ONE PICTURE IS WORTH 10,000 TURDS

Sunday, 4 September 2011

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.pdf
Joy
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...

Friday, 2 September 2011

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



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





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

Wednesday, 17 August 2011

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.

Wednesday, 20 April 2011

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 "

Saturday, 12 March 2011

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.