FLUORIDE, THE NEVER ENDING STORY

Monday, December 26, 2011

FLUORIDE, THE NEVER ENDING STORY

This week, an Official in France has warned against their breast implants. Poly Implant Prothese made by a defunct company in France is known to leak cancer-causing silicon, Health Ministry says. Dubai: The Ministry of Health yesterday advised doctors and hospitals against using silicon breast implants made by a French company which reportedly leak and cause cancer.

A senior official said the advice is a precautionary measure since the implants are not available in the UAE as they are not registered with the Ministry. But he said the advice is if they have been imported here "through other means". This is believed to refer to industrial silicon products not subject to the high quality standards normally required for medical products and thus avoiding meeting the high quality standards. This may remind followers of the pro fluoride shenanigins that the allegedly "safe and effective " monosodium fluoride, used in toothpastes and other dental products that this is very different from the toxic waste which supposedly helps prevent tooth decay when its added to drinking water supplies. this is a fine example of the dangers which can result from failure to maintain standards when corners are cut to save money. And this is a good way of allowing a misunderstanding to cloak deliberate misbehaviour and cover a multitude of sins and as a result allow the majority of people to continue to live in ignorance of the true state of affairs.

Precedent-Setting Fluoride Personal Injury Case Filed

EXCELLENT NEWS FROM GEORGE GLASSER

Precedent-Setting Fluoride Personal Injury Case Filed

Dental Fluorosis Complaint Is First In an Expected Flood of Public & Private Sector Claims

Ellijay, GA – Dental industry representatives have long fretted in their professional journals that fluoride providers could one day face legal actions for harm caused by ingested fluorides.The fear was that the citizens with a permanent staining and disfigurement of teeth called "dental fluorosis" would bring legal actions upon learning that fluorides they had swallowed had caused the damage to their teeth.

Now, after this year’s admission by federal officials that fluorides are causing increasing amounts of fluorosis, an era of fluoride personal injury and toxic tort litigation appears poised to begin with the recent filing of a precedent-setting case in the Federal District Court in Maryland.The legal action was filed against corporate giants Nestle USA Inc., Nestle Waters North America, Inc., and Gerber Products Company on behalf of a teenage girl with multiple permanent teeth disfigured by dental fluorosis.

The complaint notes that as a baby and young child, around 90% of the water the girl consumed was fluoridated bottled water sold by the Nestle defendants. The girl’s parents had purchased the water based on its advertised dental benefit for children.According to the lead attorney on the case, Washington D.C.-based Chris Nidel, the young woman’s family now faces significant costs for damage-covering dental veneers.The financial impact of the teen’s fluorosis is even greater over the long term. The veneers will need to be replaced four or five times, resulting in a lifetime potential cost of more than $100,000 in dental expenses.

Attorney Nidel points to a photo of his client’s teeth. "In this case, a photo really is worth a thousand words," he states. "The water providers had a responsibility to warn their customers about fluorosis, but they did not."He says the girl’s mother told him, "I thought I was doing the right thing for my daughter when she was a child, by giving her bottled water that contained fluoride. Her teeth have now been permanently damaged by fluorosis. She is extremely self-conscious about her smile. Her friends ask her about her teeth. And now we’re faced with extensive cosmetic restorations. It’s not simple, and it’s expensive."

Seeking compensation for the teen’s teeth damage and its impacts, the complaint lists counts of strict liability, negligence, breach of implied warranty, fraud, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.Public health professional Daniel G. Stockin of The Lillie Center Inc., a firm working to end water fluoridation, says, "I believe water utilities will note that the bottled waters that are the focus of this complaint contained around 0.8 parts per million of fluoride, which is right near the amount that public utilities add to their water. We know that millions of people have dental fluorosis, and that minority populations are disproportionately harmed by it. People are not being openly told what fluorosis really is or how it can impact their lives. I think it will be very interesting to see the revelations that come out now, as fluoride product sellers and fluoridated water endorsers begin to be placed under oath in all sorts of fluoride-related legal actions."

Stockin adds, "There were also warnings in dental and other publications that fluorides could potentially cause bone disorders, kidney harm, and thyroid impairment. I believe we’ll quickly see fluoride lawsuits grow way beyond fluorosis cases."Attorney Nidel says, "We’re at the beginning of what looks to be an absolutely enormous wave of new fluoride litigation. There are so many harmed teenagers with fluorosis. We have the government’s own data to prove that. Potentially millions with fluorosis will want to talk to an attorney, and believe me, plaintiff attorneys and the plaintiffs’ bar are beginning to educate themselves about all this."

"The National Research Council’s 2006 fluoride report raised concerns about possible harm that goes well beyond dental fluorosis," he continues. "It appears that millions of kidney patients and diabetics were not told about their increased susceptibility to harm from fluorides by their water providers or healthcare professionals," he says.

Reference Links / Sources:

* Full text of filed complaint and client teeth photo: see two links at: http://www.nidellaw.com/blog/?p=66

* Example of dental journal discussing potential litigation related to fluorosis: "It is only a matter of time until a case is brought that gets public attention. The risk is that noticeable fluorosis will be perceived by the public as a toxic consequence of fluoride ingestion – which, arguably, it is (57) – and there will be a reaction against all uses of fluoride…" Riordan, PJ: Fluoride supplements for young children: an analysis of the literature focusing on benefits and risks. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1999; 27: p.81.

* Other photos of dental fluorosis: www.SpotsOnMyTeeth.com ; www.fluoridealert.org

* CDC’s data showing minorities with disproportionate amounts of dental fluorosis (see table 23): http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss5403.pdf

* National Research Council report on fluorides: see "Susceptible Subpopulations section" pp. 350-51:

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11571&page=350 & "sensitive populations" info, p. 30: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11571&page=30

* EPA and HHS press release on lowered fluoride level in water in response to increase in dental fluorosis: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/20110107a.html

NEWS RELEASE CONTACT:

Daniel G. Stockin, MPH The Lillie Center, Inc. P.O. Box 839 Ellijay GA 30540

Ph: 706-669-0786 email: stockin2@yahoo.com web: http://www.SpotsOnMyTeeth.com

==================================================================

Hi Brian, Thanks for a wonderful newsletter, Hope now that this is truly the beginning of the end for that TOXIC MUCK, I dont even like saying the name, in this and all other countries in the world, Thanks again for all your and other peoples efforts to make our wishes come true,

Frank, Wigan.

It may not yet be the end but yes the beginning of the end is mofe likely. and we must keep an eye on smaller and third world countries. Like Tobacco, those who market fluoride will extend their market to any nation gullible enought to spread their lies.

Brian Jackson

 

Flouridation axe pleases Greens
The Bolton News
"People can use fluoride toothpaste if they want. The real problem is a lack of NHS dentists." The aim of fluoridation is to strengthen people's teeth and its implementation in the North West would have cost £200 million over six years. ...
See all stories on this topic »

D. Mail 17.9.11 "PAEDIOPHILE’S PARK BAN LIFTED BY JUDGE BECAUSE OF HIS HUMAN RIGHT TO KEEP FIT" (By j.narain@dailymail.co.uk)

A convicted paediophile banned from a local park because of a horrific attack on a boy, has been allowed back to the park because Judge Woolman said he has a human right to keep fit. Williams of Carlisle had appealed at Hyndburn Magistrates’ Court against the ban, claiming he had health problems & needed regular exercise. Professionals said "…They mention his human rights, but the welfare of children is paramount in English law, so we fail to understand how the court could overwrite the Children Act 1989.."

(My comment: it’s interesting that the Children Act can be overridden because of his human right to exercise. Could the fluoridation act be overridden because of a person’s human right not to have their health damaged by fluoride? Maybe this case could be used as a precident.

Ann

　

DELAYED IS GOOD BUT ONLY CANCELLED WILL SUFFICE!

North West Fluoride Plans Delayed
Cosmetic Dentistry Guide (press release)
NHS North West, which is due to be abolished in the near future, assessed the cost of a fluoridation scheme between 2008 and 2009 and came to the conclusion that the scheme would be too expensive. There were also concerns about the management of the ...
See all stories on this topic »

North West health authority pours cold water on fluoride scheme
Lancashire Telegraph
By Neil Docking » Reporter NHS North West said it was too expensive and time-consuming to pursue a programme of fluoridation or consultation exercise. The strategic health authority assessed the feasibility and affordability of a regional scheme from ...
See all stories on this topic »

　

Southampton City Council votes against water fluoridation ...
The decision as to whether to fluoridate water in Southampton is up to the South Central Strategic Health Authority who decided in a unanimous vote that "the ...
en.wikinews.org/.../Southampton_City_Council_votes_against...

BUSINESS AS USUAL FOR ANDREW LANSLEY

the tap: Fluoridation To Be Ordained By Andrew Lansley Secretary ...
As soon as this new Bill comes into effect, it will pass the decision of 'water fluoridation' to local authorities, such as county or district councils, since they have to ...
the-tap.blogspot.com/.../fluoridation-to-be-ordained-by-andre...

MANY DENTISTS STILL LIVING IN THE PAST == RACHELS STORY

NO FLUORIDATION IN THE NORTH WEST AND MAYBE ALSO SOUTHAMPTON

FLUORIDE CAMPAIGN

NEWSLETTER

14th SEPTEMBER, 2011

UNITED KINGDOM

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH welcomes and joins the call to cancel fluoridation for the Southampton and Hampshire areas following on from the admission that fluoridating water in Manchester and the North West is now deemed to be too expensive.


Of course the DoH has not mentioned that its also illegal, and contravenes both medical ethics and human rights legislation. (civil servants and Government Ministers are not Doctors and cannot legally prescribe to individuals let alone entire populations)


Friends of the Earth and associated groups call for the total abandonment of all existing fluoride schemes in the UK, most notably, Birmingham, Coventry, West Cumbria, Newcastle , North Tyneside and Gateshead as well as pockets of fluoridated water in several other areas caused by the eccentricities of the pipe network. This cessation should also include any proposed schemes such as Yorkshire and Teeside. We believe that there is no place or reason for fluoride in the food chain and we need tighter controls over emissions of fluoride from industrial processes. Furthermore we may also need adjustment downards of levels of naturally occuring (but still dangerous fluoride in areas already containing levels of fluoride in excess of the latest US recommendation of 0.7 parts per million.
Civil Servants at the Department of Health (sic) should be reprimanded for promoting fluoride and leading Politicians of all parties by the nose.

At a time when the entire country, not just the NHS is in serious financial difficulties, utilising £400K of the taxpayers money to fight the taxpayers of Southampton who called for a Judicial Review which they would probably never have won without this disgraceful injection of cash.from the public purse. Its little wonder that the NHS is in such financial straightts and badly in need of change when such feeble, undemocratic and wasteful procedures are persued with impunity. Shame on the civil servants at the DOH, and we call on MPs currently debating the Health and Social Care bill to carefully scrutinize the way NHS money is being squandered in order to force contaminated water down the publics throats despite overwhelming and vociferous public opposition.
If individuals really do wish to have fluoride, let doctors and dentists, recommend topical rather than systemic applications of fluoride via toothpaste rather than a pointless and dangerous and unmeasured indiscriminate dosing of the entire population and the natural environment.


Some civil servants have clearly been at it too long and I Suggest they are well passed their Sell-By date.  Parliament should take notice of the way that their laws have been unfairly and undemocratically influenced by these grey nonentities amongst the mandarins. MPs and Minister must reclaim democracy on behalf of the people.  After all, this is what they were elected for. Mandarins are not elected at all.   Nuff Said?

EXCELLENT CAMPAIGNING IN AUSTIN TEXAS -- VIDEO

HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE BILL

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH, FLUORIDE NEWSLETTER, 4TH SEPTEMBER 2011Sunday

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH, FLUORIDE NEWSLETTER, 4TH SEPTEMBER 2011Sunday, 4
　
A New Sense of Urgency .... HEALTH AND SOCIAL CARE BILL
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE NEXT WEEK. After very many years of active and detailed campaigning against fluoridation, there have recently been some slight signs of commonsense and improvement particularly in the USA where many towns are rejecting and pulling out of fluoridating their water supplies. In addition the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) has reduced the ・recommended・ maximum levels for fluoride in water supplies. I would go much further than this and agree with Dr Griffin Cole, a dentist in Austin, Texas, who said in response, "I still don't think it's enough, honestly, I don't think there should be fluoride in the water at all. As a veteran FoE water and toxics campaigner, I strongly believe that fluoride in all its forms and combinations, should be kept well clear of the food chain for humans and animals. I make little distinction between the so-called "naturally occuring" fluoride or the even worse industrial waste so beloved of water companies. Fluoride is in our food and drink both accidentally and on purpose and is now coming at us from all directions such as water, milk, salt, processed foods etc. Indeed if this muck can eat its way through glass should not its most avid proponents amongst private dentists and the usual suspects at the Department of Health spend some quality time on the couch of Mr Sigmund Freud?"
The latest UK Government fluoride proposals are rapidly becoming what could be called a 'Hard Hat' area. The USA spear-headed and promoted fluoride in the USA and across the world and the UK Gov., as usual, has eagerly supported the idea in the UK. Some great ideas have come from the USA, but, sadly this is not one of them. Perhaps it's now well past the time for the UK Gov. to call a complete halt to all future plans to fluoridate in the UK and call a halt to existing schemes in the West Midlands and the North East. There is no point in arguing the toss with them over the hotly disputed science and medical qualities and values. Even a cursory look at fluoride leads us to rule it out as a useful medical product and bearing in mind the Precautionary Principle, take much greater care with all other industrial and technological uses of this stuff. We could go on rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic for ever-and-a-day but this is a total waste of time. Governments don't actually make many useful decisions: they are usually made by high-ranking and apparently quasi-immortal civil servants who are not democratically elected but who are merely appointed, and once appointed seem to become eternal. Even Margaret Thatcher occasionally said something sensible and, in particular, once remarked that ・advisers advise and ministers decide.・ Many civil servants, however, seem to think that they should make the decisions as well. In a situation where MPs and Ministers think they are elected to rule rather than to serve by representing the views and opinions of the electorate, it's about time that Civil Servants in the Department of Health realised that they dwell much further down the food chain.
Clearly they need to be made to remember that the unelected members of our government possess even fewer privileges than their political bosses and can be called on to give testimony to 'M'learned friends'. It is only then that proper expert scientific and medical opinion can be placed before the Courts so that a well-informed verdict and policy can be determined. The tiny number of scientifically trained MPs can be counted on one or two fingers so it's not surprising that our scientific discourse has fallen on deaf ears. The fact is they just don't understand the importance or significance of this evidence, and in some cases, may simply not even care. The Department of Health's civil servants listen only to their favourite and trusted lobbyists and advise Ministers accordingly. No wonder the NHS is such an unhappy place nowadays;
Dame Sally Davies, the Government's leading advisor, has just now criticised medical staff in the NHS, calling them "selfish・ because many of the staff had not taken her advice to get the swine flu jab. Perhaps this is because they, like many others, had little faith in the judgement of the said Dame and probably like me, they would rather listen to the advice of medical professionals whom they could trust rather than to the advice of politicians and their appointees, no matter how elevated they may be. When the recommended medication may be full of fluoride or mercury, perhaps this is not so surprising.
The time for legal challenges may now be drawing closer. It has dawned on many that despite the scientific and medical tennis and attempts to reinvent the wheel over facts and figures of fluoride and its effects, the only figures that ultimately matter are the number of votes received for the various MPs and their parties. This is just one of the reasons why many of us are eager for voting reform and voted for change in the referendum which the main political parties spent so much time and money on destroying. We need a far more representative lower house which is truly representative and not stuffed with the usual 'yes men' and cronies.
Now you can read underneath just how dishonest and clannish the politicians really are. Before the last election, as many of you know, MPs and leaders of all the parties were lobbied and polled by FoE Members, This included Clegg, Cameron, Brown et al. They assured us that there would be no compulsion over fluoride against public wishes. Suddenly we learn that once the new Health and Social Care Bill becomes an Act after a hurried debate next week, the parachuting in of fluoride henchmen from the PCTs and SHAs will ensure that unwilling anti-fluoridation Councils will toe the Department of Health line. The most galling part of this is that the cost of this exercise in the further erosion of democracy will be paid for by all of us, via our Council Tax. As this tax cannot be increased, if Cameron is to be believed, some other Council services will have to be axed to pay for it. The cost of this is believed to run into hundreds of millions of pounds. In short, as per usual, Undemocratic, Unethical, Unacceptable and Illegal. No wonder, as one comic remarked, ... "nappies and politicians should be changed frequently.".... and for the same reason.
Brian Jackson
Pendle Friends of the Earth
Fluoride Campaign
01282 860985PS.
Dont give up act now. Phone your MP at his constituency office or buy calling the House of Commons on 0207-219 3000. Ask the switchboard for your MPs office and either talk to him or her or their assistant and if they are not in the office, Leave a message on their ansafone with your number and contact details and ask them to call you back. Remember they do work for you if you force their hand.
You can also call your local councillors especially those on the exec commitee or scrutiny committee, Explain the urgency of recent developments and remind them that they are likly to be sidelined by the Government and have to further cut services to make up even greater Council Tax cuts. You can also remind your councillors that unlike water companies, they may not be insurable against damage or accidents caused by fluoridation. You should also advise your local press and media about the local implications of the New Government Home and Social Care Bill.
Finally there is a guide to making more effective Press Releases for your group or organisation. The template shown is of course for Friends of the Earth but the tips shown apply to anyone trying to make an easy to read Press Release. You can find the information at this link.... http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/how_tos/cyw_64_press_release.pdf
Brian Jackson
Pendle FoE
01282-860985
FROM JONATHAN EYRE
LEEDS FRIENDS OF THE EARTH

Dear Greg Mulholland MP

Greg, thank you for the letter you wrote to Yorkshire Water on my behalf regarding Fluoridation of the regions drinking water.

Things have therefore gone up a notch, and NEXT week Parliament will be debating a bill 'The Health and Social Care Bill' which effectively change everything, putting a Government hack in all Councils to secure fluoridation of all our drinking water with the demise of the Strategic Health Authorities!

Doug Cross of United Kingdom Councils Against Fluoridation (UKCAF) http://www.ukcaf.org/index.html has worked very hard reading the 460 pages of the Bill before working on his professional assessment which is attached to this email.

I advise you and your team to read this attachment through as a matter of urgency. The apparent changes to how Fluoridation will be rolled out is worrying and of grave importance.

As I am sure you are aware, any medical treatment should only be given with consent, should be appropriate for the individual and for their underlying health condition and should have a set limit on the dosage they receive. Dilution of Fluoride compounds into drinking water allow individuals to receive varying amounts of the toxic substance depending on the amount of water they drink, and their size and age and with NO reference to their underlying health condition!

Fluoridation is an attack on all Individuals rights and their health status!

I would hope that you will oppose the sections in the Health Bill next week that relate to Fluoridation of the Public water supply, and perhaps could also ask some questions about this to the Government Ministers, such as
・E 'why is Fluoridation put into this Health bill, it seems out of place here being the only medical intervention covered in considerable operational detail'
・E 'will the Government extend the protection of prosecution extended to all water companies (in the 2003 Water Act) to all Council's, as this would seem to place Councillors under legal threat of encouraging the medication of the public with a non-registered medical drug (Fluoride) and against their will'
・E 'what cost is estimated for the forced medication of public drinking water by the Government, and will the Government meet this cost fully to all Councils?'
・E 'will local authorises be entitled to increase council tax to pay for this medication of the public practise above any Government set tax threshold, if not how will authorities afford to pay for this?
　
　
FROM LIZ VAUGHAN AT UKCAF
URGENT
The issue of water fluoridation included in the 'Health and Social Care Bill due to be debated in the House of Commons on Sept 6th and 7th as soon as Parliament returns hence the urgent nature of this email.We have studied this Bill very carefully and its implications for councils. Please circulate to your councillors and officials as soon as possible. 1 We are advising councils to seek a Judical Review about the incompatibility of fluoridation provisions in the Bill with European and English law on medicines, food and protection of human rights
2. The Bill will force councils to employ the NHS Directors of public health, who are all known advocates of fluoridation. These will be required to force councils to implement Government public health policies regardless of public opposition.
3. Fluoridation always causes substantial damage to children. Councils will be required to repay the cost of fluoridation projects to the Secretary of State from their own income, meaning that the public will be paying for the privilage of poisoning their children
4. We have checked with the head of local government insurance at Zurich and this cannot come under normal council insurance and would be seen as an uninsursable 'foreseeable risk'.
. .
We have contacted the LGA to ensure that councils are protected from excessive or unlawful government policies they need to consider urgently the implications of this Bill both for member councils and the wider public for whom they are responsible.
We have had a long and successful experience of working with councils on fluoridation issues What we think people should do besides protest to their local councillor and make sure their MP is very aware of their opinions and feelings before Tuesday Sept 6th.is to also ensure their local media are aware that this is happening next week. Doug has worked very hard reading the 460 pages of the Bill before working on his professional assessment which is attached to this email.
If you have a website please put all of this on your site so everyone is aware that the fluoride pushers and their trade union the BDA have managed to convince Government of the need to fluoridate.
Yours sincerely,
Cllr Liz Vaughan UKCAF.
　
URGENT
The issue of water fluoridation included in the 'Health and Social Care Bill due to be debated in the House of Commons on Sept 6th and 7th as soon as Parliament returns hence the urgent nature of this email.We have studied this Bill very carefully and its implications for councils. Please circulate to your councillors and officials as soon as possible.
1 We are advising councils to seek a Judical Review about the incompatibility of fluoridation provisions in the Bill with European and English law on medicines, food and protection of human rights
2. The Bill will force councils to employ the NHS Directors of public health, who are all known advocates of fluoridation. These will be required to force councils to implement Government public health policies regardless of public opposition.
3. Fluoridation always causes substantial damage to children. Councils will be required to repay the cost of fluoridation projects to the Secretary of State from their own income, meaning that the public will be paying for the privilage of poisoning their children
4. We have checked with the head of local government insurance at Zurich and this cannot come under normal council insurance and would be seen as an uninsursable 'foreseeable risk'.
. .
We have contacted the LGA to ensure that councils are protected from excessive or unlawful government policies they need to consider urgently the implications of this Bill both for member councils and the wider public for whom they are responsible.
We have had a long and successful experience of working with councils on fluoridation issues What we think people should do besides protest to their local councillor and make sure their MP is very aware of their opinions and feelings before Tuesday Sept 6th.is to also ensure their local media are aware that this is happening next week. Doug has worked very hard reading the 460 pages of the Bill before working on his professional assessment which is attached to this email.
If you have a website please put all of this on your site so everyone is aware that the fluoride pushers and their trade union the BDA have managed to convince Government of the need to fluoridate.
Yours sincerely,
Cllr Liz Vaughan UKCAF. 　
From:
"Joy Warren" <wmaf@live.co.uk>Add sender to Contacts
To:
"Brian Jackson" <brianjackson77@btinternet.com>

A really useful database - right-hand pane
http://www.epa.gov/ncct/toxcast/files/summit/48P%20Mundy%20TDAS.pdfJoy
FOI REQUEST FROM JOY WARREN
1a. Is the DH aware of the database maintained by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the US: HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/ncct/toxcast/files/summit/48P%20Mundy%20TDAS.pdf" http://www.epa.gov/ncct/toxcast/files/summit/48P%20Mundy%20TDAS.pdf
Fluoride is listed as a developmental neurotoxin in the middle column of the right-hand-pane.
1b. What steps have been taken to add fluoride to similar databases in the UK?
1c. If no steps have been taken, why not?
2a. Is the DH aware of the ARCPOH statistics received by the Australian Government relating to dental decay in Australia collected during 2003 which shows that fluoridated Australian children experience a delay in tooth eruption due to the presence of fluoride in their water and food? Fluoride-induced delayed eruption of teeth has been supported by research by Komarek et al. in 2005. (A Bayesian analysis of multivariate doubly-interval-censored dental data. Biostatistics (2005), 6, 1, pp. 145–155 doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/kxh023 )
2b. If the DH is aware of these statistics and Komarek’s research, please explain why the DH has chosen to ignore the serious implications of fluoride causing a delay in children’s dental development.
2c. Since fluoride is a developmental neurotoxin, please also explain why the DH has failed to realise that delayed eruption of teeth also means disruption to other physical development.
3a. Is the DH aware that the Centers for Disease Control in the US has recommended that the concentration of fluoride in public drinking water be reduced to 0.7ppm?
3b. If the DH is aware, what steps has the DH taken to follow suite?
3c. If no steps have been taken, why not?
4a. Is the DH aware that the reason why the CDC has recommended a reduction in concentration of fluoride is because more than 40% of people born after water fluoridation began in the US have dental fluorosis. Instead of regarding dental fluorosis as being a cosmetic issue, the US Government Department has noted that dental fluorosis is undesirable and has accordingly recommended a reduction in the concentration of fluoride. Likewise, The Republic of Ireland and Hong Kong have reduced the concentration of fluoride.
4b. Why has the DH not told the Secretary of State that a downward variation in fluoride concentration is advisable?
5a. Why has the DH refused to acknowledge research (mainly from China) which points to a reduction in intelligence in communities where drinking water contains natural calcium fluoride? (Note that the Newcastle University research (Maguire et al (2005). Bioavailability of Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Human Experimental Study, J. Dent RES 2005:84; 989) showed that both artificial and natural fluoride are equally bio-available.)
5b. Even if the DH dismisses the validity of Chinese research, please explain why the DH has failed to apply the Precautionary Principle.
6a. Fluoride crosses the placenta so that the unborn child is poisoned with a developmental neurotoxin. Please explain why the DH recommends that pregnant women refrain from alcohol and cigarettes prior to and during pregnancy but has failed to advise them to refrain from drinking and eating fluoride.
I look forward to receiving a full reply and hope that you will observe the statutory 20 working days condition.

UK Against Fluoridation: Southampton fluoride meeting with Prof ...
Southampton fluoride meeting with Prof Connett. A public talk and question time with one of the world's leading experts on fluoridation Professor Paul Connett ...
ukagainstfluoride.blogspot.com/.../southampton-fluoride-meet...

Water Fluoridation by the back door -

Council Tax to pay for poisoned water

Local Authorities in England are about to be dragged into a minefield of public anger and litigation over the controversial practice of water fluoridation. Environmental analyst Doug Cross is warning Councils that in the coming months they will be dragged into a storm of protests from the public that will dwarf all past battles over the dental profession’s irrational obsession with fluoride.

The dental profession has long wanted to force Councils to support this discredited practice, that a recent European Commission Scientific Committee has damned as 'A crude measure of systemic fluoride treatment . . . without a detectable threshold for dental and bone damage’.

If the Health and Social Care Bill due to be nodded through Parliament next week is approved, then promoters of fluoridation will at last have convinced a gullible Parliament to force Councils to pander to their senseless fixation. Dentists claim to this is a legitimate public health trade-off, but Doug argues that there can be no justification for compulsory medication that damages many children for life, on the spurious pretext that it might reduce tooth decay in a few.

Regardless of the public’s overwhelming rejection of fluoridation, the government appears determined to force this bill through Parliament, obliging Councils to take responsibility for this deeply resented practice. Cross is calling for Councils to collaborate on mounting a Judicial Review of all fluoridation legislation in the UK. He claims that it is incompatible with both EC and the English legislation on medicinal products and food. He says that the disfiguration caused by dental fluorosis amounts to degrading treatment, and is in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

If he is right, then a Court decision supporting his challenge here in the UK would have enormous influence in the world-wide movement to abolish what he describes as ‘State-sponsored child abuse’.

His call to Councils for action can be downloaded from

http://www.xproexperts.co.uk/expertarticles/3422-1314877370_Fluoridation,%20Health%20and%20Social%20Care%20Bill,%20and%20Councils..pdf

Doug has written widely on the incompatibilities of fluoridation law with the principles of medicinal law, medical ethics and human rights, and his analyses are available from

http://www.ukcaf.org/commentaries.html

Note for Editors

Doug is a Director of UK Councils Against Fluoridation Ltd, a not-for-profit company providing information and advice to Local Authorities in the UK, Australia, Canada, and the USA. UKCAF was founded by his partner, professional artist Liz Vaughan, in 1988, and has been a leading influence with councils in preventing the imposition of fluoridation in the North West and Northern Ireland. At present around 74 Councils are affiliated to UKCAF.

Doug has a long record of international successes as a senior Environmental Analyst and Mission Leader for International Development Agencies and Consultancy consortia. For the past ten years he has been a member of the Lowermoor Sub-Group of the government’s Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment (CoT), investigating the effects of the 1988 Camelford Poisoning, in which the water supply to 20,000 people in North Cornwall was contaminated by aluminium sulphate. He has campaigned for the recognition of the need for appropriate medical monitoring of the North Cornwall community for the past 23 years. He was elected as a Fellow of the Society of Biology in December 2009.

Doug Cross

Address for contact - Croft End, Lowick Bridge, Ulverston, Cumbria LA12 8EE

Tel 01229 885420

Email doug@ukcaf.org

THE FIRST 1,000 DAYS

The First Thousand Days was the title of an excellent BBC Radio Four programme which looked at the effects of the environment and Diet on infants and their development.  The seeds of illnesses are apparently planted and nurtured both in the womb and during infant development which may not show for many decades.

Dr Mark Porter talks

ed to the scientists who now believe that this 'lifecourse' approach, will find the cause of many adult diseases. "Chronic disease is going up in leaps and bounds, this is not a genetic change" says Kent Thornburg, Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine in Oregon, America "it's because the environment in the womb is getting worse. We know now that the first 1000 days of life is the most sensitive period for determining lifelong health'.  Our diet and environment are undoubtedly increasingly full of crap and toxins and this toxic cocktail of influences.

Fluoride is undoubtedly one of the most toxic of chemicals and just as breast milk appears to filter out a great deal of fluoride, then the placenta should also be shielded from as much fluoride as it can.  The effects of such chemicals may not show fully untill the adults 50s or 60s.  Of course if an adult leads a moderate lifestyle he or she may still live to a good age but continuing to take dangerous chemicals into the adult system can only do yet more damage. Of course if adults choose to take fluoride, that is their business but infants and young people are not given such choices or properly educated about the real dangers of fluoride. It seems like only common sense to me that expectent mothers and fathers,  and infants should steer well clear of these poisons.  Fluorides, whether naturally occuring or manufactured as the result of various industrial processes are both poisonous and they should have no place in the human diet, rather than wasting money on this dangerous. unethical and  illegal  poisoning of people adding fluorides to people should be replaced by spending money on removing such chemicals at source.

YOU WANT DEMOCRACY ? THEN VOTE YES FOR AV AND PR

YOU WANT DEMOCRACY ? THEN VOTE YES FOR AV AND PR

The "NO" vote campaign is yet another disgraceful attempt by the two main parties and their paymasters, to cling on to power. We really need Proportional Representation and though not perfect a YES vote to AV is a major step in the right direction. No simply allows MPs and political manipulators to carry on with business as usual, ie. bad lawmaking and poor debate. together with the usual fiddles and scams and cronyism. . Yes to AV on May 5th and full PR at the next General Election will not endanger democracy, it will strengthen it. We cannot lecture and dictate to other countries when we dont even have democracy here. Jonathan Eyre on his facebook page also makes it pretty clear.

"AV, it's just too difficult to understand, therefore vote No?!!, yeah, like don't worry your poor little heads about the Environment, industrial pollution and its chemistry and how it affects animals, aquatic life, humans; like the Economy,... like it's best left to those who know and make profit from you and drop you in the shit; like the NHS, its soo complicated that its too hard for us to defend?

We are living in a time of 3 debts, the Economy, The Environment, and Fossil fuels. Vote yes to Britain’s natural progressive majority, Vote Yes for AV "

THE FLUORIDE FAIRGROUND

Roll up, roll up, for the Fabulous Fluoride Fairground! Once you visit this crazy carnival, and allow Health Minister Andrew Lansley's Departmental roustabouts to put you on the fluoride merry-go-round, you won't be able to get off! So here's the inside story on the crazy experimental fluoridation circus they want your kids to join.

Suppose fluoridation starts in Southampton by the end of this year. If http://www.ukcaf.org/your kids are under around seven years old, up to half of them will probably get fluorosis by the time they are about twelve. But you won't know if they are going to get fluoride-damaged teeth for at least another five years, and more if they're younger. The fluoride pushers' sickening 'experiment' won't come up with any results for at least that long, but when the results do start to roll in, it'll be too late for you to pull your kids out.

Even if the Health Police do decide to stop fluoridating when they see the results (and how likely is that?), your new-born infants could develop fluorosis as teenagers until at least 2030, as yet more of your little 'guinea pigs' are fed into the mindless research machine until it eventually grinds to a halt.

Of course, the Health Police will deny that it's all down to them, and will want yet more 'research', until they at last forced to admit that, once again, there really is a problem with fluoridation, and finally shut down their obscene experiment. But that will still take another ten years - after all, reseach grants could be at risk, and we can't have that, can we?

Once you get on the fluorosis merry-go-round, you can't get off it until it stops, and that won't be until 2030 at the earliest. And if you get dragged onto the lethal bone cancer roundabout spinning alongside in this Alice-in-Wonderland fantasy fairground of excruciating experimentation, that one doesn't stop until 2040! More realistically, because this is a rare disease, the lunatics will demand even more 'research' before they're convinced. So Southampton's boy children will not be certain that they're finally clear until around the middle of the century.

Once you visit the Fluoridation Fairground, you're locked in. You'll be whirled around for at least twenty years, waiting for your kids' teeth to go brown. But if you've got young boys in the family, you'll be put onto the bone cancer one as well, and that will spin you along on a 40 year ride!

Is that what they really mean when they claim that fluoridation is 'cost-effective'? Just walk through the gate and you can stay as long as you like!

Doug Cross

DONT GIVE FLUORIDE TO YOUR DOG, GIVE IT TO YOUR CHILDREN.

Whilst watching Crufts Dog Show on More Four TV to catch up on my friend who is entering a couple of dogs there, I was heartened to hear a training and welfare expert, whilst demonstrating the cleaning of dogs teeth. Perhaps not unsurprisingly, say that it was essential to use only toothpaste containing no fluoride. So here we have something not fit for a dog which is nevertheless highly recommended by brain donees in the BDA et al for your children. How can numptys like this hold such positions of authority. I think i would rather take advice on health from a couple of stand up comedians. Now before you say, lots of dentists and so-called health pros, clearly are stand up comedians I can only counter by saying they are sadly far from the best of humourists. Perhaps we should go to Frankie Boyle for a check up. I think we should be told.

NEW VIDEO -- THE FLUORIDE DECEPTION

HOW DO YOU CAMPAIGN IN A BORED AND BOURGOISE TOWN ?

It doesn't get any easier campaigning on fluoride. There was a time when friends of the earth could call up a local paper or radio station, outline a pollution issue or a new campaign and in no time at all there was an article in the paper or you were on the phone doing a down the line interview or even doing it live. Now there are fewer and fewer investigative journalists and those who still remain have more than enough to do.

BBC Local radio stations were once a vital component of any Friends of the Earth campaigners strategy and more than willing to involve themselves or invite you into the studio as an expert witness. Since Jonathan Ross and his cohorts did so much damage to the BBC with their ill advised and childishly obscene prank phone calls, ordinary presenters are no longer trusted. Consequently, what was once a virtually free or at least very low cost hours programming now has to have a couple of trusted producers and costs a couple of thousand quid. Sad Sad Sad.

Even Friends of the Earth have not always helped. Since the loss of people like Andrew Lees and his team in London, FoE have increasingly become a centralised organisation. Formerly local groups campaigned mostly on local issues some of which grew organically and even became national or even international campaigns with wide networks. Now with Underwood Streets apparent fixation with Carbon Emissions, lots of local campaiging groups find getting their message out increasingly difficult.

I would be the last person to say that human created carbon emissions are not important, but so are a lot of other pollution issues which dont seem to even get a look int any more. Chlorine is used with gay abandon, petrol engines are replaced with small diesel engines, which were wrongly believed to be less polluting as they didnt emit benzine but meanwhile Nox and Sox go through the roof in many areas, and even here in Pendle.

Amidst all this gloom there are at least SOME blessings. The internet and its communications media such as Messenger and Skype do afford the opportunity to reach many people quickly and cheaply and facilitate sharing of information, documents, and audio/video media. Mobile phones text messaging have evolved into a plague of Twitterers and no one is anyone who hasnt got a Facebook account (and probably lots of spam Junk Mail and computer viruses. Personally i preferring blogging which at least gives enough space to cover all the angles without interference or the constant need to add "friends" and other detritus to an already crowded schedule. ........................ TBC.

FLUORIDE -- COSMETIC EFFECTS

Rupert Murdoch admits to being thousands of years out of date.