Tuesday, 5 October 2010


I can only sympathise with anyone who has tried to talk to United Utilities Water (it used to be called North West Water until it discovered the financial delights of going Global) If you visit their web site and try any contact numbers you will of course get a Call Centre. Its even worse than it sounds however, The call centre is completely obsessed with Accounts and Billing to the exclusion of practically all else. Even if i phoned in to warn them of a bomb alert, i would suggest they would still ask me for an account number. After I had finally managed to talk to a human, i found that other than being obsessed with Post or Zip Codes there was no access access whatsoever to any technical or scientific staff.

Its been heading in this direction for years and United utilities is by no means alone but in recent timess they have became totally inaccible. After eight days of trying to get a mildly technicl answer,having named the issue and the officer in charge I finally saw red and contacted the Consumer council for water and made an official complaint. This was my first effective decision. The consumer council were very good and within 48 hours both then and and a representative from UU had written to me. Sadly however it wsa soon back to normal. I am at the time of writing still waiting to hear from United Utilities to actually hear a technical response to me question.


Monday, 13 September 2010


One of my regualr correspondents on the continent, sends me an interesting report from the Daily Mail 12.9.2010

The parents of 3 year old Todd Thomas of Chepstow were directed to a hospital an hours dive away after he sprayed some cockroach poison in his mouth.

Before they reached the hospital he started suffering blisters in his mouth and vomiting. The symptoms mostly subsided after a few days.

My comments: .......

Cockroach poison is documented to contain fluoride and the symptoms Todd suffered, burns and vomiting are exactly those of cases reported from poison units worldwide after fluoride poisoning. The article does not mention what chemicals were in the pesticide of course.


Sunday, 22 August 2010


Fluoride: 'Tell us what is happening'
SOUTHAMPTON MP John Denham is calling on the Government to spell out its policy on fluoridation, once and for all.
Mr Denham has written to Tory Health Secretary Andrew Lansley, asking him to explain whether the coalition is going to intervene in the controversial scheme to add the chemical to tap water supplies in Hampshire.
The Labour MP, who says he supports fluoridation in principle but has called on South Central Strategic Health Authority to put its plans on hold in the face of public opposition, said the Conservatives have gone quiet on their election pledges to scrap it.
As revealed in the Daily Echo, anti-fluoride campaigners in Hampshire " have already , expressed disappointment at the lack of action since the More than 10,000 people took part in the consultation, with 72 per cent of those living in the affected area - covering parts of Southampton, Eastleigh, Totton, Netley and Rownhams saying they were against it. The scheme is currently on hold while a judicial review into the way the scheme was approved is fought in the ,, High Court. The SHA, which has consistently
t argued it met or exceeded all of its legal requirements during the consultation, has set aside £400,000 to fight the legal bid, which may not be fully heard until next year. Mr Denham, MP for Southampton Itchen, said in his letter it is still unclear if the Government supports the SHA in its decision to proceed with fluoridation. He said: "In my judgement, a full consultation process failed to produce the necessary levels of support, even for a beneficial act of mass medication.
"Prior to the election there were a number of statements made by Conservative spokesmen who led people to believe that plans would be dropped if the Conservatives came to power. "It is now urgent that you clarify the position and, in particular, if you would require a greater level of public support before this policy is implemented.
"If fluoridation is not to proceed then it is important that attention is focused on other ways of ensuring child oral health."
Mr Denham's intervention comes after Tory Hampshire MPs Julian Lewis and Caroline Nokes both called on their party to honour their pre-election pledges on fluoride. Despite those promises, the Leader of the House of Commons, Sir George Young, said earlier this year the Government had "no immediate plans" to change the law surrounding fluoridation schemes.

Posted By Bill to
UK Against Fluoridation at 8/17/2010 09:40:00 AM

Monday, 9 August 2010



Only yesterday we saw some typical fence sitting from Junior Health minister Milton over the free milk for under fives (with no mention from her about fluoride in milk of course) but even before the pubs closed, Cameron had stepped in and overturnd her proposal. Well thanks for that Mr Cameron, but could you also end fluoridated milk in schools as well please. Like water there is little proof of any usefulness but a lot of health concerns about dosage and side effects.

When my father died my mother had to bring me up on a tiny Widows pension. Consequently I frequently went to school with no breakfast and the hunger pangs were assuaged by drinking the free milk. As the bottles provided were small I and others used to drink two or three of them. Fortunately no government loonies like Andy Burnham had thought up fluoridated milk, otherwise I would have received two or three times the expected dose. Luckily our water was not fluoridated or we might otherwise have received extremely large overdoses of fluoride as is undoubtedly the case with many people in Birmingham and the West Midlands.

Now lets hope that PM Cameron sticks to his guns which he loaded before the General Election and abandons any milk fluoridation and water fluoridation without consent. People can easily overdose on fluoride as it is if they wish with only toothpaste and tea as sources of the poison so come on Cameron, lets make things better not worse and lets collectively stop listening to the pseud=scientific twaddle emanating from the pro fluoride lobby still inhabiting the past and hoping to keep us all living there. End Fluoridation now, not next week or next year.....Now !!!

Sunday, 8 August 2010


The main news on this rather grey and damp Sunday morning is that the government is considering ending free milk for under-fives as part of the spending cuts.

According to my AOL news page and most of the Sunday Newspapers, "Ministers said there was no evidence the nursery milk scheme improved health and, at a cost of around £50 million a year, was too expensive to run. Health minister Anne Milton admitted the move - which would echo the Conservative Party's removal of free school milk in 1971 - would be "highly controversial" and affect children in low income families.

Whether this is a curse of a blessing remains to be seen however. from the point of view of an anti-fluoride campaigner. Milk has already been poisoned with fluoride for several years in Sheffield and parts of Liverpool and God knows where else, and most people don't seem to know about this. Most fluoride campaigners however most see the milk supply to kids as a particularly evil way of distributing this industrial waste

There is little if any evidence to show that fluoride works either systemically or topically and recent research has raised growing health fears about the increasing intake of fluoride from many foods and drinks, especially in areas where water is already fluoridated such as Birmingham and the west Midlands. There are even differences of opinion about whether the calcium in the milk reduces the danger from fluoride or whether the fluoride blocks the the calcium intake. but as a long term anti-pollution campaigner with Friends of the Earth, i always adopt and recommend the Precautionary Principle. And we should be particularly careful when using young children as Guinea Pigs.

If health ministers really wish to save money in these straightened times, they should start by removing fluoride from the kids milk supplies and immediately follow this by removing it from the drinking water supplies and discontinuing all plans to extend fluoridation any further. Surely it cannot be right to be squandering vast sums on fighting its own electorate who have already made it clear to councils and Government that they don't want it. I would even suggest that they go the whole nine yards and scrap the SHAs and PCTs who are both little better than chocolate tea pots and who don't seem to represent anyone but themselvs and their cronies. Perhpas then we might have enough money to keep the free milk supply to young kids and even have some money left over for proper dentistry. This would be a "safe and effective" way of strengthening our finances and our democracy.

Of course this would assume that our new Coalition is a little more enlightened than the previous bunch of neredowells and as one of my more cynical friends put it, "if they had had a brain, they would have been really dangerous. However Having already received answers from Junior Health Minister Milton I dont hold out much hope of radical changes and will expect business as usual. After all, there are still many fences to be sat upon and lots of new bums ready and willing to accept the challenge. Meanwhile, I can best encapsulate the solution as... " keep the milk and Bin the fluoride." Sadly there are less than a handful of MPs and ministers who have even a rudimentary science degree but they still seem to believe they are equipped to make law on our behalf.

Friday, 30 July 2010




A visit to Wikipedia to find out more about Ann Milton is quite revealing and certainly much more so than visiting her apparently official Web site which appears to be full of figures and mumbo jumbo demonstrating her generosity. Wikipedia, which could be wrong of course, tells us that she was a nurse trained at St Barts in London and that she is married to a doctor. It frankly appalls me that an alleged Doctor and Nurse can be completly ignorant of medical ethics which proscribe a doctor from forcibly medicating or prescribing any medication to an indivisual without their consent, even one of their own patients. This is especially heinous when they are doing it or even advocating or sanctioning it en mass without any prior knowledge of a person or persons, medical history and other medication.

Milton's assertion that the cost of fluoridation only works out at 80 pence per person is of course ludicrously wrong. As usual its not backed by any facts and proper costings. For starters it not effective at all on anyone who is not a child, assuming of course that its effective at all which in itself has not been proven. It should never be given to infants and young children and by the time they are old enough, whatever that really means, it doesn't work anyway. It would of course be nice to get some figures on the cost of treating fluorosis, of dental coatings, varnishes etc. but as these things are not available on the NHS its not surprising that they don't want the figures published.

Of course there is no mention of the possible costs of treatment NHS or otherwise for various other complaints which may be caused or complicated by the intrusion of fluorides. Presumably because this is "perfectly safe and effective," optimal, "comparison with non fluoridated areas," " pain and suffering of poor little children, trouble etc etc waffle blather. continued page 94.

Sorry Ms Milton but we refuse to be drawn into this kind of junk science. They haven't produced any reasonable stats on fluoride in donkeys years yet still hold with the old mythology and dogma and I for one will not be dragged any further into that swamp. Ms Milton must be prepared to discuss the details and not make sweeping statements without adequate proof of povenance. Fluorides in all their forms are unnecessary poisonous crap and we will not tolerate them or pay for them.

Ms Milton in backing fluoridation is being suckered by people such as Andy Burnham, and Alan Johnson MP and their cohorts in the apparently Labour controlled and partially or wholy financed, ( at least until recent parliamentary changes occured ) pro-fluoride organisation aka, the British Fluoridation Society. It is sad to see the same old junk science and quackery being perpetrated yet again and this time by a new gang of suckers that have apparently not studied any up to date research or even the statements of their leaders. My ex-MP Gordon Prentice had the ordacity to claim that he had read all the data but in discussion with him it quickly became clear that this was probably not the case. But i digress....

In the run up to the General Election, Friends of the Earth wrote to all the party leaders and asked them for their views on fluoridation and expressed concern that the Labour Government had produced legislation (the Water Act 2003 and its amendments) which was clearly produced to satisfy the whims of the Pro-Fluoride lobby which apparently holds sway in the Department of Health. It pretended to support full public consultation of the public before any decision was made but in actuality enshrined the ability of the SHAs to promote fluoridation, spending tens of millions on it of course, and then to compel the Water companies to fluoridate even if 100% of the public strongly objected to it. Not surprisingly, the responses we received were generally warmly welcomed and widely publicised.

David Cameron was opposed to compulsion without consultation and consent, Nick Clegg was totally opposed to fluoridation and even Gordon Brown said that people would not be compelled to accept water fluoridation without their consent. Sadly it would appear that a lack of scientific and medical training amongst the majority of Politicians of all persuasions, (who do not understand the science of fluoride, or the varied dangers it presents to our population and the natural environment, and which leads them to believe outdated dogma and orthodoxy, dating from a time when even asbestos, lead and even cigarettes were thought to be harmless or even beneficial. This can only damage the reputation and credibility of the recently formed coilition government when they appear like so many flat-earthers.

All the latest studies have shown that any benefits from fluoridation are minimal if at all, and are well outweighed by the dangers of exposure to fluorine productsl which include dangers to the kidneys, the teeth and bones, the thyroid and pineal gland, weight control and obesity, and childrens IQ. As for compulsory mass medication, it does not seem to be treated as a serious issue at all which must really lead us to question, sincerity, and competence.

All this creates the impression that Government health policy is being led by quacks and snake oil salespersons who would not be supporting such pseudo-science without an ulterior motive. Lots of money has swilled from the fluoride producing industries and much of it seemingly handled by few Labour MPs as mentioned earlier. For the benefit of democracy, the economy, stability and restoration of trust The Coilitions' best policy is to avoid suspect and useless, wasted money. They must honour their collective pledges to protect and nurture the priceless NHS and concentrate on spending money on point of need dentistry rather than squandering it on dodgy data, fighting the wishes of its own democratically elected majority in the courts, illegal and unethical medical practice and embellishing the pockets of vested self interest and a good start would be for junior ministers to at least get behind their leaders and present a united and coherent front. Pure drinking water is becoming an increasingly rare and of course expensive commodoty and arguably the most vital in many parts of the world including the UK. We need to use water carefully and efficiently. Only a nut case would advocate adding toxic industrial waste to something so precious. Only by such careful and concerted action then can they bring stability and trust back into our so-called democracy.


Monday, 12 July 2010



Listening to the news over the weekend, I was very pleased to hear that the coilition Government is now apparently preparing to dramatically reduce the duties of the PCTs and SHAs. Personally i would not even trust them with a vending machine let alone key services at the point of need. It cannot happen soon enough for me.

What cheered me up in particular was to hear Andy (Virgil) Burnhams response. He is now a very unhappy man, no doubt under pressure from his friends in these Quangos especially the Pro-Fluoridation Lobby who he has supported so loyally,. I will be listening for the sounds of weeping and wailing, and of course, the gnashing of teeth.

Thursday, 1 July 2010


Thursday, July 01, 2010 


Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg has launched the 'Your Freedom' website seeking our views on which laws need to be repealed:

We're working to create a more open and less intrusive society through our Programme for Government. We want to restore Britain’s traditions of freedom and fairness, and free our society of unnecessary laws and regulations – both for individuals and businesses.

This site gives you the chance to submit, comment on, or vote for ideas about how we can do this. Your ideas will inform government policy and some of your proposals could end up making it into bills we bring before Parliament to change the law.

So if there are any laws or regulations you'd like us to do away with, then submit your idea. If you see ideas here already that you like the look of, then rate them and get them moved up the list. And if there’s more you’d like to say, then talk to others in the comments section for each proposal.

It’s time to have your say. After all – it’s your freedom. There is also a video of Nick Clegg explaining the purpose of the web site.


This is a very useful opportunity to remind Mr Clegg that we wrote to him about water fluoridation in the run up to the General Election and his reply was one of categorical opposition to compulsory fluoridation.

This is a golden opportunity to write to Nick Clegg and remind him of his reply to our enquiry about water fluoridation dates March 8th, 2010 in which he said

...."In General terms, Liberal Democrats believe that people and local communities should have the ability to make their own decisions as to whether or not they they should take forms of medication, which according to the stated purpose, fluoridation would effectively constitute. Obviously, there is no such thing as absolute certainty when it comes to health safety -- but in normal circumstances, patients can weigh up the pros and cons of receiving potentially risky treatment and choose whether to undertake it. Mass fluoridation of water would leave people with no choice, and we believe that it should not be imposed by Whitehall diktat."

Signed by Douglas Dowell

Office of Nick Clegg MP

The more letters the Deputy PM receives on this subject now, the more likely we are to have success in getting the provisions of the Water Act 2003 removed along with any form or threat of compulsion. We should also ask for a full review of current water fluoridation in the West Midlands, the North East and elsewhere with a view to ending this practice as quickly as possible. . We cannot end expansion fluoridation without removing exisiting schemes as this would be unacceptable.

Brian Jackson

Friends of the Earth, Fluoride Campaign.

Tuesday, 29 June 2010




Having discussed this week the progress of the campaign so far with other campaigners. I am inclined to say that we may well be winning the war against the cult of fluoride, although there are several battles yet to be fought and the Judicial Review in Southampton is probably the most important component for now. The fact that the SHA there has managed to find £400K of public money, IE our money which will be employed to fight us in the Review is not just a disgraceful misuse of badly needed NHS funds, its a disgraceful abuse of so called democratic power as well as desperately needed cash. If full and open public consultation was anything more than hollow words, why were we not given some of it to make our own case?

One thing is for sure, it shows just how desperate the Fluorinaders have become. Clearly they know they are in real danger of losing out to public pressure. We must keep up the political pressure and call for an enquiry into how this state of affairs can be allowed. How can there be an unbiased Consultation when the government stumps up money to ensure any decisions fall to them and their policy?

But, we are where we are so we must press on regardless and concentrate on the next issue, ie; the recommendations from the EC about infant formula and fluoridated water. If the latest findings indicate that fluoride can cause problems at levels as low as 0.7 PPM how come fluoridating water up to 1.2 PPM is considered OK. New Zealand for example is concentrating on this as as a major part of their strategy to get the whole fluoridation scheme abandoned. In this we must wish them all success. In the UK we are allegedly Democratic but the facts seem to indicate otherwise. We cannot claim to be a democracy when we are still apparently subject to a soviet style command economy led from the center. The proclamation is made by the PM or the Health Minister who at the time was Andy (virgil) Burnham, the SHAs MUST obey, the water companies are then INSTRUCTED to add fluoride to the water and all decision making and choice for the consumer is lost.

We do not believe this is acceptable. Local decisions must be taken locally after due consultation and deliberation not just theoretically, but in reality. Currently there is NO CHOICE when even the consultation is just a smoke screen. Even Gordon Brown agreed to local decision making earlier this year when things were getting hot for him and even his Lap Dog Burnham was forced to stand in line with him. When we wrote to the leaders of the political parties earlier this year we received similar answers rejecting central compulsion from the Tories and the Libdems, UKIP, the Green Party etc etc.

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, The NHS needs money badly if we are closing A and E and childrens units and tens of thousands of people still cannot find an NHS dentist. Strangely however our previous Labour government could not even be bothered to respond to our letters although they could continue to throw hundreds of thousands at a campaign to force water fluoridation on us, despite having no proper up to date scientific evidence to justify such a policy. Even the latest reseach into topical applications of fluoride could find no conclusive evidence that fluoride prevented tooth decay but sadly much evidence that dental fluorosis was becoming more rampant. This mad cap policy which we did not vote for and for which they have no mandate to persue has no sscienticic back. In the run up to the General Election, the new Coilition Government of Conservatives and Lib Dems inherited this pathetic legislation and if it does not address the issue quickly, it is also likely to inherit the blame. More policy U- Turns will not look good.

Another issue is the toxicity and action of fluorine in its many forms. Obviously even without help, fluorine is more than toxic enough to do serious damage and as it accumulates in the body, its in no great hurry and can cause serious damage over a prolonged period. Many campaigners are increasingly concerned about its synergistic effects when it reacts or bonds with other chemicals. Clearly it activates and intensifies many chemicals and may even be causing normally harmless substances to punch well above their weight. These can have drastic and and as yet unknown effects on the immune system via the bone marrow. We know that certain groups are particularly sensitive to fluoride and other chemicals, notably kidney patients on dialysis and there can be no control of dosage via the public water supply. We all consume different amounts of water so the allegedly safe "dosage" of 1 PPM in the water supply has no basis in reality and its simply wishful thinking. Additional at risk groups will be people who already receive more than enough fluoride compounds via tea, grape juice and foods processed in already fluoridated areas.

If the new government decides to continue the work of New Labour and press on with fluoridation, the fluorinaders will probably act surprised and shocked when they have to start allocating even more funds from the NHS pocket to pay, unpaid water bills to keep the Water Industry happy or defend legal actions provide security for toxic tankers and isolated water treatment plants which become terrorist targets. Neither the companies nor the Government can pretend to be shocked however. Many thousands of consumers have already pledged to refuse to pay for toxic waste contaminated tap water and rightly so. And the numbers are set to grow exponentially if consumers find themselves compelled to self medicate via contaminated tap water for no good reason and this at a time when the fluoride budget is already exhausted.

I am not aware of any contract between the water companies or the government or the people for such a practice and if the coilition continue with this discredited and illegal New Labour policy, they will bring about their own demise much sooner than they think. The UK public are now acutely aware that we will all have to go through difficult times whether as tax payers or benefits claimants and are prepared for that, but i dont think they are prepared to lie down and be poisoned as well.

I received written confirmation only yesterday from the Scottish Parliament that fluoridated salt, which is now available via LIDL Supermarkets in Scotland is not a licensed medicine anywhere in the UK. In that case why is it being sold at all and why is it being put in the public water supply or the salt under the pretense that it is a medicine??. Presumably the fluorinaders are increasingly alarmed at the prospect of England and Wales following Scotlands lead and refusing to allow any fluoridation and salt will be their fall back position for this waste disposal exercise. Could it be that those prescribing it who are not doctors and have no right to prescribe, let alone force it upon any of us sense not just prohibition in the wind but possible court actions against all perpetrators. After all evidence is already being collected in the USA for major Class Actions against all involved in fluoridation and given the increasing communications across the pond, such actions could happen here sooner than they think. After all, Irrespective of the results of any Judicial Review, we should consider the possibility and necessity of legal action against quack doctors and quack quangos for medical malpractice and impersonation of doctors. The government could possibly forestall this by winding up the SHAs and PCTs and reinstalling the locally elected, Local Health Authorities which at least represented local people and local thinking.

Despite all this we still regularly read out and out twaddle from journalists who should know better but really dont. Only last year on a phone in on BBC radio Lancashire, I was pulled up by a programme presenter for using the word poison, when I challenged him it was clear that he did not even know that a toxin and a poison were the same thing. BBC local radio used to be fairly reliable and checked its facts. Now under the post Jonathan Ross regime of ultra paranoia, everything has to be double-checked and signed by at least two producers for broadcast purposes but how can this be done when the staff are so poorly educated. The same even applies in parliament where according to some scientifically interested MPs, only about 10% of MPs actually have any scientific training or qualifications at all, so its very hard to get out a clear message when even the messengers dont understand it. In such a climate of corruption and ignorance, lies can easily take on the mantle of truth and even the good guys and the innocent bystanders are villified.

So what do we want? We want not only the abandonement of all future fluoridation projects and wasteful PR and we also want the abandonment of existing fluoridation projects in the North East, and the Midlands. We want proper dentistry provided by the NHS at the point of need for this is where the money wasted on fluoride should really be spent. And perhaps we need and want most of all, a Government of whatever persuasion that listens to the electorate and especially its own independent advisors and does not hatch policies on the hoof with no scientific basis which it uses to dictate to science. First science and then policy. This is the way of common sense. Finally we want to see the end of the Water Act 2003, A useless and hipocritical piece of legislation reminiscent of the notorious and failed Dangerous Dogs Act. With a fluoride policy, The tail must not be allowed to wag the dog.


28th June, 2010

Tuesday, 22 June 2010


Acccording to the Fluoride Action Network in the USA, their scientists and supporters strongly object to recent mischaracterizations of fluoridation opponents by political pundits Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann and others in conjunction with Senator Harry Reid's Nevada re-election campaign.

"Fluoridation opposition is science-based and growing," says Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Executive Director, who has co-authored the upcoming book, "The Case Against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water and the Bad Science and Powerful Politics that Keep it There." Co-authors are James Beck, MD, PhD, professor emeritus of medical physics at the University of Alberta in Calgary; and Spedding Micklem, DPhil, professor emeritus at Edinburgh University.

"We have spent many years investigating water fluoridation and the toxicity of fluoride and we are dismayed that commentators are willing to repeat, without verification, pro-fluoridation statements that disparage scientists and citizens who oppose the practice," says Connett.

"FAN's website has a wealth of scientific information indicating that water fluoridation is neither safe nor effective," says Connett. "In fact, mounting evidence shows that it is harmful to large segments of the population and has helped to create an epidemic of dental fluorosis in children." On April 12, 2010, Time magazine listed fluoride as one of the "Top Ten Common Household Toxins" and described fluoride as both "neurotoxic and potentially tumorigenic if swallowed."

"The majority of countries do not fluoridate or have ended the practice, including 98% of Western Europe, and yet, according to WHO statistics, their tooth decay rates are no different than those in fluoridated countries," Connett states.

The FAN website has an online DVD of 15 scientists explaining why fluoridation is a risky and inappropriate medical practice. These scientists include one Nobel Prize winner, three members of a National Research Council committee that published a groundbreaking report on fluoride's toxicity in 2006, and two former EPA scientists.

According to Nobel laureate Arvid Carlsson, fluoridation is an "obsolete" practice that "is against all principles of modern pharmacology." FAN's site also has a listing of over 2800 scientists and professionals who are calling for an end to fluoridation worldwide.

The Centers for Disease Control and the American Dental Association now concede that fluoride's predominant action on the tooth is topical, not systemic, as it works on the outside of the tooth, not from inside the body. Both groups admit that using fluoridated water to prepare infant formula elevates the risk of dental fluorosis and they advise using very low or non-fluoridated water to lessen the risk. Pediatricians rarely inform parents of this advice.

"Topical treatments like fluoridated toothpaste are readily available. It makes no sense to expose the whole body to this toxic substance or force it on people who do not want it," says Connett.

According to Connett and other scientists, "Fluoridation is reckless as there is clear science indicating that fluoride has the potential to damage human bones, kidneys, thyroid and to lower children's IQs."

Connett concludes, "Fluoridation promoters have painted themselves into a corner and cannot find a face-saving way out. But citizen awareness and opposition is growing rapidly and instead of ridiculing those who oppose fluoridation, responsible commentators should educate themselves about this 60 year controversy and urge a more rational discussion of the issue."

SOURCE Fluoride Action Network

Brian Jackson of the Friends of the Earth Fluoride Network concurs that the same bad mouthing, combined with bad science and political hipocrisy applies equally in the UK where even Government ministers spout nonesence about the "benefits of fluoride" regularly but somehow seem to be unable to respond to any scientific queries about it. Perhaps this is simply because these people either dont understand the science or more likely are terrified of beinf drawn into a proper discusion about it because they know they have litttle or no evidence to support their regularly repeated claims that it is "safe and effective" The only medical side effect that they will admit to is Dental Fluorosis, a mottling and discolouration and this they describe as "cosmetic". Its certainly not cosmetic to people who suffer from it and are too embarassed to smile.

If they didnt understand it there might be some excuse for their behaviour but the previous Government of New Labour even appointed Health minister Andy (Virgil) Burnham despite the fact that he was actually employed to represent the British Fluoridation Society. What a wonderful example of science and impartiality that was. Virgil only resigned from his position when we grassed him up to the press but of course this should not have been necessary. Amazingly, this was not the most glaring example of duplicity however. At an earlier stage, the Government appointed a research team at York University headed by Professor Sheldon. The stated aim was to examin the merits of fluoride with a view to rolling out fluoridation right across the UK. After careful consideration of all the available evidence and papers on fluoride and fluoridation, its summary indicated a lack of good quality evidence in this country and found that it could not recommend the expansion of fluoridation in the UK. Our wonderful Government however, not liking this result found it necessary to deliberately rewrite the summary and conclusions to make it look like Professor Sheldons team supported expansion of water fluoridation.

There is nothing new in this of course, its very typical of the pro-fluoride lobby and our Governments general attitude towards science, which it seems to believe is a tool to be used by the politicians to support any policy that they think will win them votes and keep them in power. Professor Nutt who was appointed to examine the current drug regulations but they also rubbished his findings and then removed him from his position. Government policy cannot be allowed to dictate to science or facts it has to be the other way round and any government which is prepared to stoop to such low and dishonest methods to support the unsupportable is simply not fit to be in power and cannot be trusted. A look at the recent history of MPs of all persuasions bears witness to this dishonesty. In the USA, the puppets of the regime or the corporations bad mouth opponents of fluoride, whilst here in the UK they just make up any old crap and lie through their teeth. "Oh brave new world that has such people in it!"

Friday, 18 June 2010



The judicial review of fluoridation of water supplies in Southampton is expected to be heard in the autumn. That's according to health minister, ...

Its important to remember that in all polls on fluoridation its been rejected by a large majoority of the Population but Southamption only proved that there is little point in having a consultation when the SHAs can blithely do as they want and ignore all wishes and the proceed with a decision to fluoridate. This unscrupulous bit of double cross is enshrined in the so called fluoridation consultation legislation. If proof were needed the Southamption decision to fluoridate went ahead despite even a contrary statement from Gordon Brown and echoed by Health Minister that it should not be imposed upon people if they did not want it.

Sadly in the run up to the recent General Election, the then Shadow Minister Andrew Lansley agreed that fluoridadtion should not be imposed on people but seemed strangely unaware that the Water Act 2003 supported fluoridation irrespective of any overwhelming opposition. And, despite being asked since to clarify the Tory and coilition position, the legislation. has neith been amended or rescinded, leaving open the doors to fluoridation in future when the fuss has died down. This is a common methodology used by governments of all persuasions in the past.

Only complete abandonmend of illegal and antidemoncratic imposition of fluoridated water supples will satisfy anti-fluoride campaigners, many of whom have flatly refused to pay for water they consider poisoned or contaminated by toxic waste. In view of the double talke and hipocrisy of the pro fluoride lobby in the government and industry, this is both an understandable and reasonable position. Water companies should not be forced to contaminate what should be clean and potable drinking water, the majority of which will only enters the sewage system and then our streams and rivers. They have no contract with the general public to do such a thing have actively rejected it and refused to vote for those politicians of any party who chose to advocate such disgraceful, unscientific and and undemocratic action.

Of course this is the kind of blind and pig-headed attitude which we should all be well acquainted with. by now. Labour always seemed to ignore even the best expert advice, even from its own appointed advisors as in the York Report which could not recommend a further expansion of water fluoridation pending serious research. The government even re-wrote the summary to excuse their lies and ignored all protest from the York Committee. The same happend to Professor Nutt over their recommended changes in drug legislislation. and although this was perpetrated by the last Labour Government, the fact that the new Coilition Government is still refusing to examine the latest evidence and leave the 2003 Water Act on the books does not fill us with much confidence that they will be eventually much different from the previous mob. The credibility of the Coilition is therefore already under question.

one of our campaigners, Ann Willis alerts me to a piece in the Guardian on the 17th June


Andy Burnham, (pro-fluoridationist MP) is calling for money to be cut from the NHS budget, so that cash is available to spend on Social Services etc.

(My comment: I wonder if he wants a cut in the money which is spent on funding fluoridation schemes!)


Brian Jackson Comments. .......

Its interesting to note that Yesterdays Man, Burnham the origianl proposer and lobbyist for fluoridation, after Gordon Browns statement of alleged opposition to compulsory fluoridation himself came out against compulsion, presumably not because he really agreed with Brown but simply because he wished to appear to be behind brown in the run up to the election. This is typical of Burnham and many other career politicians.

Since the Blair intake the party has been stuffed with these lightweight chancers and opportunists who always turns up when there is an opportunity to be seen to be doing their masters work. For this reason if for no other, his decision to join the Labour Party leadership competition should be treated with the suspicion and derision which it truly deserves. If such people float to the top in the Labour Party, Labour will increasingly be seen for the disgraceful sham it now really is and there should be little surprise if it should fade to black in future electoral competitions as the electorate find them both unrepresentative and truly untrustworthy. Just as we have learned to distrust MPs over expenses claims we are also learning to be suspicious of their stated policies when their only real agenda is one of power seeking, just look at the uproar about the threat of electoral reform and coilition. It may be the MPs loss but it will certainly be democracy's gain.

Compulsory fluoridation, ID Cards, Databases etc are all merely symptoms of the paranoid Nanny State which does not trust the electorate and thinks they are elected to rule and dominate. They must now learn the real lesson of the last couple of years that their real task is to represent the electorate and carry out the wishes of the democratic majority without recourse to manipulaton of statistics, expenses or anything else. As a first major step in this direction, the New Coilition Government should take a firm hold of the Water Act 2003 and fluoridation and stick em both where the Sun dont shine.

Tuesday, 8 June 2010


born 8th June, 1949, ---- died 31st December, 1994

I first met Andrew when I was in London to see my partner who worked at Reuters, and remembered to visit Friends of the Earths old HQ, mainly to pick up some leaflets and find out more about starting a Local Group here in Pendle. Though clearly busy he and Chris Church found time to make a cup of tea and talk to me about what a Local Group entailed. He was at once interested in the environment and eco-systems of Pendle and the Pennines and became very excited when i told him how I first encountered an Otter at close range and sad when he admitted he had never seen one in the wild. I came home and immediately Started Pendle Friends of the Earth. More than anyone else at FoE, he taught and inspired me and eventually when i was causing heaps of problems for polluters and their political apologists, he even deputised me to do media work for him when things got hectic. I learned things about the natural world and myself i would have never guessed and to this day feel guided by his wisdom and determination. As long as Friends of the Earth in the UK, remembers him, it will not go far wrong. Thank you for inspiring me Andrew, I will not forget.

Wednesday, 26 May 2010



Home dialysis patients do NOT get extra pure water. Severn Trent guarantees continuity of supply but does not provide these
customers with de-fluoridated water. Customers with CKD (Chronic Kidney Disease) retain 70% of the fluoride in their bodies because the kidneys are less efficient than the kidneys of people who do not have kidney failure. In effect, this means that fluoride has a more
damaging effect on teeth and bones when ingested by a patient with
CKD because bio-accumulation is greater. The fluoride also
accumulates in the kidneys, making them less efficient. And what happened to home dialysis patients during July and August 2008 when they received 2ppm F due to dosing plant 'breakdown' at Dimmingsdale WTW. This issue has been referred to the five British Kidney Associations for an assessment of the danger presented by fluoridated water during dialysis. Their replies will be posted to this page.

Tuesday, 25 May 2010



The first of many announcements of cuts in Government spending start today. Amongst this first package will be the ending of a variety of Quangos. Lets hope therefore, that the Government quickly deal with the PCTs and SHAs ..... ASAP. These unelected and autocratic bodies replaced the locally appointed health committees and rapidly became a mechanism for virtually automating the process of imposing water fluoridation and other unwelcome changes in the NHS and in the process, spent millions on promotion of fluoridation and threaten to spend hundreds of millions more on implementation.

This dangerous, unscientific, undemocratic and ineffective process, and the cynical " consultation " process and Water Act 2003 which enabled it, embody some of the worst excesses of the Nanny State. It soils New Labours reputation as a democratic party and the UK as a whole as a democratic system. It has damaged its reputation for sound parliamentary management of the UKs finances and perhaps most sadly of all, New Labour has damaged its own baby, the NHS. The 2003 Act, enshrined in Law the SHAs power to both call for and to ignore the results of all public consultation creating a very dangerous precedent for legalising the dismissal of future consultations whether these be over NHS changes and closures but also closures of Post Offices and a wide variety of planning decisions. Consultation no longer means consultation in the minds of many people but rather an indication that the outcome of future public consultations and subsequent decisions are now foregone conclusion beyond the reach of the electorate.

Andy Burnham who helped push fluoridation through parliament and also the man who introduced such undemocratic and expensive items as the ID Cards and assorted Databases has now joined the race for the leadership of the Labour Party. Not only does he have a penchant for foisting upon us unwelcome control freakery but he cheerfully accepted a position as Health Minister in the Labour Government without bothering to resign from his BFS position. He only accepted the charges of conflict of interest when his activities were made public by campaigners and the media.

This is not the kind of behaviour one would expect from a Government Minister and certainly not, heaven forbid, a future Prime Minister although for Mr Burnham, its perfectly in character. It actually gets even worse, Burnham said only this week that it was important the Labour Party listened to the electorate. Burnham appears to suffer from severe attention deficit disorder and should immediately himself lobby to rectify the contradictions in the Water Act 2003. Even if he did, its unlikely that anyone would ever believe or trust him again.

The last couple of years has demonstrated the desperate need for electoral reform which Friends of the Earth across the UK, fully endorses. As FoEs Director Andy Atkins said recently... " Friends of the Earth is backing the Take Back Parliament campaign for electoral reform, as part of a coalition which believes that our 'winner takes all' first-past-the-post voting system is bust beyond repair, and is calling for a fairer system of representation where seats in Parliament are allocated according to the number of votes parties receive.

Andy Atkins has said: "The current electoral system means parties focus on winning over small numbers of voters rather than grasping the long-term challenges and opportunities our country faces – such as climate change and green jobs.

"First-past-the-post is biased towards the two big parties and doesn’t represent the real views of UK voters.

"We need a fairer way of voting to restore public confidence and ensure peoples’ concerns are properly represented by the politicians that win seats."

Friends of the Earth does not support any particular voting system, but believes the electoral system our country chooses should be decided by the public. Citizens should be involved in determining the options, with the final choice made in a referendum. Our voting system has to have public backing. There are important principles – MPs should be voted for individually so they can be held to account, for example – but this can be delivered by a number of electoral systems.

Friday, 14 May 2010


Only a couple of days ago i wrote what is below for the Friends of the Earth campaign to stop water fluoridation. Amongst other things i warned of the danger of the return of Andy Burnham MP. Now we learn that he has thrown his hat into the ring for the Labour Leadership contest.


With the departure of the Labour Party into the wastelands of opposition, its nice to think that they have taken their fluoride with them. Sadly the fluoridistas can be found in many places and there are many mugs of all political persuasions who can be seduced into wicked ways. Consequently we must remain vigilant, continue the work of opposition and spreading the word about the dangers of fluoride and fluoridaiton.

Having said this however, its important not to continually duplicate our work or reinvent the wheel by passing on the same old details. Its not just the fluoridistas with their "safe, effective and Optimal" twaddle that become victims of pedantry. The anti movement can easily fall victim to this in their zeal to publicise the truth. At such times, opinion and fact can easily become confused.

Now that the Labour Party are debating who will be the next leader one should be cautioned that besides the Millibands, and Ed Balls, our old " friend" Andy Burnham has already had a couple of mentions in interviews about leadership. Some of my fellow campaigners have reassured me that Burnham is strictly lightweight. I hope they are right and leave you to decide whether he is a fact or merely an opinion. . But he does have a way of popping up where he is least expected or wanted.

We must continue to target not just the Burnhams but also newly elected MPs and Councillors, especially those who have not expressed any opinion so far. We can save ourselves a lot of work now and reduce the size and complexity of our letters and press releases 30by concentrating on the most obvious and self evident aspects of water fluoridation and only reiterate the more detailed material if challenged or when more details are requested. Some of these key points are as follows.

Fluoride is toxic in all its forms to humans and animals and toxicity depends on both dosage and the time scale.

Fluoride is even worse when containing trace elements of other toxic chemical.

In the vast majority of cases, it has little or no value although it is good at killing rats and roaches.

A patient can only be prescribed medicine by a doctor on a one to one basis having obtained the individuals consent and considered his general health and medication.

A politician, elected or otherwise is not your GP and has no right whatsoever to prescribe this muck to you.

Since writing the above we have learned today, 14th May that Andy Burnham has of course changed his mind from his original statements about the Labour Leadership in which he seemed to rule himself out of the contest. Now he intends to stand as a potential leader. Its important that we dont underestimate this change.

Many of our number tend to not only dislike Burnham but actively dislike him . I am pleased to count myself amongs these dissenters. His performances always looked nervous to me and many consider him a lightweight.. one friend said he reminded him of a rabbit caught in car headlights. He is certainly always on hand and more than willing to help, when the Labour Government needed someone to do a dirty job. Its bad enough that he helped push the thoroughly nasty piece of legislation known as the Water Act 2003 through a virtually somnambulent House of Commons. This Bill was a nasty Piece of junk full of weasel words which actually empowered the SHAs to order the the Water Companies to add the toxic fluoride waste to our drinking water. And this even if every living soul in a community actively opposed it, including the Local Councils. Thus the act was a sneaky piece of work designed to hoodwink anyone unwise enough to assume that our MPs were intelligent and selfless people, concerned only with the betterment of their faithful electorate. Come the day, come the man as they say and of course Andy Burnham and his cronies at the British Fluoridation society were ever willing and able to do their damnedest to see the Bill went through.

Perhaps not surprisingly, Burnham was rewarded by advancement into the ranks of minister and became Secretary of State for Health.(sic) Naturally it was not until we pointed out that he was working for the Fluoridistas when he became a minister (and therefore batting for both sides with potential financial gain to the members of the press,) that he suddenly found it necessary to resign from the BFS due to the rather obvious conflict of interest. We know now that many MPs were tweaking their income via expenses but to do this when one is a Minister of the Crown does seem to be pushing the boat out a bit.

It was Burnham of course that also brought us such unwelcome and far from benign legislation as ID Cards and databases, yet another fine example of the decreasing importance of Democracy and Human Rights. Clearly there is little Burnham won't do to further his interests and now its payback time. After days of denying any interest in the leadership contest, today he changed his mind and was ready to take part. Possibly this was fueled by resentment that two of his babies, ID cards and the databases had gone down the tubes when the new Coalition Government abandoned them. Its also true that Fluoride has lost its champions in the Labour Government, Little wonder that he wants to get even. Now via the leadership he could gain control and at some time in the future lead a new Labour Government into an Andy Burnham style Police State, replete with ID Cards, Public Order laws Databases and all the other paraphernalia of the proto-fascist state.

People have short attention spans and easily forget the prior activities of Burnham so its important that we remind our friends and neighbours what a piece of work Burnham really is. I have said in my blog on several occasions that someone who spends all his time pushing fluoride onto an unwilling audience and environment is really not fit to be an MP and if we add to this the other activities and shenanigens of Burnham, he is definitely not fit to be a minister let alone the Prime Minister. I think we should all be told.

Sunday, 9 May 2010



Few people can have missed the fact that none of the main parties in the General election bothered to discus Environmental issues. The exception being the Lib Dems who even replied to our enquiries about fluoridation with a strong rejection of any such policy and its to be sincerely hoped that they will continue to raise this issue whatever roller coaster ride they are now committed to.. The Conservatives did at least reply to the first enquiry but although theorectically opposed to fluoridation they seemed unaware of the legislation already in place which enables the Government to bulldoze such a policy through any public opposition should they choose to. they did not reply to our request for clarification however.

The now discredited New Labour Project did not apparently feel the issue of fluoridation, important enough for them to bother themselves with and far to pre-occupied with everything else to even bother to reply to our second request at all. One must remember that the Labour Government never did have a policy or a mandate for fluoridation but passed it hurriedly into Law in 2003. This seems fairly typical of New Labour. They didnt have a mandate for ID Cards, or massive data bases and displayed a contempt for science and scientists, even those they had appointed themselves. Nor did they feel any restraint to stop them passing fluoridation legislation which all the other parties had given the cold shoulder. In short, the Labour Government have never had a mandate for water fluoridation, dont have a mandate now and were not elected to carry out such a policy. Now that they have little chance of forming a Government and the country is broke, the prospect of fluoridation is further away then ever and the best thing we as opponents can do is to continue to make it difficult and expensive for the pro-fluoride lobby to promote or advertise fluoridation let alone bring it into operation.

All the parties need to seriously discuss and tackle the problems of pollution, depletion of resources and generation of hazardous waste. by increasing efficiency, waste reduction, alternative energies (not including nuclear), and sustainable transport, and, no party that claims to be "greening" itself or its policies can be taken seriously if at the same time it is advocating the addition of highly toxic industrial waste to something as rare and vital as fresh drinking water. In that direction lies not just hipocrisy but actual madness.

If the results of the General Election are saying anyting positive and I for one believe they are, it is that the public now expect politicians of various persuasions to work together for the good of the country, not the party or the individual politicians themselves but for all of us. The parties now have a golden opportunity to introduce PR in some workable form so that massive majorities and political excess will never again allow governments like the New Labour regime (still clinging to power in desperation at the time of writing,) or the conservatives as in the time of Thatcher and Reagan, to blithely play fast and loose with the electorate and its wishes and introduce any old policy simply because they can.

Financially, times are going to get a lot tougher before they get better and in such a climate, any party advocating such a useless and expensive policy as fluoridation is unlikely to get very far and history will not deal kindkly with them. We also have the distinct possibility if the parties cannot agree to work in harmony, of yet another election next Spring or as some say, maybe even this Autumn so this is not the time to relax our pressure on political parties but probably the time to increase it.

Electoral Reform should at the very least make governments more representative and democratic and not make individuals who are tempted to vote for the smaller parties feel they are wasting their time or votes. This has frequently been the most common reason people give for not voting for the Lib Dems or the Greens. Every vote should count and all views and opinions should be heard and debated. Despite the strong rise in popularity for the Lib Dems this time round, when push came to shove the support did not translate into votes and the only reason anyone can suggest is that there was a last minute loss of confidence which made people bottle out.

Our Commisserations go to our campaigners in Liverpool who will probably not be pleased to note that in the local elections, the Lib Dems have lost control of Liverpool Council to the Labour group. Better news from Brighton however who have elected the countrys first Green Party Member of Parliament.. Our sitting MP here in Pendle has also been displaced. He always reckoned that fluoride was a good idea and claimed to have read of its valuable properties yet sadly was never ever able to recommend to me, any of this pro-fluoride nonesense literature or even engage in a debate about it. He has been replaced by a Conservative who told me several months ago when he first came canvassing that he did not like the idea of fluoride.

We dont care what Party anyone belongs to (within reason) because anyone can be green or at least greener, and anyone can oppose water pollution and fluoridatioN and learn to embrace the experience as a steep but necessary learning curve on the road to environmental enlightenment. The first step towards this goal is cross party co-operation and the psychic step even before this must be electoral reform. If the Tory and Labour Party do not embrace this philosophy, there is really not much hope for them. PR must be the default position and the Lib Dems really really must listen to their own members calling loudly for electoral reform. Without it there can be no further progress and the death knell for the Lib Dems will be heard rining across the land. They will never again get a chance like this, a chance which people have waited a couple of generations to realise. All that this really requires is a functioning brain and a conscience two qualities collectively usually known as common sense, a quality which has not been apparent in the recent regime which has seemed overly concerned the the minutae of peoples private lives whilst in other areas change for the sake of change was the order of the day combiuned with an apparent joy in throwing its weight about. Perhaps its time for politicians of all persuasions to truly remember that they are elected to serve, not to rule and heeding the words of Confusious might help them concentrate more clearly on the real issues and the ways and means. As the ancient Chinese Book of Changes says. "The Inferior Person acts through power, the Superior Person does not act this way!"

Brian Jackson.... Pendle FoE

Thursday, 6 May 2010


If by some miracle, Labour were to be re-elected with a big majority it would be business as usual. They would persist if they could with their mindless policy. They didn't get a mandate for fluoridation at the last two elections so its daft to think that they would stop now. Of course finances may intervene. If Labour get in with a small majority they will get stiff opposition from the Lib Dems who have only recently woken up to the threat from fluoridation. The Tories would probably join in two, they are good at U Turns despite the famous Thatcher quote and there will probably be the prospect of savage cuts to front line services despite what they have said.

If the Lib Dems hold the balance with a Hung Parliament they will probably be joined by the Greens who also strongly oppose fluoridation and even UKIP oppose it. So even now on polling day i have my fingers, eyes and legs crossed for a dead heat Whatever else should happen, we will probably have to continue fighting the Fluoride Campaign on all fronts until its finally banished and no long a part of policy. Otherwise, like bypass and runway proposals, they have a habit of suddenly re-appearing at some time in the future when they hope that we have all forgotten the dangers and uselessness of fluoride and fluoridation.

Thursday, 29 April 2010


Discussion of fluoridation by the main party leaders is well overdue mostly because A... The Labour party are afraid to get into a discussion about it because it would just mean further embarassment and B... the Conservatives dont even understand it or the laws that were forced through parliament by the Government in 2003. Consequently the NPWA, UKCAF, WMAF have all been working their fingers to the bone to alert the public to how they are being bamboozled.

Jonathan Eyre at Leeds FoE has been doing sterling work in recent weeks, not least when he covered for me on this Campaign when my computer was knocked out by a DOS attack. Currently he is following on from the good work initiated by Pauline Johnson also of Leeds and is writing to candidates across the city and asking their views on water fluoridation etc. the idea being that those who support or promote fluoride use whether in Water supplies, childrens school milk or even supermarkets selling fluoridated salt are not to be recommended as potential MPs, Councillors etc etc.

So far we know from replies that the Lib Dems object strongly to fluoridation along with the Green Party and UKIP. The Conservatives object in principle to mass medication although they dont seem too clear about the Water Act 2003 which gave power to the SHA/PCTs to compel water companies to add this muck. They will need to be watched. We wrote to them a couple of weeks back asking for clarification of their position but so far only silence.

Labour did not bother to reply at all and like most of the pro-fluoride lobby, they dont wish to get involved in arguments that they cannot scienticall justify. One might expect Labour candidates to be more gung ho about this policy but i notice that they are not even mentioning it in their manifesto as far as I am aware at the time of writing. but one would suppose they would start promoting it strongly if they are re-elected and there are a still a few pence left in the NHS piggy bank. Available cash of course does seem to be increasingly unlikely who ever should become the government and the promotion of fluoride will take a great deal more cash than its already absorbed. The unscrupulous and misleading rubbish circulated by the SHA's and PCTs has been exemplified by the sham consultation in Southampton where the Advertising Standards Authority upheld complaints brought by HAF and UKCAF and will be keeping a close eye on them in future.

Peter Poole in Brighton FoE however received a very promising rebuttal of any attempt to fluoridate his town. and this from their own Labour Candidate. Well done Brighton who were luckier than my fellow constituents here in Pendle. I was rather dismayed when I learned that our own sitting Labour MP actually thought water fluoridation was a good idea although on what ground i do not know. I have asked a few times about this but all he would ever say was that he had read the evidence. Clearly he must be privvy to evidence the rest of us do not have as he has never produced any.

At least the lack of funds promises to delay any further Labour Party expansion of fluoridation and a Hung or Balanced Parliament should also slow it all down even more or at least long enough for us to ring the death knell on the whole sorry, immoral, pointless and expensive waste that we have endured so long. Lets hope that this outbreak of common sense in Brighton is sustained, virulent and spreads like wildfire amongst Labour's ranks.

Its also very sad that in a land with an allegedly Free Press, we should have to wait for the Press in Iceland, Scandinavia and Russia to tell us the truth about the fluoride ash from the Icelandic volcano. So safe is this "Naturally Occuring" fluoride that all the farm animals have had to be taken indoors to live on last years dwindling hay and silage and water drawn from wells because surface water and snow melt is heavily contaminated. OK the levels of deposition here in the UK are not inches deep as they are in Parts of Iceland but that is no reason why we should have to endure a government willing to force this poison upon us when even its own specially convened committee who produced the York Report were completly ignored (as usual).

Fluoride is so safe in fact, that it softens the animals bones to the extent that the poor creatures cannot even stand up and of course all their teeth fall out. Its true to say that the dosage is the important thing but its a bit rich when such a defence emanates from the pro-fluoride lobby and its sycophants who have absolutely no idea how much fluoride we are already getting from our diet but are ever eager to give us more and more whether in drinking water, table salt or even childrens school milk.

As the election draws ever nearer, there is no better time to write, email or phone your local candidates and ask them for their position, and if you find writing letters to these people to be difficult or tedius, you can at least copy and if necessary, adapt the letters sent out by Jonathan and see what replies you get. You could also try sending copies to your local and regional Press and Media, you can reach a lot of people that way and a lot of people is what we need in a country with a voting system that ensures that the party with the lowest vote, still gets elected with a stonking great majority. No Wonder the power hungry candidates are so afraid of a Hung or Balanced Parliament, that would really spoil their fun and force them to enter into proper debate and take notice of expert opinion etc etc but i digress just a tad.

The message to get over to candidates the media and the electorate is actually quite a simple one Namely, that fluoride is a very nasty toxic substance whatever its source, it doesnt even protect peoples teeth but actually damages them and much else besides. And finally of course that any friend of fluoridation is no friend of ours or the environment. And, if MPs etc really want to find favour with the electorate, in the hopefully sustainable future, they will have to abandon Junk Science and the too cosy relationships with vested intrests and those not too particular about how they dispose of toxic waste. They can start by opening their minds a little and meditating on the idea of the precautionary principle. In the meantime hang in there everybody. Good Luck in all your Campaigning.

Brian Jackson

Friday, 23 April 2010



Southampton PCT has now been instructed by the Advertising Standards Authority to remove all references from its published material to one of the claims made during the water fluoridation consultation.

This follows official complaints made by three members of Hampshire Against Fluoridation and UK Councils Against Fluoridation about misleading claims in advertisements by the PCT to promote water fluoridation.

During the consultation, the PCT claimed in their advertisements that "By topping it up to one part of fluoride per one million parts of water, it would be possible to make a major difference to the teeth of adults and children locally, and for future generations"

consult with the CAP Copy Advice team on future claims relating to fluoride.

HAF Chairman Stephen Peckham said "We have always argued that the PCT and SHA made exaggerated claims about water fluoridation

The ASA’s scientific experts ruled that there was no good quality evidence to support this statement. Consequently, the PCT have agreed not to repeat these claims and have also agreed to that were not based on good evidence. The fact that the PCT have now had to promise the ASA not to repeat these statements about making a major difference to adults removes one of the key arguments made by the PCT and SHA for imposing the scheme."

During the consultation PCT staff repeatedly said that water fluoridation would help "everyone" and the SHA in its consultation document also stated that water fluoridation benefits adults - despite the lack of evidence to support such statements.

Stephen Peckham added "It is likely that many people were influenced by these claims during the consultation and may have given support to the scheme thinking it would benefit them. The truth is that there are no such benefits. The fact that the PCT willingly withdrew this claim must also raise serious questions about other statements they made to promote water fluoridation to local people."

Following the PCT’s assurance not to repeat this claim, the ASA have dropped this particular clause from their final ruling which is published today (21 April 2010).

HAF Chairman: Stephen Peckham.


Brian Jackson writes,

Full marks and congratulations go out to HAF and to UKCAF for challenging the PCT statements. It is also probably worth checking carefully any other statements from your local PCT or SHA for similar gaffs. and then referring them to the findings by the ASA. The menace of fluoride although not yet destroyed is now becoming increasingly remote.

Open Letter on the British Dental Association Manifesto from John Spottiswoode

Dear Madam,

I received the British Dental Association letter to Candidates for the General Election, forwarded from Green Party Headquarters. I need to make it clear to you that I cannot support your manifesto, particularly point 5 on the promotion of fluoride. In fact I very strongly oppose the use of fluoride as it is:

Ineffective (the supposed benefits are more than outweighed by the dis-benefits, even if the flawed and biased data for five year olds is to be accepted);

Unethical (it is wrong to force everyone to take 'medication' via their tap water);

Unsafe (there is a mass of peer-reviewed and published scientific data giving grave concerns over the health effects of fluoride

Uneconomic (the supposed savings from fewer fillings is more than outweighed by the costs of delivery and the 'externality' costs of dental fluorosis. Even assuming no more serious side effects for which there is a mass of evidence.)

The addition of fluoride to the water supply has been a massive local issue in Southampton and after a thoroughly disgraceful and biased Public Consultation the population were not fooled and have voted repeatedly AGAINST adding fluoride. Every serious candidate in the parliamentary elections in Southampton now opposes the introduction of fluoride against the wishes of the population.

The BDA need to look at the science with a properly open mind and realise that fluoride affects much more than the teeth. Introducing it to the water supply leads to systemic fluoride poisoning. The data on benefits to five year old children's teeth is biased as in fact that result comes from the systemic poisoning of our children, as those in fluoridated areas have their teeth erupt around a year later (more than 50 studies have shown this).

With teeth erupting later it means that the teeth have been exposed for less time, meaning fewer cavities. If you look at the difference later in life there is NO statistically significant difference in cavities (if you want to quote to me the recent meta-study please read it properly before misinterpreting the findings).

So I call on the BDA to do some proper scientific homework and stop promoting fluoride. I will certainly oppose water fluoridation at this election and wherever I can.

Yours faithfully,

John Spottiswoode, BSc, BA, PMP

Green Party Candidate for Southampton Itchen.


From: Peter Poole, Brighton at Brighton FoE

Following my mention of candidates' election surveys, I received the following note by mail this week. I hope it might be helpful in lobbying other Labour candidates:

Dear Mr. Poole,

Thank you for taking the trouble to return one of my survey forms the contents of which I always read and are very useful to me in gauging local people's views on a variety of issues.

Personally I do not believe that Fluoridation will be put forward as a possibility in Brighton and Hove and it is clear to me that this is an area where people do not want it. I would support local residents in their opposition, if it is put forward for this area. Yours sincerely,

Simon Burgess

Labour & Co-operative Party candidate

for Brighton & Kemptown & Peacehaven


Friends in Most High Places

It was very good to see that God apparently joined in the fight against fluoridation over the last week or so. He demonstrated that widespread fluoridation was not as advertised and dumped a lot of it across Europe using the Icelandic volcano which only a madmen would try to spell correctly let alone pronouce. Foreign Toxicologists, Epidemiologists and Vulcanologists lined up in the Foreign press and media (but of course not the British Media) to explain the real dangers from the "deadly" ash cloud containing very high dozes of fluoride. This rather took the gloss off the usual lies and misinformation put out by the fluoridistas about how "safe and effective" fluoride really is. Back into your swamp you guys unless you want a good slapping which i think the British electorate are going to give you anyway. And once again we give thanks parises to the Big Man or Woman, up there at for the help and Pelease don't let the other bigger Volcano off its lead. Many of us still remember just how bad it got last time that happened as you can see at this url ....