May 2016

Norway Maine sodium fluoride sacks

SWIS NEWS – MAY  2016 Ref: 620



Comment and Discussion

 Is fluoridation in the U.K. on the way out?

 Joy Warren

The puzzle of the missing propaganda

In one day in May there were two programs on the BBC on dental health in the UK.  Neither mentioned fluoride, fluoridated toothpaste and fluoridation.  This is a first!

Now that Bedford O&S Committee has voted unanimously not to recommend the resumption of fluoridation and now that we’ve seen a PHE Bedford report on the non-statistically significant difference between dental health during and after fluoridation, it appears (fingers crossed) that fluoridation could be on its way out.

However, what is so galling is that we’re not likely to be told that this is the case.  Instead, it seems as though the Government might quietly allow fluoridation to die a death without having a funeral!  Also, I guess that the Gov. will not want to tell the USA that this might be their little plan just in case the UK Gov. is persuaded to change its mind.

Let’s look at the evidence against fluoridation which is stacking up:

Fluoride reduces intelligence.  This implies that it negatively affects the unborn child’s brain.  Anything which causes harm to the unborn child ought to be prevented.  Pregnant women are not supposed to smoke and drink alcohol and most are careful about what they eat and drink so how come it’s OK to drink a developmental neuro-toxin?

Fluoride causes ADHD.

Fluoride causes dental fluorosis.

The NOAEL fixed by the Committee on Toxicity in 2003 is clearly not having the desired effect.  The NOAEL was applied to 6-month-old children who were considerd to be at the greatest risk of getting dental fluorosis if they ingested more than 0.05 mg fluoride per kg bodyweight.  However, the Bedfordshire statistics on dental fluorosis show that there are too many 12-year-olds who have significant aesthetic opacities.  It seems therefore, that no-one knows about the NOAEL for 6-month-old babies.  The words “chocolate teapot” come to mind.

Fluoride causes hypothyroidism.  We know that this is the case because hydrogen fluoride was used in the 1930-1960s in Austria to cure hyperthyroidism.  Had the treatment continue for too long, patients would have flipped over into hypothyroidism since hyperthyroidism, euthyroidism and hypothyroidism lie on a continuum.  There is about 2% hydrogen fluoride in artificially fluoridated water.  This does not dissociate in water and is absorbed via the skin when taking a hot bath or shower.  Women aged more than 40 are increasingly coming down with hypothyroidism, especially if they live in fluoridated areas.  Remember the statistic: “almost double the incidence of hypothyroidism in fluoridated West Midlands compared with non-fluoridated Manchester”.  (Peckham et al, 2014)

New Zealand dentists have recently produced a report which shows that decay in fluoridated white children is the same or more than the decay found in non-fluoridated white children.  Yet, the NZ Gov. wants to make fluoridation mandatory.  What’s that all about?

Bedford PHE also produced a report in November 2015 which showed that decay had not significantly increased after fluoridation ceased.

 Liz and Doug Cross UKCAF :Have you noticed that water fluoridation does not now appear to be part of PHEs strategy? No mention of it by PHE’s spokesperson, Dr Sandra White. Despite the continued claims that fluoridation works, when everyone knows that that’s been disproved by the scientists, PHE’s position has become absurd and they’re fearful of looking like fools of they try to push for it. We won’t see any more schemes proposed now (unless Andy Burnham takes over Labour and they win an election!), and I suspect that the fluoridating water companies themselves are quietly reducing their own implementation of it too, what with the curious absence of fluoride in some allegedly fluoridated water supplies. No one will admit to such chicanery, of course!

I have a paper coming out very shortly in a peer-reviewed academic Journal, entitled ‘An unhealthy obsession with fluoride.‘ This deals with the ethics, law and politics behind this bizarre pactice, and shows how it persists purely to protect the dental profession’s vested interest in continuing the practice. I’ll post a full copy as soon as I get the PDF from the publishers – you’ll find it very interesting!

Yesterday( May 9th)  on North West news they had the PHE Liverpool dental officer who went on about children cleaning their teeth properly etc with fluoridated toothpaste, no mention of water fluoridation at all. My impression is they have no intention of fluoridating the water, not only not being legal it is too expensive, too many councils have rejected it as mass medication now. What is interesting is there was no mention of dental milk, UKCAF has put in an official complaint to the fraud office on this (see our website Let us hope we are right,

From Linda Forrest:   On the Victoria Derbyshire programme this morning, fluoridation was not mentioned. Dr Sandra White from Public Health England stated that the good news is that there is an improvement in tooth decay. There is a steady downward trend from a third to a quarter of 5 year olds with tooth decay. She also mentioned cutting down on sugary drinks and taking children to the dentist when they are very young.

the puzzle of the missing fluoride

Meanwhile in Coventry, (CV5), the level of fluoride in the water supply has been between 0.1 and 0.2ppm for 6+ weeks.  Now the new suppliers, Industrial Chemicals Group Ltd (ICGL) is sourcing its fluoridating acid from Spain (confirmed) so this is probably the same muck that is added to Ireland’s water supply.  We have an analysis of Irish H2SiF6 dating back to 2000 and that analysis shows that the acid contains 28 contaminants of which 14 are injurious to health.  Recognition of the fact that in order to dose the water with 1mg fluoride per litre of water, you need to add 5.36mg of the acid to each litre of water seems to have flown below the radar.  We only found this out when we acquired a copy of YARA UK’s guidance.

Why has the level of fluoride reduced?  Five possibilities:

  1. The dosing equipment is being maintained because the gauges have developed a fault.
  2. STW wants to clear out the old acid from the tanks before mixing it with the new acid and hasn’t yet taken delivery of the acid from ICGL.
  3. Someone somewhere has analysed the acid and has found it to be unacceptable.
  4.  The supply of the acid from Spain to ICGL has ceased temporarily because of lack of supplies.
  5.  The Gov. has quietly told the fluoridating water companies to use existing stocks of fluoride to exhaustion and not to order any more.  If this is the case, then ICGL will no doubt wish to invoke a penalty clause


Resources and  Reports


10th May

With National Smile Month taking place between 16 May and 16 June, researchers at the University of Chester are using the opportunity to highlight that indulging a sweet tooth is one factor which contributes to tooth decay in children.

This comes after they published research finding that the biggest influence on children’s tooth decay is inequality, which can be improved by addressing social determinants of health (in other words, the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age, and the wider influences shaping our daily lives) rather than by mass fluoridation of water. Despite the ambiguous evidence around fluoridation of our tap water supplies in some parts of the UK, historically it has been used as a strategy for protecting against dental caries.

Karen Tocque, Professor of Health Intelligence, and Professor Lynne Kennedy, Associate Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Clinical Sciences, both from the University of Chester, have studied the links between dental decay, social deprivation and local water fluoridation – and their research has shown that social deprivation has a far greater negative influence on dental health than local fluoridation of tap water has a positive one.

Professor Kennedy said: “We know that people living in affluent societies such as the UK have high intakes of sugar in their diet, including sugary drinks. National Smile Month is the largest and longest-running campaign to promote good oral health, so we felt that this was a good time to raise issues of dental hygiene and good diet in preventing cavities, especially in our children.

“Despite the fact that fluoridated drinking water can help moderate dental caries, in reality human behaviour, such as eating a lot of sweets and chocolate, sugary beverage consumption, dental hygiene, other nutritional factors and access to dental services are more likely to

While much research has been carried out on fluoridation and levels of tooth decay, Tocque and Kennedy’s research is distinctive by analysing variations in dental decay in five-year-old children across the whole of England in relation to social deprivation, in areas with and without local water fluoridation. Both professors recognise that water fluoridation results in an overall lower average of tooth decay in children, but their findings show that the independent effects of social deprivation are much greater than this benefit.

Their work focused on the National Dental Epidemiology Programme’s survey of five-year old-children in England (and has been published by the Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology), which, in an analysis of over 142,000 dental examinations, found that 31% of 5-year old children had at least one decayed, missing or filled tooth (dmft).

Children living in the most deprived areas were three times more likely to experience tooth decay than those living in more affluent areas, but Professor Tocque and Professor Kennedy concluded that there was no evidence that water fluoridation reduces inequalities in children’s dental health; because the difference across the social gradient remains the same whether children live in fluoridated areas or not.

Professor Tocque said: “We discovered that there was a very strong association between good dental health and social advantage, with 80% of children living in the most affluent areas being decay-free and only 56% of those living in the most deprived areas. But there was only a small difference in being decay-free between fluoridated (73%) and non-fluoridated areas (68%).

“However, children living in deprived areas that are fluoridated do have significantly lower average dental decay than those living in equivalent deprivation with no water fluoridation. Our study concluded that fluoridated drinking water does moderate dental caries, but socio-economic deprivation has a stronger influence on dental decay than local fluoridation of water does in preventing/mitigating it.”

Professor Kennedy added: “Children are at greater risk of developing caries if they have poor dental hygiene (including infrequent brushing), use non-fluoride toothpaste and are more likely to have a diet high in sugar and sugary drinks. Other research also suggests that, nationally, fewer children are consuming tap water, fluoridated or not.

“That’s why we believe that reducing the disparities in health is key to the future of our children’s teeth. We feel that this would be better achieved by focusing resources on reducing the effects of socioeconomic deprivation on overall health and wellbeing – with strategies tailored to needs.”

With the latest data from the National Dental Survey, also released today, confirming the persistent relationship between dental caries in 5-year olds and social deprivation – Professor Tocque added: “The challenge for the Government and public health authorities is to successfully address the social and behavioural influences on poor health in general. This would achieve a greater overall improvement in health and wellbeing – rather than trying to tackle one single disease at a time.”2


NEW YORK, April 21, 2016 —

Prominent physician, Mark Hyman, MD, author of 9 New York Times best-selling books and a Huffington Post  medical editor warns that swallowing fluoride poses risks to the brain and thyroid, and that communities of color and underserved communities are disproportionately harmed. Dr. Hyman supports, “federal investigative hearings looking into why our cities and towns are allowed to continue to add fluoride to public water sources and why the whole story about fluorides is only just now coming out,” reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

Hyman joins a growing number of health, civil rights, and environmental leaders who are speaking out against the addition of neurotoxic and thyroid disrupting fluoride chemicals to water, including civil rights icon Andrew Young, and well-known environmental activists such as Erin Brockovich, Ed Begley, Jr. and Lois Gibbs.

Andrew Young says, “I formerly was a strong believer in the benefits of water fluoridation for preventing cavities. But many things that we began to do 50 or more years ago we now no longer do, because we have learned further information that changes our practices. So it is with fluoridation.”

Erin Brockovich says, “My career has been about making people aware of harmful exposures and the deception that often accompanies those exposures. Drinking water fluoridation is harmful, [but] we’ve been deceived to believe it is safe.”

Ed Begley says, “I’m concerned because there are many studies that indicate an association between lowered IQ and levels of fluoride [in water] which offer no margin of safety to protect all our children…I urge citizens throughout North America to help end this outdated practice of water fluoridation.”

Lois Gibbs, says, “We’re finding out that the story we were all told about the addition of fluoride to public water systems was not the whole story. . . . We oppose water fluoridation as it harms our health, it harms the environment, and is a textbook case of environmental justice harm affecting low income and families of color.”

Dr. Hyman says “There are numerous mechanisms by which uncontrolled dosing of fluorides through water fluoridation can potentially harm thyroid function, the body and the brain…Communities of color and the underserved are disproportionately harmed by fluorides.”

Spanish-language station, Telemundo, aired a three-part expose on fluoridation’s hazards. LULAC, the nation’s largest Latino civil rights organization, calls for an end to the practice.

SOURCE Fluoride Action Network



April 28,2016

An  article by Jack Crowther, a resident of Rutland,   with help from Paul Connett, prompted by the recent vote by a 61-39 percent margin to continue fluoridation in Rutland.

,,,What the voters didn’t know was aided by a strong propaganda campaign  whatever the cost to scientific truth.  The state Department of Health head, Commissioner Harry Chen, gave credibility to the pro-fluoridation cause, while failing to provide honest, science-based information to the public that employs him

‘Dr. Chen wrote an op-ed piece for the Rutland Herald that ran Feb. 20. It is a beautiful mix of propaganda and bureaucratic homage to the pro-fluoridation policies of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ‘
Thearticle asks us to’ consider Chen’s inaccuracies, smokescreens and tricks of language’,. They include many familiar claims and  are all dealt with decisively in this article

from Rutland Herald:



Apr 26

From ADA News

A useful list of criminals

Cincinnati, Ohio —  Recognizing the important health benefits and safety of community water fluoridation, the ADA, the Association of State and Territorial Dental Directors and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention honored leaders, states and community water suppliers at the National Oral Health Conference April 17.

The groups recognized Kip Duchon, national fluoridation engineer at the Division of Oral Health within the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, with a Fluoridation Special Merit Award for his contributions toward the progress of fluoridation.

Mr. Duchon is credited with maintaining and overseeing ongoing development of the Water Fluoridation Report System, which every state now uses for fluoridation surveillance; overseeing and delivering national fluoridation training; providing fluoridation technical assistance around the country; developing and distributing annual CDC Quality Award and providing expert advice in collaboration with the ADA, ASTDD and other groups.

Furthermore, Mr. Duchon led the revision and restructuring of the national training course, Principles and Practices of Community Water Fluoridation, and developing high quality course materials and manual, organizers of the awards program said.  “Under Kip’s careful stewardship, course content is updated each year, providing attendees with the most current information on fluoridation public health and engineering topics,” organizers of the conference said about Mr. Duchon.

Mr. Duchon called the honor “humbling,” adding, “My contribution was only possible through the efforts of two groups: Association of State and Territorial Dental Directors members, as they are the eyes and ears close to the action while I am locked up in the CDC ivory tower, and my remarkable and talented CDC colleagues.”

Meanwhile, Colorado, Connecticut, North Dakota, Nevada, Alabama, Delaware, Indiana, Louisiana and Virginia were recognized with the 2015 State Fluoridation Quality Award for consistent optimally fluoridated water in more than 90 percent of the adjusted water systems or population supplied by adjusted water systems.

Communities awarded the Community Fluoridation Reaffirmation Award for defeating initiatives to discontinue community water fluoridation during the past year are the Tri-Community Water System, Fairhope and Sylacauga in Alabama; Breckenridge, Denver, Hayden and Snowmass in Colorado; Eustis and Inverness in Florida; Lyerly, Georgia; Culver, Indiana;  Bethel and East Millinocket in Maine; Concord, Gloucester, Newburyport, Oak Bluffs, Rockport, Shrewsbury, Templeton and Topsfield in Massachusetts; West Branch, Michigan; Park Hills, Missouri; Egg Harbor City, New Jersey; Austin, Dallas and Madisonville, Texas; Martinsville, Virginia; Amery, Delavan, Durand, Eagle River and Rice Lake, Wisconsin; Clarksburg and Shinnston, West Virginia.

Communities that passed water fluoridation initiatives during the past calendar year, receiving Community Initiative Awards, include Brockton, Massachusetts; and New Zion Utilities and Como in Mississippi.

States awarded the State Fluoridation Initiative Award for having the greatest increase in population receiving fluoridation during the past year are California and Arkansas. States receiving the Health People 2020 Award for achieving a 10 percent increase in population served by community water systems with optimally fluoridated water since 2010 are Arkansas and Kansas.

Finally, many communities were honored for 50 years of continuous community water fluoridation. They were Five Star Water and Gordo Gas and Sewer Board in Alabama; Jonesboro Water System and McCory Waterworks in Arkansas; Boulder, Carter Lake: North & South WTPS in Colorado; Hartwell, Blakely, and Royston in Georgia; Charleston, Galena, Rantoul, Shawneetown, Union-York Water District, Utilities Inc. Clarendon Water Company and Utilities Inc. Lake Holiday in Illinois; Delphi, Greendale, North Vernon, Rensselear, Rochester, Shelbyville-Indiana American Water Co. and Topeka in Indiana; Beatrice State Development Center and Rushville in Nebraska; Lancaster Water Department in New Hampshire; Allentown Water Department and City of Burlington Water Department in New Jersey; Massena Village, New York City, Owego Water District No. 2 and Syracuse City in New York; Sweet Home, Oregon; Eldora Water Supply, Elk Horn Municipal Water Works, Iowa American Water Company-Clinton District, Lake City Water Supply, Lake Mills Municipal Water Department and Postville Water Department in Iowa; Albany Water Works, Cadiz Municipal Water Company, Dawson Springs Water and Sewer, Irvine Municipal Utilities, Manchester Water Works, Nicholasville Water Department and Sturgis Water Works in Kentucky; Kennebec Water District and Pittsfield Water Works in Maine; Alma, Charlotte,  K. I. Sawyer and Michigan State University in Michigan; Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Park, Gaylord, Jordan, Moorhead, Paynesville, Saint James, Spring Valley and Winona in Minnesota; Maryville, Missouri; Brookhaven, Canton and Mendenhall in Mississippi; Asheville, Selma and Statesville in North Carolina; Ashley, Beulah, Carrington, Drayton, Langon and Lisbon in North Dakota; Dubois Municipal Water Authority in Pennsylvania; Clinton, South Carolina; Athens Utilities Board, Newport Utilities Board, Parsons Water Department, Pigeon Forge, Portland Water System and Sevierville, Tennessee; Forth Worth, Texas; Wise and Culpepper in Virginia; Lynden Water Department in Washington; Antigo Water Department, Barneveld, Black Earth, Delavan, Eagle River Light and Water Department, Pardeeville, Williams Bay and Windsor in Wisconsin; and Buckhannon Water Board, Lewisburg Municipal Water and Red Sulphur Public Service District in West Virginia.



New Zealand plans to drown its citizens in toxic fluorides

Apr28 by Jon Rappoport

I love New Zealand. It’s one of the most beautiful places on Earth. It’s…what? What did you say?…No, that’s impossible. That couldn’t be happening. They’re doing what??”

The strategy of the New Zealand government is simple.

A series of local movements is successful. So kill them off by claiming decision-making must occur at a “higher level.” Take power out of the hands of locals.

The people can’t represent themselves. That’s dangerous. No, big government will represent the people—by squashing what the people want.

The issue is fluorides. I recently wrote two articles demonstrating the extreme toxicity of this substance, which of course is dumped in water supplies as a medical treatment. (fluoride archive here).

In New Zealand, a group called Fluoride Free NZ has been highly successful working with town councils to ban fluorides from local communities.

But these successes are a threat, because they contradict the lies medical authorities spew about how safe fluorides are, and because grass-roots victories erode blind faith in centralized government.

Here are quotes from Kane Titchener, who represents the group, Fluoride Free NZ, in New Zealand. His remarks lay out what’s happening behind the scenes in that natural paradise:

“…the fluoridation issue has been brought to a head. The NZ Government is proposing that the [bigger] District Health Boards take over the decision making [about] fluoridation [in water supplies] as opposed to the local councils. This is because we have been very good at winning at the local council level.”

“Fluoride Free NZ was formed in 2003. Since that time we have had many substantial victories in local Councils throughout New Zealand. Local Councils that have stopped [fluoridating water supplies] as a result of Fluoride Free NZ’s lobbying efforts: New Plymouth; Taumarunui; Waipukurau; Far North…”

“In summary, the Government is planning to implement mandatory fluoridation to the whole of New Zealand. Currently, only around 50% of households are on fluoridated water, with only 23 out of 67 local councils still fluoridating, while voicing their growing concerns about fluoridation risks and dangers. In response to more and more councillors and mayors deciding against fluoridation, the Government is now taking the decision away from local councils and communities and putting the power into the hands of District Health Boards (DHB), who are under the direct control of Central Government.”

If you think Fluoride Free NZ’s successes working with town councils is a walk in the park, think again. This group has scored victories against long odds. This group is smart, dedicated, and effective.

They represent what can happen when strong, clear-sighted, creative individuals band together to accomplish a righteous goal.

And the tyrannical response of big government is predictable.

However, there is going to be blowback against that government in New Zealand.

The degree and power of the blowback is going to depend, in part, on the response of people around the world who become aware of the situation and make their voices heard.

Contact Fluoride Free NZ. Help them. Spread their press releases all over the world.

Why should a government be permitted to dump poison into the water and call it medical treatment?

And having called it medical treatment, by what power can a government mandate it for all citizens without informed consent, without the explicit permission of those millions of patients? Yes, patients, because that’s what they are. They’re being treated every day.

By what power can this happen? Dictatorship calling itself democracy.

A note to tourists: how do you feel about traveling to New Zealand and bathing in, and drinking, poison? Do you like that bonus for spending your good money in “paradise?”

If not, you might want to contact the New Zealand tourism authority ( and let them know about your change of plans.

Such organizations are always interested in money, where it’s coming from—and where it won’t be coming from.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.



From Mercola

The Drug You Can’t Say ‘No’ to, Whether You Want It or Not

You’re not given a choice if you want this or By Michael Connett
Fluoride Action Network (FAN)

Following the recent water crisis in Flint, it’s no wonder that the U.S. public has begun to question exactly how safe our drinking water actually is. What was once taken for granted — the idea of safe, pure, and drinkable water for everyone — is now in serious question.

In addition to the continuing problems with lead contamination, it has come to light in recent years that public water supplies are now contaminated with trace levels of pharmaceutical drugs, including oral contraceptives and mood stabilizers.

These drugs end up in our water inadvertently; however, there’s one pharmaceutical that is intentionally added to our tap water: Fluoride.

Fluoride Is a Neurotoxic, Endocrine-Disrupting Drug

Fluoride is an endocrine-disrupting, neurotoxic, and bone-weakening substance that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines as a drug when used to prevent disease, because unlike the minerals we need (e.g. calcium), humans have no known physiological requirement for fluoride.

Sodium fluoride, long known as an effective roach poison, is added to tablets and drops (i.e., “fluoride supplements“) for the purpose of preventing tooth decay.

But because of fluoride’s toxicity, you cannot purchase fluoride “supplements” over-the-counter; they can only be dispensed by prescription under the supervision of a doctor. In short, sodium fluoride is not a nutritional “supplement;” it is a prescription drug, and a dangerous one.

Although fluoride drugs have been prescribed for over 50 years, the FDA recently announced that marketing fluoride drops and tablets for cavity prevention violates federal law, because FDA has never approved these products as either safe or effective.

FDA made this stunning declaration in a Warning Letter, in which the Agency called on a manufacturer to immediately cease selling fluoride drops and tablets. Removing harmful fluoride drugs from the market will protect the health of millions of children, but we also need to address the big elephant in the room: water fluoridation.

With water fluoridation, cities and towns can add almost the same dose of fluoride contained in prescription fluoride drops and tablets to each glass a toddler drinks — with no supervision of a health professional, and without the informed consent of the patient.

FDA Issues Warning Letter

On January 13, 2016, the FDA sent a “Warning Letter” to Kirkman Laboratories, Inc., demanding that the manufacturer immediately discontinue the marketing of its fluoride drops and tablets.

The FDA’s Warning Letter clearly states that fluoride drops and tablets are “unapproved new drugs” because: (1) they are not generally recognized as safe and effective for caries prevention purposes, and (2) no manufacturer has ever provided FDA with adequate studies to demonstrate the drugs’ safety and effectiveness.

This isn’t the first time FDA has stated that fluoride drops and tablets are unapproved drugs; FDA first grudgingly admitted this bewildering fact in the 1990s in response to a dogged investigation by the late New Jersey Assemblyman John Kelly.

What makes the Warning Letter to Kirkman so significant, however, is that the FDA has finally decided to take enforcement action against a company producing these drugs.

FDA’s Warning Letter is a historic development, but much remains to be done. The real test will be whether FDA follows through on its own conclusions by going after the larger companies that are currently manufacturing the very same fluoride drugs.

Three of the largest companies making fluoride drops/tablets today are Libertas Pharma Inc., Sancilio & Company, Inc., and Qualitest and so far, FDA has not taken any action against these companies.

For this reason, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology (IAOMT) have filed a Citizens Petition with the FDA that calls upon the agency to take enforcement action against all companies, not just Kirkman, that continue to produce unapproved fluoride drugs.

The petition asks that these unsafe and ineffective drugs be removed from the market entirely. To support the FAN/IAOMT petition, please sign this online letter to FDA.

Help End the Practice of Fluoridation

There’s no doubt about it: fluoride should not be ingested. Even scientists from the EPA’s National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory have classified fluoride as a “chemical having substantial evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.”

Furthermore, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 41 percent of American adolescents now have dental fluorosis — unattractive discoloration and mottling of the teeth that indicate overexposure to fluoride. Clearly, children are being overexposed, and their health and development put in jeopardy. Why?

The only real solution is to stop the archaic practice of water fluoridation in the first place. Fortunately, the Fluoride Action Network has a game plan to END water fluoridation worldwide. Clean pure water is a prerequisite to optimal health. Industrial chemicals, drugs, and other toxic additives really have no place in our water supplies. So please, protect your drinking water and support the fluoride-free movement by making a tax-deductible donation to the Fluoride Action Network today.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and visit the links below:


J Epidemiol Community Health doi:10.1136/jech-2015-206502


Does cessation of community water fluoridation lead to an increase in tooth decay? A systematic review of published studies

  1. Lindsay McLaren1,
  2. Sonica Singhal2

+Author Affiliations

1.     1Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada 2.     2Discipline of Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

  1. Correspondence toDr Lindsay McLaren, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Dr. NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 4Z6;
  • Received12 August 2015
  • Revised28 March 2016
  • Accepted13 April 2016
  • Published Online First13 May 2016


Background Cessation of community water fluoridation (CWF) appears to be occurring with increasing frequency in some regions. Our objective was to comprehensively review published research on the impact of CWF cessation on dental caries.

Methods We searched 13 multidisciplinary databases. Results were synthesised qualitatively and quantitatively.

Results We identified 15 instances of CWF cessation (‘intervention’) in 13 countries, which covered a broad time frame (1956–2003) and diverse geographical and political/economic contexts. Overall, results were mixed, but pointed more to an increase in caries postcessation than otherwise. For example, of the 9 studies with at least moderate methodological quality based on criteria we developed for this review, 5 showed an increase in caries postcessation. 3 studies did not show an increase in caries postcessation; however, important postcessation changes (eg, implementation of alternative fluoride delivery programmes) and/or large-scale social change may have contributed to those effects. Of the 3 study groupings that permitted quantitative synthesis, 2 showed statistically significant mean overall increase in caries postcessation; however, quantitative synthesis results must be interpreted cautiously.

Conclusions Overall, the published research points more to an increase in dental caries post-CWF cessation than otherwise. However, the literature is highly diverse and variable in methodological quality. To build this literature, it is important to exploit research opportunities presented by CWF cessation. Remaining knowledge gaps include the impact of CWF cessation on the distribution of dental caries (ie, equitable or not) and understanding the decision-making circumstances around CWF cessation.



Berkshire, MA

May 12

Pro fluoride letter in the Berkshire3 eagle with a huge comment trail, mostly an argumnent with a the super-troll, Randy Johnson.


May 14

From the Times of Oman, a long  list oif the wonders of fluoide

…The public drinking water supply in Oman is fluoridated. If you drink water from public water supplies and brush regularly with fluoride toothpaste then it is sufficient for adults and children with healthy teeth to lower down the risk of decay. However, fluoride is present in much lesser quantity in bottled water….



 N ew Zealand

DHB Data Show No Benefit From Water Fluoridation

Monday, 18 April 2016, 10:29 am
Press Release: Fluoride Information Network For Dentists

Data released by the Ministry of Health today confirm that water fluoridation is having no noticeable effect in reducing tooth decay.

Around one in three NZ children have at least one cavity by age 5, and growing up with water fluoridation seems to offer no benefit.

Children in areas without fluoridation, like Christchurch and Nelson-Marlborough once again have among the best teeth in the country, with less tooth decay among 5 year olds than most fluoridated areas, such as Auckland and Counties-Manukau.

Hastings, the first area to have fluoride put in its water as an experiment in the 1950’s still has just as much tooth decay than its non-fluoridated neighbor, Napier, the town originally used to demonstrate the benefit of water fluoridation. Sixty years on there is still no benefit.

The overturning of the Hamilton council decision to stop fluoridation in 2013 also appears a wasted effort, with non fluoridated Waikato areas having less tooth decay than the fluoridated city.

“It’s very hard to see, with their own data consistently showing these trends for over 20 years, how Health Minister Coleman, the DHBs as well as the NZ Dental Association, can continue to make New Zealanders believe they will obtain a 40% reduction in tooth decay if councils fluoridate. Such statements are not backed by the science, nor by the facts, which are blatantly obvious in the school dental service data” says Dr. Stan Litras, spokesperson for the dentist group FIND who consider waterfluoridation a futile distraction.

“It’s clear to anyone who has looked at this in any depth that tooth decay is linked to socioeconomic status, ethnicity, and access to health care, not to water fluoridation. We think the health authorities are barking up the wrong tree, simply because it’s more convenient to pretend that’s going to fix the problem than to address the real issues”.

“While fluoridation enthusiasts fêted the government announcement last week aiming to give DHBs the power to force fluoridation on councils, assuming this would result in mandatory national fluoridation, we believe such a move could also give DHBs the power to end fluoridation if they look at the facts and act responsibly.”

School dental service data can be found on .



FIND cites new researchFriday, 22 April 2016, 11:06 am
Press Release: Fluoride Information Network For Dentists

New Research Confirms Fluoride Link to Lower IQ and Poor Health

New research has confirmed that increased fluoride in water results in reduced intelligence. The research, published in the journal,of environmental monitoring and assessment, found that the higher the fluoride content in water, the lower the IQ of children, and the lower the Body Mass Index, a measure of overall health.

The study also found that dental fluorosis, seen as a discoloration of teeth, is a bio-marker of fluoride toxicity. Dental fluorosis was directly related to the amount of IQ reduction and BMI reduction.

Dental fluorosis occurs in 40% of children in NZ, and the findings of this study would suggest that they have been exposed to levels of fluoride high enough to cause health effects.

The findings, by Environmental Science researchers at the University of Burdwan in India, add more weight to emerging science in China, Mexico and Iran, and to animal studies showing the effects of fluoride on the brain.

Fluoride was classified as a developmental neurotoxin, in the medical journal the Lancet in 2014.
Apart from reduced IQ, research indicates other types of damage to the brain may be occurring such as developmental disorders, depression and dementia.

FIND, a dentist group keeping a close watch on fluoridation research, is concerned that while in these studies the fluoride intake comes almost entirely from fluoride in groundwater, New Zealand has other major sources such as diet, fluoride toothpaste and other dental products, which add to the fluoride exposure.

Furthermore, the fluoride used to artificially fluoridate the water in parts of NZ is not the naturally occurring calcium fluoride measured in these studies, but the more highly bio- active HFSA, a waste product of the phosphate fertilizer industry.

FIND has repeatedly lobbied the government to test total fluoride doses at the individual level. An open letter was delivered to Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne just last month calling for urine testing, the method used in this study and recommended by the WHO.

“We think it’s irresponsible to be promoting water fluoridation when 40% of the population are already exceeding safe levels, and individual dosage is not being monitored.” Says FIND spokesman, Dr. Stan Litras.

“It looks like we could be sacrificing the mental health of the many by questionably trying to improve the dental health of a few”

K.Das and N. Mondal ,March 2016
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 188:218 “Dental fluorosis and urinary fluoride concentration as a reflection of fluoride exposure and its impact on IQ level and BMI of children”


Apr 25


New post on fluoride free NZ

Will Chinese Tourists be Warned That Banned Fluoride is Added to Our Drinking Water?

by mary

Fluoride has been banned in China for over thirty years. China, along with Europe and Japan (where is has also been banned), know that fluoridation is archaic and dangerous. Will the many more Chinese visitors to New Zealand be told toxic fluoride chemicals are added to NZ water?

 Water fluoridation was banned in China because ingested fluoride causes skeletal and dental fluorosis. China fluoridated some urban areas back in 1965, but banned it in 1983 due to the dangers discovered by international scientists. The Chinese government now considers any water supply containing over 1 ppm fluoride a risk for skeletal fluorosis. Skeletal fluorosis has even been found at the lower level of 0.7ppm[1]. By contrast, the New Zealand Ministry of Health advises fluoride be added to water supplies, up to 1ppm.

 Parts of China have very high amounts of naturally occurring fluoride, and as a result, 30 million Chinese people suffer from skeletal fluorosis. China and India both remove fluoride from water to make the water safe to drink.

 57 human studies have now been published, examining fluoride’s effects on brain and neurological functioning. 50 of these show fluoride damage: lowered IQ, nervous disorders, and memory disruption etc. 38 of these studies were done in China. The Chinese are obviously well aware of the fluoride problem and make efforts to reduce fluoride exposure on their citizens.

 Should John Key advise our Chinese visitors not to drink our water? As we have seen, the Chinese are keen to buy our beautiful, clean artesian water (before the fluoride is added), but we can be sure they won’t want the contaminated water New Zealanders are forced to drink.

 It is well established that the first outward sign of fluoride toxicity is dental fluorosis. According to our Ministry of Health, 40% of children in New Zealand have some form of this disease. Surely it is blindingly obvious that our fluoride exposure needs to be reduced, not extended, as the Government is now proposing.

 The chemicals used for fluoridation are the waste product of the phosphate fertiliser industry and are classified as hazardous, a Class 7 neurotoxin. Industry would have to pay to dispose of their excess if they did not sell the chemicals to the government for dilution via the public water supply. Their fluoride waste is not refined, and it is not pharmaceutical grade.

 Information received from the Invercargill District Council shows the Council was buying its fluoridation chemicals in 2009 from the Chinese company Shanix, but had to stop because of discolouration and the presence of rust and bits of wood.

 Fluoride Free New Zealand is calling for a complete halt to all fluoridation in New Zealand, and a halt to the Government proposal for mandatory fluoridation for the whole country. Please sign the petition

  [1] SOURCE: Gupta R, Kumar AN, Bandhu S, Gupta S. (2007) Skeletal fluorosis mimicking seronegative arthritis. Scandanavian Journal of Rheumatology 36(2):154-5.

 mary | April 25, 2016



Apr  21

Anti-fluoridation campaigners are cautiously celebrating a milestone victory in their battle to keep the chemical out of Bedford’s water supply.

Members of Fluoride Free Bedford were at a borough council meeting to hear the adult services and health scrutiny committee recommend the scheme should be “terminated” to the executive.

If agreed, the next step is to gauge public opinion with a consultation.

After the meeting last week campaign coordinator Cynthia Bagchi said: “We may have to continue this fight to help other areas, because if we don’t help other areas to understand the truth and keep fluoride out of their areas, they will come back and try and persuade the councillors here to fluoridate again. We’ve made a wonderful start but we can’t rest on our laurels.”

A Bedford Borough Council spokesman said the executive will consider the recommendation from the overview and scrutiny committee that fluoridation in Bedford Borough is terminated, on Wednesday, June 15.
Read more:

From Linda Forrest

 On the Victoria Derbyshire programme this morning, (May 10 ) fluoridation was not mentioned. Dr Sandra White from Public Health England stated that the good news is that there is an improvement in tooth decay. There is a steady downward trend from a third to a quarter of 5 year olds with tooth decay. She also mentioned cutting down on sugary drinks and taking children to the dentist when they are very young.

May 11

 A new study puts deprivation more important than fluoride, but still says there is a benefit from fluoridation.

  See Resources item 1

University of Chester researchers have released a unique study which shows that socioeconomic deprivation has a stronger influence on dental decay in children than local fluoridation of water does in preventing/mitigating it.

 the full article can also be read at


May 19

From FAN

InAlbuquerque, New Mexico, members of the Water Utility Authority voted 4-2 to cut funding for fluoridation from their 2017 budget after hearing from residents who overwhelmingly opposed the practice.  The city fluoridated their drinking water up until 2011, when they suspended the practice until the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services came out with an official recommendation of the “optimal fluoride levels.” 

Since ending the practice 5 years ago, the water utility authority has been under intense pressure from the fluoride-lobby to re-start the practice, since Albuquerque is one of the largest cities in the U.S. that is not fluoridated, along with Portland, Oregon.  Despite lobbying from local dentists, the New Mexico Department of Health, and from Delta Dental, Albuquerque councilors concluded that it wasn’t their role to force a medical treatment on their citizens using the water supply. 

Arab, Alabama

May 11
Fluoride will be put back into the Arab Water Works’ water supply beginning Monday. That means the water that goes to customers of Arab Water Works, Union Grove Utilities and the Joppa-Hulaco-Ryan Water Authority will be fluoridated.

From theArab Tribune


 Buffalo, Wyoming

May 3

A  public forum held Monday evening in Buffalo to discuss the possibility of fluoridating Buffalo’s municipal water showed those attending were predominantly against the idea, but open to looking into alternatives to help with the oral health of the county.


 Davis, CA

May 4

Four council candidates were asked  Do you support or oppose municipal water fluoridation in Davis and why or why not?

Will Arnold:I don’t think we should revisit the fluoride proposal. The citizens and the City have spoken on that issue. …

Lucas Frerichs:Oppose- I voted against municipal fluoridation back in 2013.  I felt like the whole fluoridation issue was a bait and switch – the community was asked to support the surface water project without fluoride…and at the last minute there was a push by some to make fluoride part of the surface water project..

Brett Lee:I voted no on water fluoridation.  I believe that there are more appropriate ways of addressing dental health.

Matt Williams:Given the controversial nature of municipal fluoridation in Davis, I believe it is prudent not to proceed with a system-wide fluoridation implementation



May 10

The controversial question of whether to keep fluoride in Collier County’s water supply drew dozens of people – on both sides of the issue – to Tuesday’s commission meeting.

“Community water fluoridation is not associated with any type of severe fluorosis,” Tomar said. “The primary reasons are inappropriate use of fluoride toothpaste, by young children.”

But retired chemistry professor Paul Connett says he’s more concerned about what too much fluoride can do to our brains than our teeth. “Over 300 experiments. animal experiments, human experiments, (indicate the) lowering of IQ,” Connett said.”And what parent or what politician in their right minds would put their children’s brains below their teeth?”

Commissioners decided to keep the practice continuing for the time being

May 12

A Naples Daily News writer clearly thought it should be left to our representatives and that Dr. Scott Tomar the dentist had demolished Connett’s arguments.

However , the paper’s poll disagreed.  Question : should decision be left with commission or by public ballot?   56%  wanted ballot, 29% leave itt o the commission and 15% don’t know or don’t care–289ea723-3cbc-781d-e053-0100007fc-379073651.html


May 19

From FAN

This week there were two major victories against fluoridation in the U.S.  The first was in Newport, Oregon, where residents voted 64% to 36% to overwhelmingly reject the introduction of fluoride chemicals into the public drinking water.  This vote was the first dealing with fluoridation in Oregon since Portland’s landmark vote defeating fluoridation 61% to 39% in 2013.

Newport was fluoridated from the 1960’s until 2005, when dust from the fluoride chemicals created unsafe conditions for water treatment staff and violated OSHA guidelines, causing the city to end the practice.  The issue resurfaced last summer after the Lincoln County Public Health Advisory Committee recommended adding the toxin to the drinking water.  In response, members of Clean Water Newport organized local residents in opposition, packing public hearings, putting up yard signs, demanding a ballot vote, and using every grassroots strategy available to defeat the measure.  You can learn more about this amazing victory by clicking here.


Port Angeles

May 5 

An anti-fluoridation group submitted a petition Wednesday to the Port Angeles City Clerk’s Office that could lead to a new form of city government and new City Council elections.

Our Water, Our Choice! President Eloise Kailin of Sequim said the petition was submitted after an ad hoc fluoridation committee that issued a report at Tuesday’s council meeting failed to recommend ending fluoridation of the city’s municipal water supply.

 May 12

A three-part ethics complaint against Port Angeles City Attorney Bill Bloor over fluoridation of the city’s water supply is without merit, a Seattle lawyer has decided


Sonama -Marin

Sonama -Marin Municipal Water District.

*TEXT OF THE 2016 MMWD FLUORIDATION MORATORIUM INITIATIVEThe Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) shall institute a moratorium on all District water fluoridation unless and until such time as each and every manufacturer of the fluoridating chemical supplied to MMWD for water fluoridation, provide to District customers and consumers:1) an accurate list of all contaminants and their amounts, accompanying each batch of fluoridating chemical supplied to the MMWD, and2) a detailed toxicological report on the fluoridating chemical, and3) a written statement verifying the fluoridating chemical’s safety for ingestion, once introduced into the water supply, by all water consumers.

May 11

Backers of a Marin anti-fluoridation initiative have fallen about 2,500 signatures short of getting their issue on the November ballot.

Since November, Clean Water Sonoma-Marin has sought to gather 11,000 signatures to put an item on the ballot requiring the Marin Municipal Water District to stop using fluoride in water until it could detail what’s in the chemical and report that to residents. It also wanted the district to provide a report showing that it is safe to ingest.

But the deadline was Monday, and the group had mustered only 8,500 signatures.

…The group raised about $35,000 for the effort and had 200 volunteers collecting signatures, but Gallagher-Stroeh said myriad other local and state measures diluted the group’s effort to get the number of signatures needed to qualify.

For its part, the water district and its attorneys have said the agency is required to fluoridate.

“We are legally obligated to fluoridate our water and we have done that since 1973,” said Michael Ban, the environmental and engineering services manager for the water district.

Fluoridation at Marin Municipal began in December 1973 after 57 percent of voters gave approval in November 1972. Opponents failed to block it in court and in an appeal to the state Department of Health.

It was taken up again by voters in 1978 after water to five West Marin communities was accidentally overdosed with up to eight times the accepted level of fluoride for about two weeks in late 1977. In that vote, 53 percent of voters gave approval to continue fluoridation.

In 1995, Assembly Bill 733 was passed into law. The law requires public water systems that have more than 10,000 connections to provide fluoridated water as long as they don’t use ratepayer funds. The district receives about $1 million annually in rental income and uses about $140,000 of that for fluoridation.

…Water board member Larry Bragman said he doesn’t think fluoridation is needed anymore, noting that fluoride is put in toothpaste, mouthwash and other dental products. But he said the district is bound legally to supply it, barring the voters overturning its use.

…“I will keep advocating for the reduction and elimination of fluoride,” said Bragman, adding its use should be a personal choice.


Washington state

How Washington state spends its public health money


Wilmington, Ohio

Apr 29

 WILMINGTON — To fluoridate or not to fluoridate Wilmington’s water. That is the question to be presented Thursday at 7:30 p.m. during Wilmington council’s regularly scheduled meeting.

“The purpose of Thursday’s forum is to gather public input on a proposed community water fluoridation program – specifically, to fluoridate Wilmington’s water at the state mandated 0.8 parts per million,” wrote Kelsey Swindler, chair of council’s water committee.




Cornwall, ON

April 18

Perhaps Cornwall, Ontario does not deserve the amount of space below  but, it was hard to decide what to cut out all the tortuous arguments and the decision-making process in this one town. I promise not to give Cornwall ( or Port Angeles) any more than a glancing mention in future


Part of an unusually crfitical editorial

 The council chambers at city hall were jammed Monday night as opponents to the return of water fluoridation in Cornwall took centre stage at a meeting that stretched on for nearly three hours.

While one could fire a cannon in the same room during budget deliberations and barely wound a couple of elected officials, Monday night’s full house suggests to me the issue of fluoride in our water is starting to gain traction with an electorate that is often as quiet as a mouse.

The good news is Dr. Paul Connett, a university professor and expert in toxicology, made several solid points about the dangers of fluoride and how wasteful it can be to use the controversial product in our water.

The bad news is it probably won’t do any good, because fluoride is likely on its way back to your water if the majority of council has anything to say about it.

… We’ve been without fluoride for nearly three years, so waiting another two years for election day isn’t going to hurt.

And in that time we can get a true cost of what a return to fluoridated water will mean for the municipal bottom line. Some figures released by the city suggest it will cost about $350,000 to upgrade the water treatment plant with the necessary safety equipment to bring fluoridation back online. That’s not including $50,000 a year in operational costs and about $40,000 to remove the 15,000 liters of hydrofluorosilicic acid still sitting in a vat at the plant.

But the real numbers, I’m told, are quite a bit more. Unofficially the cost of the safety equipment has already ballooned to $500,000. The $350,000 figure bandied about at city hall is about two years old and not really considered accurate by some.

Now we’re talking about a highly controversial project that could cost as much as $600,000 the first year, with operational costs that will only go up from there..—TODD-LIHOU%3A%26nbsp%3BTime-to-put-the-fluoride-question-to-voters/1

 April 28, 2016

TODD LIHOU – EDITOR:was still making his views clear

Like the rest of you city council continues to be as divided as the Capulets and the Montagues when it comes to fluoridating Cornwall water.

And not unlike another tragedy, it appears a razor-thin majority at the council table will vote to see fluoride returned to the water supply.

I’ve railed against fluoride in our water, in large part because workers at the filtration plant shouldn’t be exposed to it, and the $350,000 price tag attached to system upgrades is too much when one considers that most of the additives in the water end up right back in the St. Lawrence River before passing through our bodies.

The way council intends to vote on this issue is becoming clearer as time unfolds – and those of us against water fluoridation had best be prepared for disappointment.

Based on the comments made Monday night, it’s fair to suggest Councillors Andre Rivette, Elaine MacDonald, Denis Carr and perhaps even Bernadette Clement are in favour putting fluoride back. Clement wasn’t nearly as passionate as some of her other colleagues, but the way she was talking Monday night it’s fair to suggest she’s leaning towards fluoride.

On the flipside are Councillors Claude McIntosh, David Murphy, Justin Towndale and Mayor Leslie O’Shaughnessy who are against the practice.

Undecideds/unknowns include Councillors Maurice Dupelle, Carilyne Hebert and Mark MacDonald.

But based on the scuttlebutt I am hearing from city hall, it’s likely those on the fence will vote fluoride – though I hope they don’t.

I floated the idea a couple of weeks ago of going the route of a referendum at the next municipal election, but there’s not enough support around the council table for such a move – which means sometime next month, likely the first meeting of May, councillors will vote to finally put this issue to rest.

Towndale is now on an extended leave for the next three months while he trains to become a member of the Canadian Forces, so consider that a lost vote on the ‘no’ side and an even tougher chore for those against fluoride.

WHERE’S THE UNION?: The union representing employees at the water filtration plant had requested time before council to lay out their objections to fluoridation. Union members are especially fearful of the hydrofluorosilicic acid that is added to our water to create fluoride.

The acid is extremely toxic and has left scars on the concrete at the filtration plant where it has, on occasion, accidentally spilled.

The union was told it would not be allowed to address council – likely because the city wants to avoid setting a precedent that would allow other employee groups to make similar pleas if they feel slighted.

It says here if the union is serious about this, then members need to take their message to the people. Protests and information sessions need to be organized.

And while we’re on the subject of unions and employees, it surprises me that more councillors with an NDP affiliation aren’t stepping up to protect those workers by voting against fluoride.—EDITOR%3A%26nbsp%3BCouncil-vote-will-be-razor-thin-when-it-comes-to-fluoride/1


Cornwall, Ontario

Apr 25

 Proponents of water fluoridation said Cornwall’s overall health will suffer if the practice is abandoned….But that hasn’t stopped critics from expressing concern with the issue.

The acid used to fluoridate Cornwall’s water contains arsenic, said Peter Van Caulart, executive director of the Environmental Training Institute in Niagara, prior to Monday’s city council meeting.He said the 15,000 litres of hydrofluorosilicic acid in storage at the water treatment plant in Cornwall could contain as much as 800 grams of arsenic – a poisonous substance.

Van Caulart arrived at this conclusion after receiving a sample of the acid, which shows it contains about 55.75 parts per million of arsenic. The material he shared with the media prior to the council meeting has also been shared with city council, he said.Van Caulart, who trains water and wastewater operators in Niagara, was asked to come to Cornwall by the union representing such operators at the Cornwall treatment plant…,-but-arsenic-found-in-acid/1


Apr 26

A pro-fluoride presentation to council that relied on the science, but also sound public policy, from local medical officer of health, Dr. Paul Roumeliotis, and chief dental officer of Canada, Dr. Peter Cooney, didn’t convince Mayor Leslie O’Shaughnessy for one.

Earlier, Roumeliotis and Cooney provided a two-pronged approach to show why the city should return to fluoridation, which stopped when an equipment failure occurred in summer 2013. Since then, council hasn’t felt convinced to debate whether they should spend about $300,000 for new equipment that would make the application of hydrofluorosilicic acid at the water treatment plant safe.

The chief dental officer did dwell on science, but not in the detailed specifics that were provided by anti-fluoride crusader Dr. Paul Connett at council’s April 11 meeting.He pointed to several peer reviews of findings that indicated Health Canada’s continued fluoride support.

For example, Cooney tried to debunk the claim that IQ declined due to fluoride ingestion.He noted that IQ in Americans increased by 15 points between the 1940s and 1990s. Meanwhile, fluoridation use increased to 67 per cent from 3.3 per cent from 1951 to 2012.  “IQ is keeping pace.”

May 5

CORNWALL, Ontario – The argument concerning water fluoridation has gone political, and does not address safety concerns at Cornwall water filtration plant, the union representing operators at the facility has said.

Alan Armstrong, president of CUPE local 3251, told Seaway News in an interview Thursday the general public is missing out on a major component of the debate.

“This thing was something that started as a health and safety issue and it kind of morphed into the pros and cons of the fluoride issue,” he said. “And it’s become a very political topic.”

Indeed city council has heard from two groups, both for and against the fluoridation of Cornwall’s drinking water.

The union has significant concerns with the use of hydrofluorosilic acid (HFSA), the toxic compound added to the water to create fluoride.

The union had asked to make a similar presentation to city council, but was turned down because such a move would have been against procedural bylaws. City councillors, by way of a two-thirds vote, could have overridden the bylaw – but no such move took place.

“We’re not questioning fluoridation or its benefits,” said Armstrong. “What we’re questioning is HFSA. It’s a serious hazard to the workplace.”

Health Canada and Environment Canada have published warnings related to the acid, and even city environmental services manager has deemed HFSA an extremely dangerous product, by way of a report to councillors.

Should council vote to return to water fluoridation, workers at the plant will have to be retrained on how to properly administer HFSA to the water supply. Health concerns at the plant three years ago forced the city to abandon the practice.

Workers will likely have to wear hazmat suits, and operate in containment rooms, should HFSA use return. There are still some 15,000 litres of the acid in storage at the treatment plant, and Armstrong said the product has no business in the city now, or in the future.

“It comes in by transport,” he said. “What if there’s an accident?

“Right now the morale is pretty low, with these guys,. They’re really concerned with this. You can put all the measures in place that you want, but there’s always going to be that chance of error. Whether it’s a mechanical breakdown or human error.”

Armstrong also sounded the warning on potential costs for taxpayers. While the city has set aside money to cover the $350,000 cost expected to fix the issues at the plant, should water fluoridation resume, there is still a $50,000 annual cost associated with the practice.

And Armstrong said anyone who thinks the upgrades will only cost $350,000 is dreaming.

“If you look at the costs that are going to be involved and the extent of things they will have to do, that’s a red flag,” he said. “Regardless of how you fund this, the taxpayer pays for it. If they pull it out of reserves…they have to pay that back. Water bills are going to have no choice but to go up.”

Monday’s city council agenda does not include any material related to the fluoride debate, and it’s believed councillors won’t make a decision on this issue until its May 24 meeting.



Nairn ON

Apr 20

The Sudbury and District Board of Health reaffirmed its long-standing support for community water fluoridation Wednesday at its regular meeting.

The board also supported advocacy for provincial regulation to make community water fluoridation mandatory for all municipal water systems in Ontario.

The board of health motion was introduced after the April 11 decision by Nairn and Hyman Township council to remove fluoride from the community’s water supply



The mayor of the Township of Nairn and Hyman said he was not surprised the Sudbury and District Health Unit condemned the town council’s recent decision to remove fluoride from the local water supply.

The April 11 vote to end water fluoridation in the township was months in the making, said Mayor Laurier Falldien, and was preceded by a presentation from the health unit to convince the municipality to keep fluoride in its water supply.

But due to vocal concern from some citizens, the township decided to follow other Ontario municipalities, like Parry Sound, most recently, and move away from water fluoridation.

Falldien said around 100 individuals in the township are connected to the municipal water supply, and around 20 people voiced concerns about fluoridation.

In a survey to residents, 80 per cent of respondents said they wanted fluoride removed from the water system.

“The big concern is what’s happening to the body when fluoride is ingested,” he said. “We can’t control a dosage of something we’re basically forcing people to take into their bodies.”

Falldien said some residents were worried about the impact neurological effects of ingesting fluoride and how the inorganic compound is stored in the bones.

“I believe that in the future we’re going to see more evidence against the benefits of fluoride in water,” Falldien said.

But the Sudbury and District Health Unit strongly condemned the township’s decision during its board meeting Wednesday.

“I am very concerned by the Nairn & Hyman Township Council’s decision to remove fluoride from its community water supply,” said Dr. Penny Sutcliffe, Sudbury and District medical officer of health, in a statement released later that day. “This is a significant step backwards for oral health for this community. Community water fluoridation makes sure that everyone benefits from the protection that fluoride provides against tooth decay—regardless of factors such as income, age, residence, or education.”

Falldien said he expects fluoride to be removed from the township’s water system by early summer.




May 2

ANTI-FLUORIDE campaigners have warned the State Government it will have a serious fight on its hands if it ­decides to mandate water ­fluoridation in the Far North.

A petition started by a Hervey Bay activist has called on the government to resume the mandate and State control of fluoridation in Queensland.

The petition, which started about two weeks ago, has so far attracted only 17 signatures.

State legislation currently dictates that each local government in Queensland makes the decision to add fluoride to their water supplies.

Far Northern co-ordinator of Queenslanders for Safe Water Air and Food (QSWAF) Bill Kilvert said Cairns did not need fluoridated water. He claimed fluoride was not safe and effective, its use was a human rights and medical rights issue, there were negative impacts upon the human body, fluoridation had been ­rejected by “nearly all countries” and that many professionals had changed their minds about the chemical.

“Our 1000 members would be very angry if the government mandated fluoride,” he said.

“We would fight very hard to get it out of the water but we would hope we would not have to do that.”


New Zealand


Mandatory fluoridation proiposal for New Zealand

Press release from Fluoride FreeeNZ::

From FAN

May 11


  • April 2016 announcement that Government proposes legislation
  • It’s expected that the Ministry of Health will write the legislation which may be ready around July/August 2016
  • Health Minister to present Legislation for its first reading when ready
  • Health Select Committee will consider. At this stage submissions will be sought and people can speak to the Committee
  • Expect 2nd Reading would be early/mid next year
  • Expect 3rd Reading to be late 2017 or early 2018
  • Could be in place by 2018.

What you can do

Help Crowdfund Fluoride Free New Zealand’s Crucial Ad Campaign

American actor, director, and comedian Rob Schneider, has also joined the call for a rejection of the New Zealand fluoridation mandate.  On April 28, Schneider Tweeted, “Contact Fluoride Free New Zealand!” and shared an article by investigative reporter Jon Rappoport entitled, New Zealand Plans to Drown its Citizens in Toxic Fluorides.

Contact Fluoride Free New Zealand!

— Rob Schneider (@RobSchneider) April 28, 2016

Then on May 1, Schneider Tweeted, “Boycott Tourism in NZ: More fluorides? Bye bye.” And shared an article by Rappoport with the same title calling for a travel boycott.  Boycott tourism in NZ: More fluorides? Bye bye. | Jon Rappoport’s Blog




May 4

Campaigners urge Nelson City Council not to add fluoride to region’s water

Fluoridation may be off the Nelson City Council’s agenda but its opponents left councillors in no doubt about the depth of their feelings when they spoke at an annual plan hearing. Fluoride FreeNelson made a presentation representing their 130 members, who included  doctors, dentists  and chemists, with an on line pettition with ‘1000signatures and growing’ . Although government intends to hand fluoridation issues to district health boards, the council’s annual plan was a good way to for councilors to connect with their community, said the Mayor.

May 12

…On Wednesday they were  supplied with new information from the staff saying if the council were responsible for fluoridating Nelson’s water, they estimated a one-off $250,000 capital cost and operational costs of $80,000 a year.

The council has already sent the written submissions to the DHB and councillors were told in writing that staff would also send the minutes of hearings and encourage the board to engage with the community on this issue.

This was not enough for councillor Ruth Copeland. She wanted the council to express the concerns of the submitters to the board at its May 24 meeting, specifically the potential cost to ratepayers of water treatment and infrastructure changes, the discharge of fluoride to the environment and its unknown long-term effects on the water catchment, and the lack of opportunity for a public “interface” with the board.

The motion was passed on a division.

  • .

Fluoride Conference in India

The International Society for Fluoride Research (ISFR) will host a conference this November 9-11 in collaboration with the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).  It will take place in Hyderabad, India at the National Institute of Nutrition.  The focus will be on fluoride toxicity, geology, and mitigation on a worldwide scale.

The event is open to all members of the public who register by October 1st.  Representatives of ISFR asked FAN to specifically invite scientists, clinicians, academics, engineers, and state officials to this conference, which will have brain storming sessions and field visits

Comment    See all comments






Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *