in miscarriages. The malformations and infant mortality dropped dramatically upon cessation of the fluoridation. Similar malformations and infant mortalities are now occurring in U.S.

26.) C. R. Cox, working with the University of Oregon, found that 17 ppm fluoride in feed caused constipation, great mature and baby chinchilla death, small litters and over four generations a smaller, inferior rabbit.

27.) Down’s Syndrome was established to be linked to consumption of fluoride through statistical studies and re-studies by Dr. Ionel F. Rapaport, M.D. and Waldbott, Fluoridation the Great Dilemma, pp. 212-219. Dr. Rapaport also found that 70% of Down’s Syndrome babies were born with cataracted eyes.

28.) Genu valgum (knock knees) has been reported as having been caused by fluoride in drinking water..

29.) Gilbert’s Disease (hemorrhagic yellow jaundice) has been cured by taking the patient off fluoridated drinking water. (Exhibit).

30.) Collagen synthesis has been shown to be impeded by fluoride by the work of B. Uslu, Andola School of Medicine, Eskisehir, Turkey.

31.) Immunosuppression, according to Sutton and Gibson, may be caused by consumption of fluoride. (See Exhibits).

32.) Decreased immunodiffusion has been established as due to fluoride ion, making it a negative chemitaxic agent (this means it impedes the “taxiing” or motion effect). (Exhibit).

33.) Between 1953 and 1968, there were approximately 572,810 (44,062 per year average) more deaths due to all types of cancer in 10 major fluoridated cities compared to non-fluoridated cities. Sex, race and age changes in these populations were insignificant during this period, so that nothing else could be established as causal. (Exhibit).

34.) In Antigo, Wisconsin, heart attacks were shown to dramatically increase both in the general population and the people under 65 and over 65 when fluoridation was instituted and continued over 35 years.

35.) A tremendous increase in caiman (alligator) deaths was experienced once Kansas City, Kansas water was fluoridated at the Parrot Hill farms under the care of Patricia Jacobs, naturalist. EVIDENCE AGAINST THE EFFECTIVENESS OF FLUORIDATION

36.) In contrast to the claims of the Human Health Services and the American Dental Association that fluoride reduces DMF (decayed, missing, filled teeth) 65 percent, it has now been established through a very large number of reliable studies that fluoride may actually cause a slight amount of DMF. (A large amount of DMF is actually related to nutrition.)

37.) Dr. Yiamouyiannis found that of 39,200 students, ages 5-19, from 89 fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas, the teeth of those living in non-fluoridated areas had slightly less DMF. (Exhibit).

38.) A survey of 1,500 fifth grade students in Missouri gave slightly lower DMF for those who lived in a non-fluoridated area. This was also true in a survey of 1500 6th graders.(Exhibit).

39.) A study of school children in Tucson, Arizona by Dr. Cornelius Steelink (Chemistry Department, University of Arizona), established that there was an increase in DMF with an increase in fluoride in the water. (Exhibit).

40.) A thorough study of the entire population of Japan (included 20,000 school children, 1972) established that when the fluoride in the drinking water was above .4 ppm there was more decay. (Exhibit).

41.) A study of Auckland, New Zealand, found that DMF decreases depended heavily on dental education in the schools and the salary of people from various areas, and insignificantly on the amount of fluoride in the water. (Exhibit).

42.) In Garis, Africa a high proportion of 14 to 15-year-olds had first permanent molars which were extensively carious or missing despite 1.06 ppm fluoride in drinking water. High sugar intake was a possible factor.

43.) Earlier “studies” justifying fluoridation of drinking water have been unmasked and debunked by competent authorities (Dr. Waldbott, Dr. Colquhoun, Dr. Foulkes, Dr. Mark Diesendorf, Dr. Sutton, Dr. Exner and Dr. Rudolf Ziegelbecker) on the basis of neglecting variables, cheating and group selection, not completing the studies, etc. (Exhibits).

44.) As one example, phosphate, calcium and strontium were not accounted for in the Newburgh-Kingston study, or any other study, to the best of my knowledge. Dr. Waldbott established that the Kingston water had deficiencies of these elements.

CONCLUSION

 My research has made it clear that the American Dental Association and U. S. Human Health Services have made a wrong turn in their attempt to improve the teeth of the American public.

 Fluoride in drinking water should be limited to .1 ppm where possible, since reverse osmosis can easily reduce fluoride below this value.

 It is my best judgment, reached with a high degree of scientific certainty, that fluoridation is invalid in theory and ineffective in practice as a preventive of dental caries. It is also dangerous to the health of consumers.

 I make this Affidavit in support of the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

Dated this _____ day of ________, 1993. ____________________

BLUE-RED-BLUE strip

Brian Martin

SCIENCE POLICY: DISSENT AND ITS DIFFICULTIES
Published in Philosophy and Social Action,
Vol. 12, No. 1, January-March 1986, pp. 5-23
pdf of published article
 by Brian Martin

http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/86psa.html

See also → HERE

BLUE-RED-BLUE strip

See Our Letters to Anna Bligh → HERE

Bligh-legacy-image-copy

Green strip qld-consolidated-acts-logo

Queensland Criminal Code – 1899 – SECT 87 

A.BLIGH-promise

we-are-all-waiting-for-clean-water

 Israel bans fluoride — is it our turn yet?


logo-aust-f-skeptics

New-Splash

FLUORIDE THE NEXT ASBESTOS ?

Image-of-Qld

 From: Doug Cross                    
 www.ukcaf.org
 Date: 19 May 2013

'In case you missed it'

    Dear All,

Good to see that somebody appears to take notice of what I write! MP Jason Woodforth’s [Qld State Gov.] warning that “Fluoride is the next asbestos!” is a direct quote from an article that I published on our web site on 22nd June 2011 (see final paragraph of ‘A disreputable trade-off: SCHER ignores the humanitarian impacts of water fluoridation.’, at  http://www.ukcaf.org/_schers_final_report.html )

Since this is such an important claim, it’s worth recording precisely where that statement came from, so that anyone wishing to repeat it can substantiate its provenance.

In the summer of 2004 I had a meeting in London with Marie-Louise Rossi. She was the Chief Executive of the International Underwriting Association, and had a formal conference with her and some of her Associates at the IUA’s London Headquarters. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the insurance implications of the provable harm caused to children by water fluoridation. We did not discuss any of the more controversial health concerns of the practice, confining the discussion almost exclusively to the implications of the very large proportion of children known to develop this disfiguring condition.

I explained to the meeting the legal problems that are involved with this form of compulsory medication, and the issues of liability that inevitably emerge, especially for any Council, Health Authority or any other public servant that becomes involved in the imposition of this damaging, unethical and illegal form of medical assault.

And as I went through the information that I had prepared for the IUA, Ms. Rossi became more and more concerned. Eventually she blurted out, “My God! This is the next asbestos!” That’s where Mr Woodforth’s statement originated, from the very top of the Underwriting sector, and specifically in relation to water fluoridation. So now you know – and if anyone challenges that comment, I can verify to you now that this is indeed the original source.

So what does this mean for you in Australia now, and indeed, pretty well everywhere else in the world where this form of uninsurable activity is carried out? Well, here’s how it works.

When a member of the public makes any claim against an insured person or corporation, and an award is either agreed or awarded by a Court against the respondent, it is generally their insurers who will have to foot the bill – always assuming that they actually have insurance cover. So ultimately, whilst the insurers write the policies, the risk is usually reinsured through guarantees provided by professional underwriters, acting in the interests of their investors. There’s a hierarchy of people who agree to provide finance that is used to insure against claims. These investors hope that, provided the insurers do their sums right then they, the investors, will eventually make a profit.

But suppose that an insurer fails to understand the risk of an activity in which one of its clients is engaged, and the insured does not disclose – or even recognise – that what they are doing may eventually result in a claim at some later date? Then the investors have a big problem – if the insurer gets it wrong, then ultimately they have to fork out the cash.

That’s precisely what happened to the ‘Names’ (the investors) of Lloyds of London in the 1990s, over the asbestosis/mesothelioma claims, which were bought many years after exposure under employers’ liability or workers’ compensation insurances. As Wikipedia explains:

…the insurer did not understand the full nature of the future risk back in the 1960s, it and its reinsurers would not have properly reserved for it. In the case of Lloyd’s this resulted in the bankruptcy of thousands of individual investors who indemnified [under 'reinsurance-to-close'] general liability insurance written from the 1940s to the mid-1970s for companies with exposure to asbestosis claims.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lloyd%27s_of_London)

And this is why Ms Rossi and the International Underwriting Association were so concerned at hearing what I had to tell them about the public risks of damage from water fluoridation. Within the Health Sector, most health professionals and authorities are required to carry Professional Indemnity Insurance against claims brought against them by patients and others. Insurers will not cover ‘foreseeable risks’ – that is, any activity that, if engaged in by a Client, has a very high probability of resulting in claims against the insurer. (In the UK the government insures itself for claims against to National Health Service, but hey! it’s not their money anyway!) But individual health professionals can still get hit for private actions – remember that if you are a Dental Officer pushing fluoride outside office hours!

And as we are all well aware, dental fluorosis of at least some detectable level affects around half of all children exposed to fluoridated water during their early childhood (York Review of Water Fluoridation, 2000). Around one in eight kids will get it so badly that they need cosmetic dental treatment for the rest of their lives. In the UK the lifetime costs are an average of around £30,000 – about the same as the cost of getting a university education.

So, as a foreseeable risk, anyone engaged in any professional or business capacity whatever in the promotion of implementation of fluoridation may be personally liable for the costs. Insurers will start to recognise it as a foreseeable risk and refuse to cover it under professional indemnity or public liability insurance.

And yes, we do have proof of this:

In a recent letter from Zurich Insurance, one of the principle insurers of Local Authorities in the UK, the company confirms that it will not indemnify Councils for any claims against them for damage caused to members of the public arising from water fluoridation.

Is this a significant problem for Health Professionals and Councils advocating fluoridation, or even forcing fluoridation on unwilling communities?

Absolutely! Here’s what happened to Lloyds of London ‘Names’ over the asbestos scandal:

Lloyd’s set up a separate vehicle known as Equitas in 1996 to handle asbestos-related claims. This was effectively acquired by Berkshire Hathaway a decade later amid fears it was running out of funds. Warren Buffett’s investment vehicle agreed to take on Equitas’ staff, operations, liabilities and most of its assets. It also agreed to provide up to £3.7bn in reinsurance cover, therefore protecting Equitas against the risk of larger-than-expected claims. Lloyd’s provided £90m as part of the deal. Although most of the Names paid up and agreed to this scheme to reinsure their debt, 1,200 refused. About 200 of this second group responded by launching a counter-suit for compensation, which claimed that Lloyd’s brochures had led them to believe that the cover, called Reinsurance To Close (RITC), completely ended their liabilities at the end of each underwriting year. The names spent years battling against Lloyd’s in the courts, claiming they had been misled over insurance deals they bought into prior to the market’s near collapse. The High Court eventually ruled against them in July 2008, a decision which was upheld by the Court of Appeal. In June 2009, a final group of 35 individuals were declared bankrupt in the High Court.

(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/insurance/8463871/How-asbestos-brought-Lloyds-of-London-to-its-knees-in-the-90s.html)

If you think about that in relation to fluoridation, you’ll realise just why Ms Rossi and the IUA were so alarmed at what I told them. The numbers of people affected by asbestos run into hundreds of thousands; ‘dental fluorosis of  aesthetic concern’ (mild and worse) affects at least 10,000 children every year in the UK alone, and far more elsewhere. Regarding the risks from exposure to asbestos, the UK’s Health and Safety Executive considers that there is no minimum threshold that exists for exposure to asbestos below which a person is at zero risk of developing mesothelioma. Remarkably, the EU’s SCHER came to precisely that same view regarding the risks of damage to human teeth and bones caused by fluoridation only a couple of years ago!

We are talking about big money here – in the UK alone, if all kids needing cosmetic dental treatment actually found the money to pay for it, then the dental profession would rake in around an additional £300 million in new income every year for as long as fluoridation continues. And our intellectually compromised British government actually aims to quadruple the extent of water fluoridation as soon as it can get past the obstacles of inconveniently unconvinced members of the public (us ‘Activists’, as Queensland Health likes to label folk like me! Bur hey! – who wants to be a ‘pacifist’ anyway?), and the curiously slippery water companies, who just can’t seem to get their plans to the point at which they can actually start new schemes.

Make no mistake about this – if the insurance sector is getting cold feet about covering those who aspire to poison our kids, and cause them grief – especially financial grief – that will result in claims for compensation, then they are not going to carry the can for this one. The fluoride advocates will find themselves in the same boat as those unfortunate ‘Names’ at Lloyds of London who were unwittingly caught out by the asbestos disaster.

When the next asbestos hits, this time from the very water that pours from the faucets in your own homes, both you and the Health Authorities and Councils will be on your own. So heed Mr. Woodforth’s warning and make sure that those pushing fluoride at you are aware that everything that they own could soon be at risk. The insurers will be out through the door like rats up a drainpipe, leaving you to hold the baby.

In case you think that you can ignore Ms. Rossi’s concern, here’s what her CV says about her:

Marie-Louise-Rossi

The late Marie-Louise Rossi

Over three decades in the City of London, Marie-Louise has developed an expertise in many areas including insurance. For over eleven years she worked as Chief Executive of the International Underwriting Association (and its predecessor) representing over £11bn pa of international insurance and reinsurance markets to governments and international institutions worldwide. Marie-Louise has worked closely with the EU Commission  and the European Parliament, as well as with the then DTI and the CBI. She was Head of Insurance and Risk Management for the New Security Foundation (formerly NATO forum for Business and Security) and was the author of The Single Market in Insurance (1992).

(http://www.grahambishop.com/StaticPage.aspx?ID=59&Parent_ID=56&SAID=88)

Doug Cross

Director, UK Councils Against Fluoridation   www.ukcaf.org

18th May 2013

Vit.c strip

LEGAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST FLUORIDATION

Vit.c strip

notice of complaint F.

Vit.c strip

There are a  few names in our ‘ROGUES GALLERY  that might
consider taking a low profile after reading the above. 

Anna Bligh's Legacy  F.

Anna B's Guarantee copy

Vit.c strip

logo-aust-f-skeptics

new splash

“CANCER INCREASED IN FLUORIDATED CITIES” – Supreme Court Judge

The most powerful court in America is not
the United States Supreme Court but,
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

seal-of-Pennsylvania-Court

—  CITY SUED OVER FLUORIDATION —

CITY-SUED-F

Vit.c strip

Judge-F.

Judge John P. Flaherty, [ on right ]

Now a Supreme Court Judge presided over the trial in the case of

Paul Aitkenhead v. Borough of West View, No. GD-4585-78.

The city was sued over fluoridation. On 16 November 1978,

Judge Flaherty handed down his decree. The critical

parts of his opinion read as follows:

❝ Over the course of five months, the court held periodic hearings, which consisted of extensive expert testimony from as far away as England. At issue was the most recent time-trend study of Dr. Burk and Dr. Yiamouyiannis, which compared cancer mortality in ten cities which fluoridated their water systems with ten cities which did not fluoridate over a period of twenty-eight years from 1940 to 1968.

The study concluded that there was a significant increase
in cancer mortality 
in the fluoridated cities.❞

Contrary to what has been said by promoters of artificial fluoridation of public water supplies, Judge Flaherty’s jurisdiction to make and enter his findings on November 16, 1978 was expressly sustained and upheld as appears in Aitkenhead v. West View, 397 Atl. 2d 878 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1979). Nor were his findings ever disturbed on appeal.

In 1988, Justice Flaherty re-affirmed his convictions

that fluoridation is a very dangerous practice.

In a letter dated January 26, 1988 to Ms. Evelyn Hannan, he stated,

❝  It has been years now since the case involving fluoridation was before me as a trial judge, but since that time nothing I have seen changes my view of the serious hazards occasioned by public fluoridation. To the contrary, what I have read convinces me all the more that in-depth, serious, scientific effort should be undertaken before further expanding a questionable practice. Those who belittle critics of fluoridation do the public a mis-service, yet it seems in the face of strong, uncontradicted prima facie evidence, that is the tactic most often employed.

Whether government has the right to force what it perceives as a benefit to the public was not directly before me in the case, but that also is to be pondered.

My hope is that groups such as yours will spur the scientific community into an objective posture on this issue.

I enclose an essay which was sent to me a few years ago focusing on the issue presented by analyzing epidemiological law data. Perhaps resolution of this narrow question will provide the answer. ❞

More recently, some people have pointed out that Judge Flaherty’s decision was overturned on appeal and they assumed that therefore fluoridation wasn’t really proved to be harmful. Now a member of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Justice Flaherty clarified that his decision to end fluoridation was overturned only on the grounds that his court did not have jurisdiction to decide the issue.

         ♦

John P. Flaherty, Jr. (Born 19 November 1931)

was a Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
from 1978 to 2001 and Chief Justice of the Court from 1996 to 2001.
He retired at the end of 2001.

Vit.c strip

SUPPRESSION OF CIVIL RIGHTS IN

AUSTRALIA REGARDING FLUORIDATION:

VICTORIA

In November 1994 the Victorian Parliament passed an amendment to the Fluoridation Act by changing the Constitution to stop the Supreme Court from hearing cases against Artificial Fluoridation. If you are poisoned by fluoride in Victoria tough luck, there is no protection under law.

TASMANIA

The Tasmanian Government in 1995 passed a Bill through the Lower House to prohibit the holding of meetings on the subject of Flouridation anywhere at all in Tasmania. Called the Consequential Amendments Bill it was later withdrawn but is being re-worded. Outside of Tasmania, no outcry, no boycotts, why?

NEW SOUTH WALES

A draconian law was enacted in NSW in 1989. Because of this law, a Council cannot cease Fluoridation of its own water supply, after requests by public demand, unless it gets permission from the Health Department. And there is little chance of that.

Australia is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966). This U.N. law states that ‘no one shall be subjected without his consent to medical or scientific experimentation.’ The Health Dept. cannot produce one double blind scientific study which proves absolutely the safety and efficacy of fluoridation. It seems we are all experimental subjects.

If fluoridation is so safe or effective, why this repressive legislation ?

Why don’t we hear about it in the media?

Vit.c strip

 ” FLUORIDE THE NEXT ASBESTOS “

logo-aust-f-skeptics

New-Splash

Queensland Fluoridation – Behind the Scenes – FOI

It is disappointing that Dr. Hodge has not
kept up with the science of fluoridation.

Fluori-leaks-sZelle-Hodge-ff

ADA / Qld. Labour Party Collusion      

‘” (The Queensland Health Department, funded

The Australian Dental Association

Queensland Branch, $220,000 as a CONtribution

to its pro-fluoridation campaign. 

The request for this funding was directed to

the Hon. Stephen Robertson MP.

The Minister for Health at the time [Feb. 2006] )

Hodge-letter-til-f

 

Off-line-Copes...

CRIMINAL CODE 1899 – SECT 87 (Queensland)

$cience According To

The AMA ↓

myths-fallacies-ama

More →  HERE

radial-line-red-down-copy

gov-today-commerce-f

radial-line-red-p-copy


new-skeptics-logo

new splash