This presidential contender said today that it was the UK NHS which prevented Thatcher from doing to the UK what Reagan did to the USA. Clearly a complete and conceited twat. I hope on behalf of the American lower and middle classes that he never becomes the US president. People in the US are suffering more than enough because of Senator Sanctimonious and his ilk, may he never take power, hes a real piece of ordure which we can all do without. Its amazing just how much shite people will spout just to take power and further exploit people who have so little in the first place, Fuck off back to Uncle Sams land of exploitersl and i hope his boat sinks with all hands if they are the people who are seeking power over there. What a bunch of shitheads they are.
ONE PICTURE IS WORTH 10,000 TURDS
Wednesday, 4 January 2012
Tuesday, 27 December 2011
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.
Wednesday, 21 September 2011
Precedent-Setting Fluoride Personal Injury Case Filed
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 »
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 »
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 »
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...
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...
Thursday, 15 September 2011
Wednesday, 14 September 2011
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?
Monday, 5 September 2011
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.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...
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...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
