Toronto Danforth EDA, Davenport EDA, Vaughan EDA, York University Greens, Frank De Jong, Tom Eric, Halvorsen Jobi, Mike Kenny, Claudia Rodriguez-Larrain, Ingrid Sheriff, Constantine Kritsonis, Mike Dewar, Marie La Plume, Fay Neuber, Stefan Premdas, Bruce Hearns, Matt Turner
BE IT RESOLVED that the Green Party seeks to introduce and support legislation that will ban artificial fluoridation products in public drinking water.
Motion Operative:
WHEREAS the Green Party affirms that the precautionary principle should be used where there is evidence of potential harm in the absence of complete scientific consensus.
WHEREAS no statistical difference exists in rates of dental caries between areas that use artificial water fluoridation chemicals and those that do not (Statistics Canada);
WHEREAS fluoride is not removed in sewage treatment and remains a toxic constituent of the effluent discharged by treatment plants to rivers and lakes, and background levels of fluoride in the Great Lakes exceed the Canadian Water Quality Guideline (CWQG) for aquatic species, and fluoride concentrations in sewage effluent are 5-10 times in excess of the CWQG. At these concentrations fluoride is known to be toxic to a variety of water species such as salmon, caddisfly, daphnia & others;
WHEREAS the use of drinking water to deliver medications is not medically or environmentally sustainable, and the use of unregulated, unapproved medications in drinking water, without a prescription or informed consent is medically and environmentally not sustainable, and the daily dose of fluoride cannot be controlled and health effects from fluoride are not monitored;
Green Party of Canada website 22 August 2010 an area that has traditionally been within the jurisdiction of the provinces.
WHEREAS 97 percent of Europe does not use artificial water fluoridation products in their public drinking water supply, and 94 percent of the world’s population does not use artificial water fluoridation products in their public water supply;
Motion Preamble:
WHEREAS fluoridation products such as hexafluorosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride are toxic by-products scrubbed from the smokestacks of the phosphate mining industry, and less than one percent of treated water is actually ingested by people and the remaining 99 percent is discharged into the environment…
~ THE AUSTRALIAN GREENS ~
The Queensland Greens:
Extract from their policy document ↓
36. Ensure fluoridation of potable water, to be funded by the state government.
The Australian Greens are divided about science and when it comes to fluoridation, or, far worse, vaccination; and a large majority are firmly against all forms of Genetic Engineering, which is a big problem forThe Greens Party of Australia.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
It is a conflict of policy to be pro-fluoridationandanti-nuclear! – We at ‘Fluoridation Queensland’ are
anti-fluoridation & anti-nuclear.-
This split could be the end of Australian Greens!
Some one needs to explain to me why wanting clean drinking water makes you an activist, and why proposing to destroy water with chemical warfare doesn’t make a corporation a terrorist.” Winona LaDuke [She ran for vice president as the nominee of the Green Party of the United States,on a ticket headed byRalph Nader.]
The laws of nature cannot be reversed to suit pleasure,
profit or politics. It matters little how many millions
of dollars are spent promoting this absurdity,
it will not change the facts. – One part per
million, is a medical dose; and it is a guide to industrial polluters.
Our Letter #1 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh Copies sent to her electoral office and home address.
14/12/2007
Dear Ms. Bligh,
Re your proposal to fluoridate Queensland’s Water Supply:
We are ‘The Smart State’ for not having artificially fluoridated water.
Queensland is at the moment in step with most of the world. See attachment ‘A’ ‘State of the Nations’ + ‘Tooth Decay Trends’
The majority of countries, either, avoided it, have banned it, or have ceased to fluoridate. In parts of India and China where it occurs naturally, it is removed from the water used for drinking.
Are you aware of the political history of fluoridation in our state?
The Gold Coast City Council stopped fluoridating its water supply in 1979 due to public pressure. See attachment ‘B’
Lord Mayor Atkinson reversed her original decision to fluoridate Brisbane. See attachment ‘C’
Dr. Lew Edwards lost his safe seat due to public pressure because of his commitment to fluoridate the State of Queensland.
In 1952 The Queensland Government funded research into the health of Qld. sheep drinking naturally fluoridated bore water. See attachment ‘D’ ‘Chronic Endemic Fluorosis of Merino Sheep in Queensland by J.M. Harvey’
Does your government know what the levels of hydrogen fluoride from pollution are in the air we breathe?
Page 2 of 2
Does the Queensland Government monitor fluoride air pollution?
Do you know which industries pollute with fluoride?
Do you know how much natural fluoride is in our drinking water at the moment?
Are you aware that natural fluoride CaF2 is different from the chemicals used to artificially fluoridate water? See attachments ‘E’ and ‘F’
What are your proposals for recycled water? Are you going to
re-fluoridate it?
If you put recycled water through Reverse Osmosis equipment, which removes fluoride, what are you going to do with the redeemed toxic fluoride sludge?
If you store fluoridated water in the dams you risk fish kills. Fresh water fish, bees, turkeys, some plants and animals are very sensitive to fluoride pollution.
One part per million, is not a medical dose; it is a guide to industrial polluters.
Dentists have been lobbied with endorsements, not scientific research. Long-term health problems have been ignored.
See attachments ‘G, H, I,’ and ‘J’.
Fluoridation is deliberate pollution. See attachment ‘K’
What safe guards are you going to put into place to protect people who are super sensitive to fluorides?
See attachment ‘L’ Death Certificate Brisbane Mater Hospital for Jason Burton – death by Fluoride poisoning + statement by mother and newspaper cutting.
You have a duty of care, a responsibility to every person in the state.
See attachment ‘M’ Informed Consent – Nuremberg Code
On the matter of water fluoridation we are directing you to do nothing. The people of Queensland want clean water not contaminated water.
Keep Queensland ‘The Smart State’ by not having artificially fluoridated water.
We look forward to hearing from you very soon.
Yours truly,
Chairman Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association
[Gold Coast Commenced Fluoridation 5 Nov. 1968]
Our Letter #2 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh.
Copies sent to her electoral office and home address.
cc- our web, opposition, minister for health
04/07/2008
Dear Ms. Bligh,
While you were in China and India recently, did you enquire as to the state of the natural contamination of Fluoride (CaF2) in the water in those two countries? See our previous state of the nations report.
Ottawa, Canada removed Fluoride from its water last month.
Previous communications from your Department of Health have not addresses our questions. By not answering them are they deceiving us?
Promotion by endorsement is not science and this is all we have received. History has shown this; doctors used to promote cigarettes! The FDA has just withdrawn its support for mercury in dental fillings. See below.
The law you have passed on fluoridation does not permit you to add the heavy metals that are also in this industrial waste Hydrofluorosilicic acid, which contains up to 30 components including heavy metals. (See analysis below). It is the acid spray waste from the chimney pollution scrubbers, mainly from the fertiliser industry. Fluoride is usually 20% – 38% of the total compound.
This industrial waste is not safe for human consumption.
TYPICAL ANALYSIS:
Note: acceptable safe levels for many heavy metals is zero
Nickel 1742 ppm
Aluminium 2.1 ppm
Cadmium 4 ppb
Arsenic 4826 ppb
Mercury 5 ppb
Chromium 3763 ppb
Lead 15 ppb
Fluoride is toxic and corrosive. It rates ‘four’ on a one to five scale – more toxic than lead, slightly less toxic than arsenic.
While the uranium and radium in fluorosilicic acid are known carcinogens, two other products of uranium, even more carcinogenic are radon-222 and polonium-210, these are also present.
It is illegal to release fluoride into waterways or the ocean.
It seems to us, that someone needs to do some homework.
You have been ill advised on this mater, your advisors seem to know very little about poisons, human health, and eco-systems.
The laws of nature cannot be reversed to suit pleasure, profit or politics.
It matters little how many millions of dollars are spent promoting this absurdity, it will not change the facts.
Citizens have an expectation that their government will supply them with clean drinking water. We certainly do not expect it to be deliberately contaminated or medicated.
People living in units cannot install tanks. Reverses osmosis filters are expensive, and waste a lot of water. The city water supply system must not be used as a medicine bottle and certainly not used for pollution dispersal.
If you and your family drink fluoridated water, given the information we have provided to you, then you will be unwise. However, if you do not drink the fluoridated city water then you will be guilty of double-standards.
No one goes through life without making mistakes, and often the mistake cannot be remedied. Fluoridation is a mistake and you can correct it.
The American Kidney Foundation has recently withdrawn its support from sodium fluoride in the water and is urging other medical bodies to do likewise. The health of 4,000,000 Queenslanders is at stake. This was bad science and a bad policy from the beginning, we urge you change positions, and act quickly to stop fluoridation.
We look forward to hearing from you very soon.
Yours truly,
Chairperson – Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association
Our Letter #3 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh
Copies sent to her electoral office and home address.
14/09/2008
Dear Ms. Bligh,
Many of your electors will forgive you and “your”
government for problems you have inherited from
previous governments. But as you are solely
responsible for the project for state-wide water
fluoridation, on this matter it will not be so.
We have attempted in the past to alert you to
this error, which you seem to so far have chosen to ignore.
A little sole searching and goggling should have rung alarm bells for you. Fluoridation is at
best, a nineteenth century dream, at worse, an oppressive dangerous hoax. Considering
your University background we are surprised that you would condone such injustice –
As we stated previously, ‘Citizens have an expectation that their government will supply
them with clean drinking water. We certainly do not expect it to be deliberately
contaminated or medicated.’
It now seems that we will not have a “Smart State” or a “Fair State”
or one lead by an elected female premier.
Our organization will now actively work against your political future as we did for
Dr. Lew Edwards who attempted to fluoridate the State of Queensland (1975), and several
other politicians who originally put fluoride into the Gold Coast water supply many years
ago (ceased July 1979).
Even if you do install fluoride plants in various water systems throughout the state, they
will be removed in the future.
Yours truly,
Chairperson
Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association
Our Letter #4 of 4 sent to Anna Bligh.
Copies sent to her electoral office and home address.
01/06/2009
We,
The Brisbane Anti-fluoridation Association
wish to draw your attention to two urgent problems:
1.
We are concerned that you may not have tested the eighteen bores used to augment Toowoomba’s water supply for calcium fluoride – CaF2.F. levels.
We are asking for the F. levels from each of these bores please.
The attached maps, charts and photos (9 Pages total), from research carried out by the Queensland Government: (J.M. Harvey Chronic Endemic Fluorosis of Merino Sheep in Queensland. Q J Ag Sci 1952;9:1-88.) – These charts illustrate, calcium fluoride is present in Queensland’s underground water, and some of the illustrations associated its problems.
2.
Some of Queensland’s aboriginal settlements also use underground water and it needs testing for levels of calcium fluoride before you undertake artificially fluoridation programs of their water supplies.
We request these figures too please.
We wish to further remind you that indigenous people have smaller kidneys – a reduced number of nephrons and decreased renal reserve – (Singh G, White A, Spencer J, Wang Z, Hoy W [1999]).
Kidney health problems are more common for indigenous people than for non-indigenous peopleand they are therefore more at risk from fluorosis and other diseases associated with fluorides.
(The National Kidney Foundation (USA) no longer endorses Water Fluoridation.)
See two enclosures
We look forward to hearing from you within 30 days with proof of your action on these two issues.
Yours truly,
Chairperson
Brisbane Anti-Fluoridation Association
(Several thousand petition signatures were faxed to the premier’s office.) Due to the lack of an honest response from Premier Anna Bligh to our letters 1 – 4 etc., We are left with an unhappy choice between her being dishonest or incompetent, – or both.
Bligh Puts House on The Line for Fluoride
By Andrew Wright 12 February 2009
Anna Bligh has signed a personal guarantee that could cost the Premier her personal assets in a court battle if people become sick from water fluoridation, a Brisbane lawyer said.
This week, Ms Bligh confirmed she had signed a legal document in which she accepts full personal liability for fluoridation and promises to provide financial compensation in the event that it causes adverse health affects.
Fluoride was introduced into the state’s water supply in December. At the time, Health Minister Stephen Robertson was presented with two petitions totaling 6000 signatures against the move, which will see a final fluoride concentration of 0.6 parts per million.
The document, which Ms Bligh signed on October 15 at a community meeting, was first published in the Hinterland Voice independent newspaper.
“The Premier signed the document as a demonstration of her commitment to fluoridation,” the Premier’s spokeswoman said.
But the promise could provide a loophole for anti-fluoridation activists to take legal action over the rollout of fluoride.
Mark O’Connor, a compensation specialist and partner at Brisbane law firm Bennett & Philp, said state laws prevent residents from taking any action against water authorities.
However, he said the Premier’s pledge means she could be liable as a private citizen, although it would be difficult to establish a case against her.
“You’d have to provide medical evidence the condition has been caused by consumption of fluoridated water and not another factor,” Mr. O’Connor explained.
He said anyone bringing a case against Ms Bligh would have to show they had changed their behavior on the basis of the promise.
“It’s an unusual case. I’ve never seen this done before,” he said.
“It would appear she is giving a personal guarantee, rather than a guarantee on behalf of the Government.
“Any claim would therefore be against Ms Bligh’s own assets.
“I doubt she would put her assets at risk, unless she was sure that fluoride wouldn’t cause disease.”
At an anti-fluoridation rally on Tuesday, Queenslanders Against Water Fluoridation spokeswoman Jeanie Ryan said the group was still calling on Ms Bligh to end fluoridation because of its health effects.
An article published in the respected medical journal Lancet said fluoride can cause nurotoxicity in laboratory animals, but hasn’t yet been proven to be toxic to humans.
Studies in rural communities in China have found high fluoride concentrations in well water may cause skeletal abnormalities and affect intelligence.
Australian Dental Association Queensland branch president, Rockhampton ♦ dentist Greg Moore, said there could be a 20-40 per cent reduction in tooth decay as a result of fluoridated water.
QUEENSLAND Premier Anna Bligh’s spectacular back-downs on recycled water and on the controversial Traveston dam project will not save her at the next state election. Not unless she shelves her plan to add fluoride to the drinking water.
Those who think the introduction of fluoride is a minor issue should think again. It was, after all, a highway through koala habitat in southeast Queensland that ended the government of Wayne Goss.
Fluoride will be added to Queensland drinking water just before the new year break. The problem for Bligh is that the citizens who vociferously rally against fluoridated water are part of the same group that was instrumental in denouncing recycled water. It’s issues such as these, where governments run roughshod over the electorate, that really bite.
Bligh claims that most Queenslanders are in favour of fluoridation, but there is widespread scepticism, particularly among farmers, who have known for many years that some bore waters high in natural fluoride have a detrimental effect on the health of livestock.
Chronic fluorine toxicity results from continuous consumption of fluorine while the sheep are young and teeth and bones are growing. The teeth become chalky white, mottled and pitted. The bone of the lower jaw thickens and bony outgrowths may develop.
In some instances this can lead to lameness and fractures.
Selling the message that fluoride is good for human consumption is a hard task in country Queensland, especially as the Department of Primary Industries warns against a consumption of 2mg a litre for sheep. This amount would be drunk by a farmer in a normal day’s work if the drinking water had fluoride levels proposed by the Bligh Government of 0.8 to 0.9 parts per million.
During a visit to Queensland, Andrew Harms, past president of the South Australian branch of the Australian Dental Association, said the addition of fluoride to water in these mining towns would increase the uptake of lead by children and adults who already had gravely high lead levels in their blood samples.
City folk may be a different matter, especially as a substantial number of Queenslanders have migrated from NSW or Victoria. This group is seemingly content with the message that they have better teeth than their next-door neighbours. The problem is that not all Queenslanders agree with the message and that many citizens are against any form of mass medication in the water supply.
The Bligh mantra of “safe and effective” does not convince everyone and there is much evidence that contradicts the government line. In November 2006 the American Dental Association announced that baby formulas made up with fluoridated water should be avoided for infants younger than six months.
The Australian Dental Association and the National Health and Medical Research Council came on line with similar suggestions: babies six months to a year should have only about 600ml of fluoridated water, increasing slightly as the child grows.
Mistrust of government festers within a community that has started looking elsewhere for information. The Lancet medical journal and Scientific American put the cat among the pigeons with negative comments about water fluoridation and its effects on body systems.
Add to that data from the national survey of adult oral health (2004-06), published in 2007, which showed no difference in the dental health of Queenslanders and people in other states.
Some medical professionals have tried to stem the flow of indoctrination but have been ridiculed for their objections. A prime example is the highly respected Brisbane-based general practitioner John Ryan, who has postgraduate qualifications in nutrition and children’s diseases and in environmental medicine.
What irritates him is the failure of the Bligh Government to tell Queenslanders of the NHMCR fluoride warnings to mothers with babies. “Where is the Government’s duty of care?” he asks.
Ryan is angry that the Government would deceive the public about data from a much-publicised Townsville study. Oral health data was collected about children living in Brisbane (non-fluoridated) and Townsville (fluoridated). There was much publicity by the Government indicating a supposedly vast difference between the two cities. In fact, the study showed there was less that half a tooth difference.
This, Ryan says, is an ancient and poor quality study, on which the media indoctrination largely is based. “We were so shocked by five very significant untruths told to the public by the Government,” he says. As a consequence, opponents of introducing fluoride into the water supply took the matter to the Criminal Misconduct Commission. The CMC indicated it was not within its brief and referred the matter back to Queensland Health. Eight months later it has still not responded.
The primary aim of the new Queensland Safe Water Association is to inform metropolitan and country Queenslanders about the negative aspects of recycled and fluoridated water. The message is simple: the state Government is putting public health at risk. Adult Queenslanders do not have the worst teeth in Australia and babies should not be given fluoridated water.
The Bligh Government has estimated that about 30 per cent of the population is not in favour of water fluoridation, so you can bet the number is much higher. In the state election due next year, the Liberal National Party led by the urbane Lawrence Springborg, who is opposed to compulsory fluoride, may well ride to power on the back of this debacle.
Media Release 23 February 2008
NEWS ALERT
Qld Health staff doctored tooth decay data used in decision to force fluoridation.
This alert is to inform Queensland Members of Parliament and others, that Queensland Health staff have doctored tooth decay rates data used in the decision making process and the massive fluoridation advertising promotions.
A delegation to the Queensland Premier, Health Minister and Chief Health Officer on the 12th Feb made them aware of this situation, however it appears that this is being ignored by the Premier and that Legislation that has its basis in fraudulent data will be rammed through Parliament on Tuesday 26th Feb.
Premier Blighs announcement on 5th Dec that she had made the decision to force fluoridation was hilighted by comparison of tooth decay rates ( but using data only from baby teeth ) between Townsville and Brisbane and led into newspaper advertisements which stated “In Townsville, water supplies have been fluoridated since 1964, resulting in 65% less tooth decay in children than those in Brisbane” additionally “… fluoride is proven safe and effective”
Examination of the source of the data used reveals that Qld Health staff have changed results from “teeth surfaces” to “teeth” a four to five fold difference ( teeth each have 4 or 5 surfaces depending on the type of tooth) leading to a false and exaggerated impression of tooth decay favouring fluoridated Townsville. Brisbane children were falsely shown as having 2 more decayed baby teeth than Townsville children, when in reality, averaged out, it would have been only a fraction of a tooth. The data from permanent teeth in children aged 6 to 12 years old which was available but not used by Qld Health, showed on average only a tiny fraction of a tooth difference in decay rates…
Queensland Health also portrayed that the data is from 1996 when in fact it is from mid 1991 to 1992. Queensland Health have refused to acknowledge tooth decay data in permanent teeth from recent Queensland Children’s Dental surveys and refused to acknowledge tooth decay data from children’s permanent teeth measured at 12 years of age which is the international standard of comparison. Recent Tooth decay data from permanent teeth shows that Queensland compares favourably to other Australian states.
There is no scientific evidence to show that water fluoridation results in 65 % less tooth decay as Queensland Health claimed. A major British Government commissioned review of water fluoridation done in 2000 by York University found that size of estimated benefit to be only of the order of 15% and additionally that the review did not show water fluoridation to be safe.
Queensland Health staff have illegimately dismissed creditable scientific publications showing links with harm from Osteoscarcoma and other adverse health effects and also recommendations from the Centre for Disease Control that infants under 12 months of age not consume fluoridated water.
Freedom of Information shows that a senior Oral Health advisor to the Health Minister had written in 2006 that there are no scientific studies to prove water fluoridation is safe.
Queensland Health would have spent millions promoting “safety“ of water fluoridation in newspaper, radio television advertising, even in posters in public toilets, yet the 2008 Water Fluoridation Bill assures the Queensland Government blanket protection from liability.
The Water Fluoridation Act 2008 will give ” protection from civil rights and remedies” to any person or corporation involved in water fluoridation. Unless Criminal negligence can be proved, no harmed person will ever be able to bring a case of harm against, or prosecute the State of Queensland, the Minister, any analyst, any official or any person authorized under the Fluoridation Act, or any Water Supplier.
It is contradictory for the Queensland Premier to claim water fluoridation is safe, and then introduce Legislation that forces fluoridation on the population but also prevents any people harmed by it (even by accident) from making a claim against the decision makers or any person authorized under the Act.
We urge the Members of the Parliament of Queensland to vote against this legislation which was based on and promoted by fraudulent data.
As can seen below fluoride, lead, and mercury have always been a
problem to human health and are a bad combination:
FLUORIDATION INCREASES LEAD ABSORPTION IN CHILDREN
The chemical most commonly used to fluoridate America’s drinking water is associated with an increase in children’s blood lead levels. Most studies that purport fluoridation’s safety and effectiveness in preventing cavities use the chemical sodium fluoride. However, most communities inject cheaper silicofluorides (fluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride) into their drinking water based on the theory that each chemical comes apart totally, so that freed fluoride can incorporate into tooth enamel.
However, the silicofluorides (SiF) do not separate completely, as sodium fluoride does, As a result, water treatment with silicofluorides apparently functions to increase the cellular uptake of lead.
In research published in the International Journal of Environmental Studies (September 1999), Masters and Coplan studied lead screening data from 280,000 Massachusetts children. They found that average blood lead levels are significantly higher in children living in communities whose water is treated with silicofluorides. Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Evaluation Survey (NHANES III) and a survey of over 120,000 children in New York towns (population 15,000 to 75,000) corroborate this effect.
Masters and Coplan reported that some minorities are especially at risk in high SiF exposure areas, where Black and Mexican American children have significantly higher blood lead levels than they do in unfluoridated communities.
Children with higher blood lead levels also have more tooth decay
Lead poisoning can cause learning disabilities, behavioral problems, and at high levels, seizures, coma and even death, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Lead is a highly significant risk factor in predicting higher rates of crime, attention deficit disorder or hyperactivity and learning disabilities.
Fluoridation
…Future lawsuits on behalf of kidney patients…
“AWWA looks to the medical and dental communities, the U.S. EPA, the Centers for Disease Control, and other … organizations for their information and research on medical and dental health,” the statement said.
…Stockin said the association has ignored obvious conflicts between the research and glowing reports on the safety of fluorides and will likely face lawsuits on behalf of kidney patients and other groups. He suggests other organizations immediately rescind support of fluoride.
“This was bad science and bad policy from the beginning, and I would suggest cities and organizations that lend their name to supporting fluoridation very quickly and emphatically change positions,” he said. ‘Attorney Reeves’ letter should be a wake up call – to act quickly to stop fluoridation.”
Dental Mercury: FDA 6 June 2008
After years of asserting that mercury in fillings was safe, the Food and Drug Administration now says it may be harmful to pregnant women, children, fetuses, and people who are especially sensitive to mercury exposure.
“Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses,” the FDA now says on its Web site.
The agency posted the revised assessment online Tuesday as part of a settlement with consumer advocates. The FDA also committed to issuing special controls on mercury fillings in July 2009.
Those controls could range from giving patients information to adding warnings prohibiting use of the fillings in some people.
While bans are unlikely, the FDA may conclude that the cavity-repair treatment, called dental amalgam, should not be used in certain patients such as pregnant women, FDA spokeswoman…
This web site may contain legal information but ispresented with our policy of ‘A Citizen’s Right-To-Know’. You are notified that dissemination of this informationis encouraged. If you receive this transmission inerror feel free to notify the authors or retain ormake any copies you may need.
We reserve the right to publish any outgoing correspondence and incoming
responses or non responses on our web sites as part of our policy of a ‘Citizen’s Right-To-Know’ .
https://fluoridationqueensland.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/logo-300x77.png00yarycoldhttps://fluoridationqueensland.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/logo-300x77.pngyarycold2010-09-17 09:58:082010-09-17 09:58:08FLUORIDATION Letters # 1-4 sent to Anna Bligh +
Fluoride air pollution can have a devastating effect on the total environment. Over the past 50 years, a variety of industries have released into the atmosphere more than 25,000,000 tons of fluoride gases and particulates.
Fluoride air pollution can have a devastating effect on the total environment.
Angus Lazores is a Mohawk Indian. For centuries before the white-man reached Canada and the United States, the Mohawks hunted, fished, trapped, and farmed the islands of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, now known as the St. Regis Akwesasne Indian Reserve.
Angus Lazores, along with 1,500 other Mohawks, lives on Cornwall Island, a part of the reserve straddling the borders of Quebec, Ontario, and Upper New York State. The St. Regis Mohawk Band settled Cornwall Island just over a hundred years ago; they soon became known as an efficient and self-sufficient agricultural community. In 1959, there were 45 farmers, forty cattle barns and 364 dairy cattle on the Island.
Twenty years later, only eight farmers and eight cattle barns were left.
During the twenty years the cattle population was decimated;
all the bees on the Island had disappeared; crop yields had fallen;
partridges, after which the Akwesasne Reserve is named, had declined drastically;
and the white pine trees on the Island were dying.
In 1959, Reynolds Metals Company had built an aluminium smelter on the south bank of the St. Lawrence River near Massena, New York State. Cornwall Island is downwind of the smelter at least 60 per cent of the time.
Angus Lazores dates his problems on the Island to 1962, just three years after the smelter became operational.
In that year, cattle became lame and developed swellings on their legs, eventually the lameness became so severe that the animals could no longer graze normally. They laid down to eat on pasture and then crawled to the next place to eat. With increasing age the cows had difficulty drinking cold water, and chewing was obviously painful. The animals would grab hay but let it go after unsuccessful attempts at mastication.
The first pregnancy and calving were usually uneventful, but the cows had small udders and too little milk for the calf. At the third pregnancy and delivery, the native cows had usually deteriorated, being unable to drink or chew properly. Cows died during delivery and neonatal calf mortality was high. If cows survived the third pregnancy they were sold for slaughter.
By 1971, the majority of farmers had switched from dairy to beef cattle and by November 1977, there were only 177 cattle on the Island compared with 364 in 1959.
The cause of the cattle disease was admitted only after many years. In 1969, officials of the Canadian Ministry of the Environment had expressed concern to Reynolds Metals about fluoride emissions impacting on the Island. Four years later, the St. Regis Local Council authorised an investigation into pollutants emitted by the smelter. In July 1973, the Council were advised that damage to the pine trees on the Island was due to fluoride gases.
Two years later, urine samples from Cornwall Island cattle showed abnormal levels of fluoride.
In November 1975, Angus Lazore’s cattle were examined by a veterinarian called Abbey, sent by Reynolds Metals. He claimed that internal and external parasites were responsible for the condition of the cattle – fluoride wasn’t even mentioned.
The Mohawk elders were disturbed by Abbey’s diagnosis and approached Professor Lennart Krook, an eminent veterinary scientist at Cornell University.
Krook ran extensive diagnostic and pathological tests on the St. Regis cattle, then announced his findings:
“Owing to extensive and serious chronic fluoride poisoning no cattle born on Cornwall Island were going to live for more than five years.”
During 1977 and 1978, the situation which had developed on the Island was investigated by a team of scientists from the New York State College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University. Leaders of the team were Professor Krook and Dr George Maylin. In the introduction to their published report, they point out:
“Of all pollutants that affect farm animals, fluorine has caused the most severe and widespread damage. The object of the present study is to record yet another man-made fluorine pollution disaster and to interpret the pathogenesis of the osseous changes in view of recent advances in the understanding of bone metabolism.”
While Krook and Maylin focused on the cattle, Dr Clancy Gordon of the University of Montana, examined 2,600 plant samples from Cornwall Island and found very high levels of fluoride in all the vegetation tested.
University of Illinois scientists were then recruited to see if the Islanders themselves were suffering health problems resulting from excessive exposure to fluoride. Doctors Bertram Carnow and Shirley Conibear reported:
“Significant numbers of people with abnormalities of the muscular, skeletal, nervous and blood systems.”
In addition, Cornwall Island physicians had noted high rates of anaemia, rashes, irritability, diabetes, high blood pressure and thyroid disease.
Carnow and Conibear concluded that there had been;
“Unquestionably heavy exposure to fluorine compounds that has affected all the life studied.”
They recommended an immediate reduction in smelter fluoride emissions. Chief Francis of the Mohawk Indian Band put it more dramatically, he advised anyone living in areas where smelters might be built, to:
“Block the project. Block them with everything you have. If you fail then move. Move as quickly as you can because there’s no money that can buy your health back.”
Reynolds Metals spent its first ten years of operation spewing over 130 kilos of fluoride emissions an hour, directly downstream to Cornwall Island. Even after New York State regulations forced the company to reduce its emissions to 30 kilos an hour by 1975, Reynolds’ “gift” to the Mohawks had been an appalling –
TWELVE MILLION KILOS OF AIRBORNE FLUORIDE CONTAMINANTS
OVER TWENTY YEARS.
The Mohawk way of life became a victim of a preventable man-made plague. And you don’t have to go to Canada to find fluoride pollution problems. For more than a century, the Hunter Valley Region of New South Wales has produced some of Australia’s finest wines.
On Tuesday July 8 1980, the Tyrrell’s and the Tulloch’s, Reg Drayton and Dr Max Lake together with Chris Barnes, who, as President of the Hunter Valley Vineyard Association represented virtually all the other wine-makers, held a press conference at the Hilton Hotel, Sydney.
Their message was simple – they could foresee the day when the Hunter Valley was finished as a wine-growing area. And the reason? For the past ten years the ALCAN aluminium smelter at Kurri-Kurri had rained 600 to 700 tonnes of fluoride pollutants onto the surrounding landscape annually. The wine-makers said they had known nothing about these fluoride emissions until 10 months previously, yet fluoride pollutants have, in the past, reduced grape yield and decimated vineyards in Spain, Greece, Bulgaria and the Rhone Valley.
Ever since the beginning of the industrial revolution but particularly in the second half of this century, wholesale pollution of air and of the countryside with fluoride fumes and fall-out has taken place; and the most common and most dangerous fluoride air pollutant is HYDROGEN FLUORIDE.
As mentioned previously, Dr Jag Cook, from Britain’s National Chemical Emergency Group – which is responsible for mopping up any major toxic spills in the UK – has said: “Hydrogen fluoride is about the only chemical that really scares me.”
Hardly surprising since amongst other things, hydrogen fluoride (HF) eats up glass and dissolves most metals.
Alright, you say, its dangerous, but I don’t live near a factory that releases HF into the atmosphere, nor do I work in an environment where HF is present. But consider this. Demand for lead-free petrol is growing quickly and the processes for making it involve the use of HF to achieve high octane ratings without using lead. In fact, between 1.26 and 3.14 kilos of HF are used in the production of every six barrels of alkylate.
As a result HF is present in the exhaust gases from vehicles using lead-free petrol. The levels of HF, three inches from the exhaust outlet measure 30 parts per billion, and remember at that concentration, HF can impair reflex activity in rats by acting as a CNS depressant – in other words, a mind-dulling drug.
HYDROGEN FLUORIDE, aka:, is used by an increasing number of industries, and it is also produced as a pollutant by an increasing number of industries.
A series of accidents in the United States have recently demonstrated that industrial HF sites are a major threat to public safety.
For instance, an HF leak on 30 October 1987 at the Marathon refinery in Texas City left 700 people in need of urgent medical treatment. Dr Fred Millar, of the Environmental Policy Institute, said that only luck had prevented the accident from becoming the major industrial catastrophe of the year. He pointed out:
“The release was from the vapour space of a storage tank. If the same release had been of HF liquid thousands would likely have died in the ensuing gas cloud. It would have been our Bhopal.”
A few months later, another HF leak occurred at Mobil’s refinery in Torrance, California. This caused a raging 41-hour fire and millions of dollars worth of damage. An official report of the accident suggested:
“The consequences may have been so great as to warrant regulations to direct industry to phase out its use or substitute processes with less environmental hazards.”
In March 1988, there was another HF leak, this time in Tulsa, Oklahoma. There, an accident at the Sun refinery produced a three-mile-long cloud which engulfed the town Only a prompt evacuation limited the casualties to 36 persons (none fatal).
A recent test by the US Government showed that relatively small amounts of HF liquid will release a dense, ground-hugging gas cloud which remains lethal for five kilometres.
In Britain, the location of HF manufacturing plants are, according to the Health and Safety Executive, officially secret – to prevent them becoming targets for terrorists.
Many people, particularly those working in the pot-rooms of aluminium smelters, are exposed to relatively high concentrations of hydrogen fluoride. What can it do to them? Well, lets see.
In the spring of 1986, one of the most modern aluminium smelters in the world went into production in Portland, Victoria. The smelter had been built by the Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA), who also owned a much older smelter at Point Henry, Geelong.
Two years later, on December 2 1988, the Melbourne Age reported:
“SMELTER WORKERS CLAIM FOR ASTHMA.” “Twelve workers from the 35 per cent State-owned Portland aluminium smelter have issued common-law claims against the joint-venture seeking damages for occupational asthma. The chairman of the Aluminium Development Council, Mr. Bruce Heister, said the incidence of occupational asthma varied from smelter to smelter but the reasons for this were not clear. Damages for a case of occupational asthma were claimed against another big aluminium producer, Comalco, at its Queensland smelter a few months ago. The cause of pot room asthma is suspected to be an agent, or agents, in emissions from smelter pot lines. Since production started in Portland in October 1986, 65 workers have been diagnosed as having occupational asthma.”
In other words, after just 25 months in operation, 65 workers at one of the most modern aluminium smelters in the world had been affected by mysterious agents in the pot room.
Worse was to follow. On 27 April 1989, the Melbourne Herald reported:
“ALUMINIUM IS LATEST WORKER HEALTH SCARE.”
“A senior Victorian union official claims workers at Geelong’s ALCOA smelter are suffering respiratory ailments potentially as deadly as those found in the asbestos industry. Mr. Royre Bird, slate secretary of the Federated Iron-workers Association, has called for a national inquiry into respiratory disease in aluminium smelter workers after a report by New South Wales researchers found evidence of long-term irreversible lung damage. The report, by a team from Newcastle University medical school, found workers at Alcan Aluminium’s Kurri-Kurri smelter suffered reduced lung function equivalent to smoking a packet of cigarettes a day. Mr. Bird, who has worked in the industry for 18 years, claimed the findings had serious implications for the aluminium industry world-wide and for workers at Geelong. He said he believed that apart from respiratory diseases, aluminium workers were at risk of contracting cancer. He claimed to have observed a “slow but gradually developing history of cancers” at the Point Henry Plant in Geelong.
He also claimed workers at the Portland smelter, partly owned by the State Government, were suffering higher rates of pot room asthma than at Point Henry. Union solicitors had confirmed 176 cases of pot room asthma at Point Henry since 1964, compared with 76 at Portland. At least 20 more cases were being processed by other solicitors, he said.”
A few days later, a cancer specialist supported Mr Bird’s claim when the Melbourne Sun published the following article on May 1 1989:
“CANCER RISK AT SMELTERS: DOCTOR”.
“Workers at aluminium smelters are at risk of developing cancer as well as chronic asthma, according to a leading cancer specialist. At least 39 smelter workers across Australia are believed to have already died from work-related cancer. Dr Cyril Minty, a specialist at the Peter McCallum cancer hospital, said fumes emitted from the smelters’ pot rooms could contain cancer-causing chemicals as well as irritants that produced the respiratory condition known as ‘pot room asthma’ Dr Minty said more than six sufferers of industrial asthma from Portland and ALCOA’s Geelong smelter had been referred to him during the past year.”
Now, there is no mystery at all. The major pollutants in the pot room are gaseous and particulate fluorides; and HYDROGEN FLUORIDE is the most common fluoride gas.
HYDROGEN FLUORIDE IS THE MAJOR CAUSE OF
POT ROOM ASTHMA AND A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR
IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF LUNG CANCER IN
SOME ALUMINIUM WORKERS.
But, industrialists live in fear of conclusive evidence linking a pollutant to ‘new’ occupational or Neighbourhood diseases. The reason is obvious. Employers and their insurers will face claims for compensation.
(Note: a “Neighbourhood disease” is one affecting people living in the vicinity of a pollutant producing factory.)
Industries with major fluoride pollution problems are amongst the most powerful interest groups in society. Fluoride emissions are amongst the most difficult of all pollutants to control effectively, and in a highly competitive economic system, many companies will fight for their very lives to avoid spending large amounts of money to control pollution since this will, almost inevitably, increase the price of the end-product.
Certain sections of industry will go to great lengths to suppress stories about fluoride pollution. Such reports might encourage people to sue for damages or, result in pressures for tougher anti-pollution laws.
The first symptoms of exposure to trace amounts of hydrogen fluoride are NOT physiological but psychological, and include such symptoms as confusion, fatigue, partial loss of memory and mental dullness. To put it another way, behaviour is exquisitely sensitive to minute traces of hydrogen fluoride (and other pollutants) in the environment.
Unfortunately, the tests to which chemical substances are usually subjected in efforts to determine their so-called “maximum permissible doses or concentration” do not take into account possible changes in mental function, and also would often fail to pick up long-term or chronic effects on the organism.
Minute concentrations of hydrogen fluoride inhaled over lengthy periods of time CAN DAMAGE VITAL COMPONENTS OF THE IMMUNE SYSTEM – this leaves the individual vulnerable to opportunistic diseases.
Last century, canaries were taken down coal mines because of the presence of trace amounts of deadly gases in the mines. The gases were undetectable by smell but if the canary died, the miners got out – quickly!
Some scientists suspect that FROGS have become analogous to the coal-mine canaries. All over the world frogs are disappearing and no-one knows why. The best guess so far is that pollution of the environment is responsible. I’d like to tell you about an experiment I recently completed.
In the adult human the immune system weighs about two pounds and consists of around a trillion lymphocytes and about 100 million trillion molecules called antibodies that are produced and secreted by the lymphocytes.
In a mouse, the immune system consists of about 300 million lymphocytes and around a trillion antibodies.
The smallest known immune system, that of a tadpole, is estimated to have a million lymphocytes and an antibody repertoire of about 10 million. Smaller immune systems do not exist presumably because such systems would recognize antigen so infrequently that they would provide little, if any, protective advantage.
I exposed tadpoles to a number of increasingly common environmental pollutants, including mercury, cadmium and hydrofluoric acid – which is hydrogen fluoride in water, and both gas and acid have the same formula, HF.
Incredibly low concentrations of these chemicals proved lethal to the tadpoles.
But technically speaking, the tadpoles didn’t die of “mercury poisoning” or “cadmium poisoning,” or “hydrofluoric acid” poisoning. They died because the chemicals ‘wrecked’ their immune systems leaving the tadpoles vulnerable to all the germs and parasites in their environment.
The significance of this is that scientists still evaluate the toxicity of a chemical by determining what amount of the chemical causes obvious damage or death.
For instance, lets look at a common chemical – sodium fluoride.
It would take at least 3 grams of sodium fluoride to kill a healthy adult. That’s the amount in 3,000 litres of fluoridated water.
If you ingested about 8 milligrams of sodium fluoride daily for ten years or more, you would develop a well-defined disease called skeletal fluorosis, which affects bones, tendons and secondarily, the nervous system. If an infant ingested 2 milligrams of fluoride daily, they would develop dental fluorosis or ‘mottled’ teeth.
Apparently therefore, the only problems that low doses of sodium fluoride can cause are either dental fluorosis or skeletal fluorosis. The CLINICAL symptoms of these conditions are easily detected – ‘mottled’ teeth and ‘bony outgrowths’ and the calcification of tendons in skeletal fluorosis.
BUT WHAT ABOUT SUB-CLINICAL SYMPTOMS
THOSE THAT WE CAN’T SEE?
Experiments have shown water containing 1 to 4 parts per million can have an effect on the Central Nervous System – a mind-dulling effect! Experiments have also demonstrated that fluoride at a concentration of just 0.6 parts per million can disturb antibody production, and thus interfere with the functioning of the immune system.
And many experiments have shown that concentrations of fluoride of about 4 parts per million can damage DNA – the vital core of every living cell.
In other words, at very low concentrations, fluoride can cause subtle changes in enzyme activities, nerve action potentials, altered behavioural reaction, and the immune system…
………..
About Dr. Smith
Dr Geoffrey Ernest Smith, L.D.S., R.C.S. (Eng.) Dental Surgeon, (retired)
Curriculum Vitae
Born: 1 November 1932, Married, 5 children, 4 grandchildren.
Educated: Lawrence House School, St. Annes on Sea, Lancashire. Rossall School, Fleetwood, Lancashire. University of Manchester, Turner Dental School.
1956: Qualified L.D.S., R.C.S. Royal College of Surgeons. (England).
Paper: Original Paper Citation : Caries Res 2001;35:125-128 Title : Fluoride Deposition in the Aged Human Pineal Gland Author(s): J. Luke Info : Figures: 2; Tables: 0; References: 32 Keywords : Calcium; Distribution; Fluoride; Human pineal gland; Hydroxyapatite; Pineal concretions Abstract : The purpose was to discover whether fluoride (F) accumulates in the aged human pineal gland. The aims were to determine (a) F-concentrations of the pineal gland (wet), corresponding muscle (wet) and bone (ash); (b) calcium-concentration of the pineal.
Pineal, muscle and bone were dissected from 11 aged cadavers and assayed for F using the HMDS-facilitated diffusion, F-ion-specific electrode method. Pineal calcium was determined using atomic absorption spectroscopy.
Pineal and muscle contained 297+/-257 and 0.5+/-0.4 mg F/kg wet weight, respectively; bone contained 2,037+/-1,095 mg F/kg ash weight. The pineal contained 16,000+/-11,070 mg Ca/kg wet weight.
There was a positive correlation between pineal F and pineal Ca (r = 0.73, p<0.02)
but no correlation between pineal F and bone F.
By old age (50-70), the →pineal gland← has readily accumulated F
https://fluoridationqueensland.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/logo-300x77.png00yarycoldhttps://fluoridationqueensland.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/logo-300x77.pngyarycold2010-09-15 15:28:522010-09-15 15:28:52THE SECRET WAR – FLUORIDE POLLUTION – Dr. Geoffrey E. Smith
It comes as a surprise to many people when they discover
that the chemicals used to fluoridate drinking water
are not pharmaceutical grade.
The bulk of the chemicals used today come from the
wet scrubbing systems of the phosphate fertilizer industry.
A recent extract from Dr. Paul Connett:
…Late last year the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) published a systematic review and health assessment of the neurotoxicity of fluoride. Based on 20 high-quality studies it concluded: “fluoride is presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans.”
In December 2019, Philippe Grandjean, one of the world’s leading neurotoxicologists, provided an extensive review of the literature on fluoride’s neurotoxicity (156 references). He concluded: “there is little doubt that developmental neurotoxicity is a serious risk associated with elevated fluoride exposure, whether due to community water fluoridation, natural fluoride release from soil minerals, or tea consumption, especially when the exposure occurs during early development.”…
Fraser Mitcham is splitting chemical hairs when he says that “sodium fluorosilicic acid” does not exist. The correct name is sodium fluorosilicate, the salt formed when fluorosilicic acid is neutralized with sodium hydroxide. The “ate” ending is introduced when a salt is formed from the parent acid. However, more disturbing is Micham’s willingness to continue to propagate the Victorian Department of Human Services “spin” on the source of the fluoridating chemicals used in fluoridation schemes. What follows is a shortened version of what will appear in a book I have co-authored which will be published in October 2010, “The Case Against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics That Keep it There.”(Connett, Beck and Micklem, Chelsea Green Publishers).
It comes as a surprise to many people when they discover that the chemicals used to fluoridate drinking water are not pharmaceutical grade, meaning that they are not of the same purity used in dental products. Instead, the bulk of the chemicals used today come from the wet scrubbing systems of the phosphate fertilizer industry.
The wet scrubbers were introduced into the phosphate manufacturing process in order to remove two highly toxic gases: hydrogen fluoride (HF) and silicon tetrafluoride (SiF4). For many years these gases had damaged vegetation in the vicinity of the phosphate plants as well as crippling cattle on local farms. Fortunately, a spray of water is able to capture these gases and convert them into a solution of hexafluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6). When this resulting solution has reached a concentration of about 23% it is shipped untreated in large tanker trucks to chemical companies. These companies then send the solution (still untreated) to communities to fluoridate their water.However, agencies that continue to promote fluoridation – despite the fact that there is little genuine scientific evidence that swallowing fluoride actually reduces tooth decay, and the growing evidence that there is no margin of safety sufficient to protect everyone drinking fluoridated water from known harmful effects – have gone to tortuous lengths to calm the public on the use of hazardous waste for this purpose. One example comes from the Victorian Department of Human Services, which states that: ”Fluoride is not a waste product of the fertiliser manufacturing process, but rather, a co-product. If fluoride is not actively collected during the refining process for water fluoridation purposes, it remains in the phosphate fertiliser. However, due to the widespread practice of water fluoridation in Australia, fluoride is commonly extracted during the refining process.”Maybe this “health” agency is happier using the word co-product rather than a hazardous by-product, but the simple truth, as indicated above, is that the captured gases (hydrogen fluoride and silicon fluoride) are very toxic and did enormous damage to crops and cattle surrounding phosphate fertilizer plants for about 100 years before the industry was forced to put on wet scrubbers to capture these “co-products.” Substances that cause damage to plants, animals or humans are called “pollutants.” Nor, as this fluoridation-promoting “health” agency claims, will these captured gases magically remain in the phosphate fertilizer if they were not scrubbed from the air emissions. These claims are chemical and historical nonsense.
Paul Connett,
PhD,Professor Emeritus of Environmental Chemistry,
