September 2017

Research and Reports

Sep 5

1. Proof that fluoridation wastes money

An argument cash-strapped authorities are now legally obliged to listen to..

Leaving aside the question of effectiveness, what is  the real cost of water fluoridation as a means of preventing dental decay, among its claimed target group, young and disadvantaged children?, Joy Warren ‘s paper demonstrates that,by any standards of a accounting, the programme is a complete waste of money and better oral health could be achieved by redirecting the money spent on more effective means of prevention . The  paper is now on Research Gate and is free to access.By mid September it has already had over 200 ‘reads’.

A Complete Waste of Money! Water Fluoridation Costs for England, 2013-2021 (PDF Download Available)

Official Full-Text Paper (PDF): A Complete Waste of Money! Water Fluoridation Costs for England, 2013-2021

Sep 23

2. Government sponsored research showing the liok between fjuoride exposure and in utero damage to the brain

Prenatal Fluoride Exposure and Cognitive Outcomes in Children at 4 and 6–12 Years of Age in Mexico

This is the abstract

Objective: Our aim was to estimate the association of prenatal exposure to fluoride with offspring neurocognitive development

Methods: studied participants from the Early Life Exposures in Mexico to Environmental Toxicants (ELEMENT) project. An ion-selective electrode technique was used to measure fluoride in archived urine samples taken from mothers during pregnancy and from their children when 6–12 y old, adjusted for urinary creatinine and specific gravity, respectively. Child intelligence was measured by the General Cognitive Index (GCI) of the McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities at age 4 and full scale intelligence quotient (IQ) from the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) at age 6–12.

Background: Some evidence suggests that fluoride may be neurotoxic to children. Few of the epidemiologic studies have been longitudinal, had individual measures of fluoride exposure, addressed the impact of prenatal exposures or involved more than 100 participants

Results: We had complete data on 299 mother–child pairs, of whom 287 and 211 had data for the GCI and IQ analyses, respectively. Mean (SD) values for urinary fluoride in all of the mothers (n=299) and children with available urine samples (n=211) were 0.90 (0.35) mg/L and 0.82 (0.38) mg/L, respectively. In multivariate models we found that an increase in maternal urine fluoride of 0.5mg/L (approximately the IQR) predicted 3.15 (95% CI: −5.42, −0.87) and 2.50 (95% CI −4.12, −0.59) lower offspring GCI and IQ scores, respectively

Conclusions: In this study, higher prenatal fluoride exposure, in the general range of exposures reported for other general population samples of pregnant women and nonpregnant adults, was associated with lower scores on tests of cognitive function in the offspring at age 4 and 6–12 y.

This is the link to the complete Environmental Healtrh Perspectives study

Here is Paul Connet’s 3 – minute reaction:


Whitney Webb’s article in Mint News below is an excellent summary of the  case. We are happy to republish it unedited:

ADA Untroubled By Yet Another Study Pointing To Fluoride’s Negative Health Impacts Fluoridation was sold to Americans by none other than the father of public relations himself, Edward Bernays — a nephew of Sigmund Freud, who applied his uncle’s ideas on psychological persuasion for the benefit of industry and government propaganda


For decades, many groups have fought against the inclusion of fluoride in publicly supplied water, arguing that the risks of mass fluoride consumption outweigh the purported benefits. Now, a new study published in Environmental Health Perspectives has added to the scientific literature that suggests that fluoride negatively impacts human intelligence, especially in children and infants.

The study, surprisingly, was widely reported in the U.S. mainstream media despite the fact that its findings contradict the government’s official position regarding the safety of fluoride.

The study examined nearly 300 sets of mothers and children living in Mexico and tested the children’s cognitive development twice over a 12 year period. A drop in scores on intelligence tests was observed for every 0.5 milligram-per-liter increase in fluoride exposure beyond 0.8 milligrams per liter found in maternal urine. While researchers found a potential connection to prenatal fluoride exposure, they found no significant influence of fluoride exposure on brain development once a child was born.

While the study is likely to cause concern for mothers-to-be around the world, the findings of this study will be of particular concern for those living in areas where public water is fluoridated. In Mexico, where the study was conducted, fluoride is not added to public water supplies and fluoride exposure largely occurs via naturally occurring fluoride in the environment, fluoridated salt and supplements. In contrast, three-quarters of the U.S. population is exposed to fluoride through public water, in addition to other sources of fluoride such as fluoridated toothpaste.

However, the American Dental Association (ADA) took issue with the study, stating, its findings “are not applicable to the U.S. The ADA continues to endorse fluoridation of public water as the most effective public health measure to prevent tooth decay.” The ADA declined to state why the study’s findings were not applicable to pregnant women in the United States, given that fluoride consumption in the U.S. is much higher than in Mexico due to public water fluoridation.

Furthermore, contrary to the ADA’s claim, the inclusion of fluoride in drinking water does not actually reduce the incidence of cavities at all — instead causing a form of tooth decay known as dental fluorosis, a widespread phenomenon that the government has admitted is linked to water fluoridation. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that about 41% of U.S. children between the ages of 12 and 15 suffer from dental fluorosis. Excessive fluoride consumption can also cause skeletal fluorosis, which results in extreme joint and skeletal pain.

Other studies have found yet other negative health effects related to fluoride consumption. For instance, a study published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health in 2015 found that people drinking fluoridated water were 30 percent more likely to have high levels of hypothyroidism compared to those living in areas with low, natural levels of fluoride in their water. The study included the largest sample population ever analyzed regarding fluoride consumption.

 From toxic industrial byproduct to toxic cavity-preventing “miracle”

This new study is hardly the first of its kind. In 2013, a Harvard University study found that children living in areas with highly fluoridated water had “significantly lower” IQ scores than children living in low fluoride areas. Furthermore, more than 23 human studies and 100 animal studies have linked fluoride consumption to brain damage. Some of these studies date back to the 1940s when mass public fluoridation was just beginning in the United States.

Back when the push to initiate mass public fluoridation began, influential scientists such as Dr. Dean Burk spoke out against it. Burk, co-founder of the U.S. National Cancer Institute and head of its cytochemistry department for over 30 years, once called fluoridation of the public water supply “public murder” after reviewing several government-funded studies from the 1930s that showed that fluoride consumption led to abrupt increases in the incidence of cancer. However, these government studies were classified and suppressed as a result of pressure from the aluminum and industrial fertilizer industries, which supply the fluoride added to U.S. water supplies.

The production of aluminum as well as industrial fertilizers produces sodium silicofluoride and hydrofluorosilicic acid, byproducts that had long been a headache for industry due to their toxicity. Following World War II, when aluminum production was heightened to meet wartime demand, hundreds of fluoride damage suits were filed around the country against aluminum and chemical companies. Most of the lawsuits were settled out of court, which avoided the establishment of legal precedents. However, in one case in 1955, a federal court found that an Oregon couple had sustained “serious injury to their livers, kidneys and digestive functions” from eating “farm produce contaminated by [fluoride] fumes” released by a nearby Reynolds aluminum plant.

Once fluoridation was approved and became public policy, these industries began to sell their fluoride wastes to the government, which then added them to public water supplies. These waste products, incidentally, are classified as hazardous and toxic until they are added to public water supplies, at which point they then become classified as “preventing” cavities. The first scientist to suggest that fluoride had cavity-reducing properties was Gerald J. Cox, whose work was largely funded by the Aluminum Company of America (Alcoa).

Following a deluge of industry-funded “science,” fluoridation was sold to Americans by none other than the father of public relations himself, Edward Bernays. Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud, applied his uncle’s ideas for the benefit of industry and government propaganda. His work led fluoride, previously known for being marketed as a rat poison, to become associated in the American mind with gleaming smiles and brilliant white teeth.

Nearly 70 years after water fluoridation began, the aluminum and chemical industries continue to benefit handsomely, as the practice allows them to sell their waste to the government at a premium for inclusion in public water systems. The governments seem happy to continue the agreement, despite the mounting evidence that fluoride lowers intelligence, increases the risk of cancer, and gravely harms public health.

Republish our stories! MintPress News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.


Sep 21

This is FF New Zealand’s press release

Fluoride Free New Zealand is calling on the 23 councils (out of the total of 67) that still fluoridate, to urgently implement a moratorium on fluoridation to protect the brains of children being born today in their community.

A major study published on Tuesday in the US Government’s Environmental Health Perspectives has found that children born to mothers exposed to fluoride while pregnant, have significantly lower IQ scores. This is particularly relevant to New Zealand where half of the population is currently subjected to fluoridation.

The study measured fluoride in urine and found the average level of fluoride in urine was 0.9mg/L (mg/L = parts per million). To relate this to water fluoride concentration, a separate study found that pregnant women in an area with 0.4 to 0.8 ppm water fluoride only had slightly lower urine fluoride than the average participants in this study. The Ministry of Health recommends fluoride chemicals be added to the water at 0.85ppm.
Pregnant women in New Zealand in fluoridated areas likely have similar levels of urine fluoride as those in the Mexican study. Urine fluoride reflects total fluoride intake from all sources, not just fluoridated water. The paper also reports that in the USA, which is 70% fluoridated, urine fluoride ranges from about 0.5 to 1.5 mg/L which fully overlaps the range found in the Mexican study.
The child of a mother who was drinking water with 0.85ppm fluoride would be predicted to have 5 lower IQ points than if the mother had drunk water with close to zero fluoride in it. This obviously has huge consequences for New Zealand children.

The Ministry of Health recommended 1ppm until the 1990s when it reduced to a range from 0.7ppm to 1ppm, with a target of 0.85ppm. The US Human and Health Services have directed a maximum of 0.7ppm for fluoridation.

This study was very carefully done by a group of researchers who have produced over 50 papers on the cognitive health of children in relationship to environmental exposures.  It was funded by the US Government’s National Institute of Health and was a multi-million dollar study.  This was the group’s first study of fluoride – their other studies mostly dealing with lead, mercury and other environmental neurotoxicants.

This study controlled for a wide range of potential factors that might have skewed the results and produced a false effect.  It was able to largely rule out confounding effects by these other factors.  The factors ruled out included lead, mercury, socio-economic status, smoking, alcohol use, and health problems during pregnancy.

This study offers confirmation of previous studies in Mexico, China and elsewhere.  Some of those studies had higher fluoride exposures than are commonly found in fluoridating countries, but many did not.  The sole study in a country with artificial water fluoridation was by Dunedin dentist Jonathan Broadbent. That study found no association between water fluoridation and IQ and was trumpeted by fluoridation defenders.  But that study was shown to have almost no difference in TOTAL fluoride  intake between the children with fluoridated water and those with non-fluoridated water, since at least half of the children in the non-fluoridated area were given fluoride supplements. This left only a small proportion of the study children without substantial fluoride exposure. Nor did this study look at maternal fluoride exposure during pregnancy, which could be the most vulnerable time of exposure.

The study authors are cautious in their conclusions, as is common for scientists. But the implications of this study are enormous. There have been 58 other human studies looking at fluoride exposure and harm to the brain – 51 of them have found an association.




From FAN:

Fluoride Conference included English and Irish contributions

The sixth International Conference on Fluoride: “When Policy is King, Science becomes a Slave.”  took place over the weekend (Sept 16, 17) when the Fluoride Action Network (FAN)  brought speakers from around the world, to the Regency Hyatt hotel in Crystal City, VA, – close to Washington DC  to educate the public, the media and decision-makers about the dangers of swallowing fluoride.

Speakers included  Stephen Peckham (University of Kent, UK)  talking about the study he co-authored linking fluoride exposure to lowered thyroid function and William Hirzy, PhD, a former EPA risk assessment specialist, whose recent paper quantifies the risk fluoride poses to children’s developing brains. ( )

Talks which were live-streamed included a presentation by Declan Waugh, using Skype from Ireland, showing the relatively poor state of  health of fluoridating nations, including the U.S.

As recordings become available  links will be posted in the SWIS update


New legislation contains hidden threat

Legislation has passed out of the Congressional Energy and Commerce Committee that could waste millions in federal tax-dollars on grants to state dental lobbying organizations’ efforts to force fluoridation on states and municipalities across the country.

H.R. 2422, called the Action for Dental Health Act of 2017, is the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing.  This bill amends the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize and add to existing oral health promotion programs through 2022, at a cost of $160 million over 5 years for taxpayers.  A significant portion of this money will most certainly be used by state dental associations to fund pro-fluoridation lobbying campaigns in communities that are currently not fluoridated, have recently rejected fluoridation, or are considering an end to fluoridation.  …

Following the  Conference ,FAN’s lobby-day focused on killing or amending H.R. 2422,  the suspension of all federal funding for the promotion of fluoridation, and a long overdue Congressional hearing and study of the issue.

Other links to Fluoride News suggested by FAN

Fluoride-Free Toothpaste Market Analysis 2017-2022 (International)

Timaru Fluoride-Free Campaign Imelda Hitchcock Dies (New Zealand)

Editorial: On Fluoridation, Water Authority Listened to Public (Pennsylvania)

For more fluoride related media, please visit FAN’s News Archive



Chapel Hill, Carrboro NC

Sep 7

The Fluoride Free Chapel Hill/Carrboro (FFCC)rallied outside Chapel Hill Town Hall to protest against the fluoride in Orange County’s water Thursday night.

The protests came in response to a cancelled meeting set for Aug. 24 by the Orange County Water and Sewage Authority’s Board of Directors, in which members of the community planned to address the fluorinated water issue. OWASA cancelled all their summer meetings, making it three months without an opportunity for residents to voice their concerns in a public comment meeting.

Sep 7

from the Durham Herald Sun

Anti-fluoride activists who felt brushed aside when OWASA [ OWASA =Orange County Water and Sewage Authority]  canceled a public meeting last month took their fight to the Carrboro Board of Aldermen

Anti-fluoride activists who felt brushed aside when OWASA canceled a public meeting last month took their fight to the Carrboro Board of Aldermen on Tuesday, lobbying elected leaders to throw their weight behind an effort to keep fluoride out of Carrboro and Chapel Hill’s drinking water.

The aldermen listened to 21 speakers, the majority of whom opposed fluoridation. Many spoke of health issues they linked to fluoride, including arthritis and thyroid problems. Others said drinking fluoridated water amounted to being medicated without their consent.

… Mayor Lydia Lavelle said any comprehensive discussion of fluoridation should take place at the county level, led by OWASA officials. The board opted not to vote on the resolution, but noted interest in the issue was not likely to dissipate.

“I think that the people who are concerned and opposed to fluoridation have some very real concerns,” said Alderwoman Jacquie Gist. …

Aug 24

…Daria Barazandeh, founder of FFCC, said she wants OWASA to look into the science and health implications of fluoride. “They suddenly cancelled the meeting saying they don’t have anything on their agenda, but how is that possible that they can be on recess all summer and there’s nothing on their agenda,” she said. “We took that as they are trying to silence us.”

…Barazandeh said the FDA has labeled fluoride as a medication, therefore OWASA is violating human rights by medicating the community without consent.  “We’ve been going to the meetings and speaking up, but they don’t say anything in return; they just kind of ignore it,” she said. “But we’re getting larger and larger, and they’re going to have to deal with us because there’s going to be public pressure to do so.”

…Barazandeh said she hopes to bring awareness to the issue. “What our message to them is, is that we are not just a few fringe anarchist crazy people that they would like to brush off, but that this is a really serious health concern,” she said.


Harrison AR

Aug 27

..The OMRPWA, our water provider, has been working along with others to get the requirement to add fluoride removed from Arkansas law due to the health concerns and the added cost. Two water districts in Arkansas have refused to fluoridate, and are involved in lawsuits with the Arkansas Department of Health. The Ozark Mountain Regional Public Water Authority and the Madison County Regional Water District have opposed fluoridation based on concerns not just about human health effects, but that fluoridation chemicals are so corrosive they can reduce the life of the water delivery system by 40 percent while increasing lead leaching from old pipes. Unfortunately, opponents of Arkansas water fluoridation failed to remove the state mandate and must now wait another two years until the legislature is in session. There is some hope, though. A lawsuit was recently filed in federal court in California by the Fluoride Action Network (FAN) and other groups to get fluoride out of drinking water all across the country…


Meadville PA

Sep 11

Meadville City Council has received official notification of Meadville Area Water Authority’s intentions to apply to the state Department of Environmental Protection for a permit to add a fluoridation system….

Ocanto Falls empty

Ocanto Falls WI

Aug 28

OCONTO FALLS, Wis. The Oconto Falls city council voted 4-2 this month and now fluoride is no longer being added to the water supply. Now that a fifty-year practice in the city is coming to an end, the community is having mixed reactions.

Picture: The barrel holding Fluoroacetic Acid sits empty inside the Oconto Falls well house

Greg Kuhn, the Oconto Falls Utility Manager is the one who recommended the city no longer add Fluoroacetic Acid to the water, saying it’s bad for the pipes.

“The Fluoroacetic Acid is very corrosive, so it attacks any piece of iron in the system it eats away at concrete so what you see is particularly in our well house is the premature corrosion of pipes,” said Kuhn.

The city anticipates saving $13,500 every year by stopping fluoridation.

…A petition has been started to bring fluoride back, but Kuhn says the people who sign the petition are surprised when he tells them what’s actually going into their drinking water.

“They’re like wait- what are you adding to the system? Well I’m adding basically Hydrochloric Acid to the system. If I came to you with a bottle of water and I put two drops of battery acid in it, would you drink the water? Most people say no,” said Kuhn.


Potsdam, New York

Sep 6

POTSDAM — The village Board of Trustee meeting on Tuesday night brought out a number of residents concerned about the fluoridation of water.

The trustees are currently researching whether to continue fluoridating water at the water treatment plant, as the equipment is aging and needs either to be replaced or removed. The village currently has a grant from the state to study the cost of replacing the equipment, so if it decides to end fluoridation, it would have to return the money.

The issue of fluoridation was not on the agenda of the meeting, but during the period of public comment, seven people stood to ask the board to stop fluoridation.

Dean Laubscher, who has sent a number of emails with anti-fluoridation information to the trustees, addressed the board first. At one point, he held up a bag with two fluoride filters, which he said cost about $70. “Not only do I pay for fluoride, I pay to remove it,” he said. “Tonight, I respectfully ask the village of Potsdam to immediately cease and desist the use of (fluoride) … for the health and well being of our community.”….

… trustee Stephen J. Warr added “it eats windows.” He went on to describe how the windows at the water treatment plant had been degraded due, according to him, to fluoride fumes….Mayor Reinhold J. Tischler said the issue would be on the agenda at the board’s next meeting on Sept. 18.

Comment from Nyscof:

Fluoridation is a failed concept. For example, fluoridation has been state-mandated in Kentucky for decades. Yet,cavities doubled after the mandate.

Cavities went up yet again in Kentucky as the below graphic shows

The truth is that rotten diets make rotten teeth and no amount of fluoride changes that. Too many Americans are fluoride overdosed and dentist deficient. Dentists, both inside and out of government, use fluoridation as a substitute for dental care. The two are not interchangeable.

Poweshiek ), Iowa From FAN

Poweshiek Water Association (PWA), Iowa , a water provider serving approximately 25,000 residents in 11 counties in rural East Central Iowa, has discontinued water fluoridation, and even re-affirmed their decision after renewed lobbying by proponents.  Concerned customers first brought the dangers of fluoridation to the PWA’s attention in 2013.  After the board did their own research, they agreed that fluoride supplementation ought to be an individual choice.  After making this decision, they were heavily lobbied by state and national dental lobbying organizations, as well as state and county health agencies.  However, they didn’t hear from a single local water user who supported the practice, only from residents who opposed it.  Since they serve locals and not out-of-town lobbyists they reaffirmed their rejection of the practice this Jul


Moncton New Brunswick

Sep 13

THE CANADIAN PRESS. MONCTON, N.B. — Despite pleas from dentists to restore fluoride to the water supply in Moncton, N.B., at least one city councillor says he’ll vote against it when council meets to make a decision next week.

Moncton ended fluoride use in 2011, and local dentist Suzanne Drapeau-McNally says she has seen a dramatic increase in tooth decay among young children ever since.

“Children who previously had no cavities, all of a sudden come in and have a higher number of decays,” Drapeau-McNally said.

Moncton city council was supposed to make a decision this spring, but Coun. Shawn Crossman asked that the decision be delayed until Sept. 18 to gather more information.

Crossman said he spent the last seven months reading studies and listening to the public, and hasn’t seen any evidence to prove that fluoride prevents tooth decay.  “There’s nothing there that says fluoride is stopping tooth decay, absolutely nothing,” he said.

“There’s a much bigger picture here. Sugar is a factor, what do our diets look like, what is the person’s overall health? There are other factors that contribute. Fluoride is not going to solve everybody’s problems.”

…Crossman said he hasn’t done a poll of other councillors, but believes most will support his decision when council meets on Monday.



August 8, 2017

FAN message from Paul Connett

In a statement released on August 3 in Brisbane, Merilyn Haines, on behalf of FAN-Australia, issued a damning critique of the government’s National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC) 2017 “sham” review of water fluoridation.  Haines explains that this is the latest attempt by the NHMRC to mislead the Australian public and decision-makers that water fluoridation is safe, effective and ethical.

According to Haines, “In order for this government agency to deliver a “rubber stamp” endorsement of government policy, it had to corrupt both science and the democratic process.

Haines hopes that when people see how the NHMRC has behaved there will be so much outcry from citizens and scientists – both inside Australia and around the world – that it will trigger a demand for a Royal Commission investigation.

Merilyn has asked us to get as many supporters as we can to write personal letters and emails to the Australian Ambassadors in their country (for forwarding to the Australian Prime Minister and the state premiers).  See template and addresses below.

As you know, governments in fluoridating countries have the power to write biased reports like this and get away with it. However, they have less power to control their image outside the country. This is why we need your help. URGENTLY.

Please send in a letter (or email) as soon as you can to your Australian embassy (see contact details below) and a copy to us at: and

In these short letters we recommend the following format:

Dear Ambassador,

(Include an introductory sentence about yourself including how many years you have been following, or researching, water fluoridation.)

Would you please forward my concerns about the corrupt way the NHMRC conducted its review of water fluoridation to the Australian Prime Minister and State premiers.

Clearly, the NHMRC stacked the decks with pro-fluoridation experts to get the result the government wanted. (or include information you find particularly shocking from Merilyn Haines list of 23 manipulations.)

If left standing this NHMRC review will greatly damage the scientific credibility and reputation of the Australian government.

FAN Australia’s Media Release, Brisbane, Australia, Aug. 3, 2017

Today, on behalf FAN-Australia, Merilyn Haines called for a Royal Commission to investigate the manner in which the Australian government’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) conducted a review of the safety, effectiveness and ethics of Water Fluoridation.

Haines charges that the 2017 NHMRC review of water fluoridation was unprofessional, unscientific, biased, highly selective, deeply flawed and prevented meaningful scientific and public input and was clearly biased in favor of defending the practice of water fluoridation – a long-standing government policy.

The NHMRC produced a very poor review in 2007 which received extensive criticism from independent scientists. To produce an even more biased and restrictive review in 2017 is even more egregious in lieu of the new science published (or updated) since 2007.

For example, the 2015 Cochrane review (a gold standard when it comes to meta-analysis of health issues) found little in the way of high quality studies to demonstrate the effectiveness of fluoridation. On safety, there have now been over 300 published animal and human studies indicating that fluoride is neurotoxic. This large body of evidence has been largely ignored by the NHMRC, even though it is being currently scrutinized by the National Institute of Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Toxicology Program (NTP) in the USA.

In this analysis, 23 specific examples of NHMRC manipulations have been documented.  Here is a selection of the 23 examples.  The NHMRC,

  1. Stacked the fluoride review committee with fluoridation lobbyists and advocates.
  2. Broke a promise to include experts opposed to fluoridation.
  3. Secretly commissioned a new study on dental effects (previously listed as “out of scope”), when the 2015 Cochrane Collaboration review didn’t deliver a convincing  pro-fluoridation position.
  4. Falsely claimed that there is no evidence that fluoride interferes with thyroid function.
  5. Falsely claimed a low-quality IQ study (Broadbent et al, 2014) was a high-quality study.
  6. Downplayed, dismissed or excluded evidence of fluoride’s neurotoxicity.
  7. Excluded a significant study linking fluoridation to ADHD (Malin and Till, 2015).
  8.  Failed to refute the Bassin (2006) osteosarcoma study but still continued to maintain no evidence of a link between fluoridation and cancer.
  9.   Based its claims of safety largely on its 2007 review, however, its 2007 review was largely a copy of the 2000 York University review, which according to the York Review’s Professor Sheldon did NOT show fluoridation to be safe!
  10. Failed to acknowledge that poor kidney function increases uptake of fluoride into the bones and poses risks over a lifetime.
  11. Abandoned the normal evaluation method for studies of fluoride’s effectiveness almost certainly in an effort to disguise the fact that most of the studies reviewed were of low, or very low quality.
  12. Violated its own selection criteria by including a) an unpublished work; b) a narrative and c) an abstract (all favorable to fluoridation).
  13. Claims fluoridation reduces tooth decay by 26-44 % – but without indicating just how small such reductions are in absolute terms – often less than one tooth surface out of over 100 tooth surfaces in a child’s mouth!
  14. Dishonestly claims fluoridation is safe by excluding important studies on spurious grounds, ignoring many others, and even cherry-picking weak studies that serve their purpose (e.g. Broadbent on IQ).
  15. Perverted the principles of medical ethics by presenting a bogus ethical claim constructed by lobbyists rather than ethicists.
  16. The NHMRC’s extraordinary effort to maintain the dubious claims that fluoridation is safe, effective and ethical, are becoming more and more desperate by the year. NHMRC 2007 was very bad, NHMRC 2017 verges on fraud.

*For the full list of the 23 items see Haines media release:

*For the full report see:

United Kingdom
The Hon Alexander Downer, AC – High Commissioner
Australian High Commission in London, England (UK)
Australia House, The Strand, London WC 2B 4LA, United Kingdom







New Zealand

Aug 21


This was released just before the general election, which has now ( Sep 22) resulted in another hung parliament, with the two major parties looking for partners, including the Greens with 7 seats, so it seems unlikely that revisiting the fluoridation bill that has met with much public  resistance, is likely.

Second Reading of Mandatory Fluoridation Bill Delayed

Well done everyone!  We have succeeded in pushing out the Second Reading of the Mandatory Fluoridation Bill to some time in the future, or maybe even never.

Even more good news today, Associate Health Minister, Peter Dunne, who introduced this Bill into Parliament last year, has resigned. That means the that Bill dies, unless another MP picks it up in the next Parliamentary term.

When this Bill was introduced, Health Minister Jonathan Coleman said the Second Reading would likely be June or July 2017. The third and final Reading would be early 2018 and then the Bill would become law.

However, because of the efforts you all have made in opposing this Bill, the Second Reading never happened. We don’t know exactly why this is, but guess it was because the Select Committee members could not agree, and the MPs saw it as an increasingly unpopular stance – which they weren’t prepared to take in an election year.

This shows that we can make a difference! But please don’t give up yet. After the election, the people who pressured the National Government to take on this Bill, will be at it again. We need to make sure all of the elected MPs know that there are smart ways to deal with public dental health (e.g. Childsmile), and that fluoridation is not one of them!

Now would be a really good time to write to the political parties and tell them you do not want fluoridation.



Sep 2

An unexceptional tale of neglect of public duty. Note the concentration of fluoride found is not ‘many times’ the US and European ‘safe’ level of 1.5mg/l

Jajpur/Binjharpur: As many as 5,000 people living in villages under Olei-Chandanpur panchayat of Binjharpur block in Jajpur district have been suffering from the toxic effects of fluoride-mixed water for the last 70 years.

Lack of potable water facilities in their villages has been forcing the residents there to drink the toxic water.  All their pleas to the district administration and the public representatives have gone unanswered.  A recent survey has pointed out to the presence of 5.08 mg of fluoride in every litre of water.

The constant use of fluoride water has changed the colour of their teeth and many are stated to be suffering from knee and joint problems. The district rural and water sanitation department, except conducting periodical surveys, has done little to address the villagers’ problems.

Sources said the villages under the Olei-Chandanpur panchayat have been left high and dry despite being situated about 26 km from the district headquarters and 8 km from block headquarters of Binjharpur. Many of the villages like Chandanpur, Harisinghpur, Olei, Olei-Chandanpur and Pandasahi are located close to the banks of Kharasrota River.

Sarpanch Soubhgya Kumar Mohapatra has alleged that they have been using the toxic fluoride water for generations due to lack of any alternative source of drinking water in their villages.

The constant use of the water has resulted in formation of dark stains on their teeth while food tastes bad and its colour changes abruptly due to use of this water in cooking. The administration is laying stress only on construction of deep bore wells. But they start yielding fluoride water after two to three years of use.

When contacted, executive engineer Amiya Kumar Parija said a proposal has been submitted to the engineer-in-chief for piped drinking water from the river. The initial survey for the project has been completed. PNN