PRO-FLUORIDE PUNDITS ON THE ROPES RESORT TO DIRTY TACTICS.

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 http://www.FluorideAlert.org 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!"

FLUORIDE... HERE'S THE NEW BOSS, SAME AS THE OLD BOSS.

JUDICIAL REVIEW DUE THIS AUTUMN..... OR IS IT?

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

headed "CURB NHS SPENDING PLEDGE TO SAVE OTHER SERVICES, SAYS BURNHAM"

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!)

Ann

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.

ANDREW JOHN LEES, ( ENVIRONMENTALIST)

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.

HOME DIALYSIS PATIENTS DO NOT GET EXTRA PURE WATER

FROM THE WEST MIDLANDS AGAINST FLUORIDATION WEB SITE

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.

TO STAMP OUT TRUTH DECAY WE MUST KEEP ON STAMPING.

FRIENDS OF THE EARTH FLUORIDE CAMPAIGN -- ELECTORAL REFORM

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.

ANDY BURNHAM MP, NOT FIT TO LEAD THE LABOUR PARTY

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.

THE WAR ON FLUORIDE MAY BE SEEM TO BE OVER BUT THE SKIRMISHES WILL HAVE TO CONTINUE.

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.

THE POWER IS OVER BUT THE MALADY LINGERS ON.

WILL THE POLITICIANS MISS THIS GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY FOR ELECTORAL REFORM?

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