Alarming news from the North East. reported in the Northern Star. Updates will be added as they occur on the UKFFFA site. Meanwhile, anyone in the area of the three authorities mentioned – please get in touch to ensure we are in direct contact. .
The December 13th meeting approved the recommendation for a full survey, effectively starting the process that will end with a consultation, all without any apparent opposition.
11th December 2017
FLUORIDE could be added to drinking water across County Durham in a bid to cut tooth decay among children.
Members of Durham County Council’s ruling Cabinet will be asked to vote next week on whether to carry out a full technical appraisal of a water fluoridiation scheme after an initial study showed it is believed to be feasible.
A report to go before the council says there are significant inequalities in oral health across County Durham, with 61 per cent of children suffering decay in the Woodhouse Close area of Bishop Auckland, compared to just six per cent in the Chester-le-Street South division.
The initial study found that it would be feasible to fluoridate drinking water across the whole of County Durham, but as it would also affect water to properties in neighbouring Sunderland and South Tyneside, all three local authorities would need to work together
At the next Cabinet meeting, which takes place on December 13 at the Town Hall in Durham, councillors will be asked to agree to a full technical appraisal, paid for by NHS England, Durham County Council and neighbouring authorities.
From Cynthia Bagchi
CENTRAL BEDS COUNCIL, we understand, has approximately just over 20% of its residents fluoridated. However, we have come to learn from Bedford Borough Council and Anglian Water that Pulloxhill, one of Central Beds original fluoride dosing stations (there are several), has not been in operation since 1996 but may soon come back into use
Further investigation reveals that PHE is relying on a contract made in 1971 by the then Bedfordshire County council as the local health authority and the Bedfordshire Water Board ( prior to privatisation) and relate to a water treatment works subsequently replaced by a new site with a different asset number but the same name. The original contract was never activated, nor is there evidence that it was re-negotiated or reassigned. Cynthia and her associates are pressing Mid Beds to justify their action and more legal advice is being sought.
Report from Parliament ( House of Lords)
This is one of a number of mentions of fluoridation recently, as recorded in Hansard. The occasion was a debate on some details of the bill setting up the new Greater Manchester Authority. There were also several references in a Lords debate on Oral Health. In each case, there were no dissenting or questioning voices from other noble Lords. There was also no positive action proposed, but it does illustrate the mind set of some of our Elders and Betters.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath Shadow Spokesperson (Cabinet Office), Shadow Spokesperson (Education), Shadow Spokesperson (Health and Social Care) 3:56 pm, 25th January 2018
My Lords, it is a great pleasure to respond to my noble friend’s debate. As my noble friend Lord Smith mentioned oral health in the north-west, I remind the House that I am president of the British Fluoridation Society, which of course is the answer, at a stroke, to the dreadful oral health issues among children in Greater Manchester and the north-west generally.
Declan Waugh has asked fellow scientists and citizens to sign on in support of his letter to the authorities responsible for fluoridation in Ireland. The letter an be seen in full here
FAN, reporting om the letter, comments om
..the extraordinary efforts of environmental scientist Declan Waugh:…over the last six years this remarkable man has been moving Irish mountains: he has written long reports; published scientific commentary and research studies in peer reviewed journals; written dozens of letters to the newspapers and politicians and scientists and to government bureaucrats. .
Sunday, 7th January, 2018 8:00pm
This is Declan Waugh writing to the Irish Southern Star
Sunday, 7th January
SIR: In the week before Christmas, I submitted a document to the Irish and European authorities regarding the highly-controversial policy of mandatory fluoridation of drinking water supplies in Ireland.
This policy mandates by national legislation that citizens, residents and visitors to Ireland must consume fluoride in water and associated beverages and foods.
The document was co-signed by many respected academics, scientists, medical doctors, midwives, neurologists, psychologists, biochemists, molecular and cell biologists, toxicologists, nutritionists and experts in pediatric medicine; as well as historians, poets, educationalists, some of Ireland’s leading food entrepreneurs and the cream of Irish songwriters, and musicians.
The latter group included Christy Moore, Declan Sinnott, Glen Hansard, Declan O’Rourke, Paul Brady, Sharon Shannon, Mary Black, Frances Black, Damien Dempsey, Steve Wall, Paddy Casey, Liam Maonla, Fiachna Braon¡in, Jon Kenny, Steve Wickham, Jim Corr, Mary Coughlan, Paul Linehan, Ashley Keating, Mundy, Vyvienne Long, Juliet Feeney, Donal Lunny and Luka Bloom.
The document was also signed by multi-Oscar-nominated playwright and film director Jim Sheridan, author Patrick McCabe, Oscar-winning film producer David Puttnam and Oscar-winning actor Jeremy Irons as well as hundreds of citizens and parents across the length and breadth of Ireland.
The submission is seeking answers to specific questions from the authorities in the interests of transparency and accountability that the Irish State or its agencies has refused to address in the past and presents new evidence which demonstrates gross negligence and malpractice by the authorities on how this policy is governed in Ireland.
It is important to be aware that the day after this letter was submitted, Reuters reported that that a federal judge ruled that opponents of fluoridated drinking water in the USA can proceed with a lawsuit against the US Environmental Protection Agency under the Toxic Substances Control Act. The lawsuit by Food & Water Watch, the Fluoride Action Network and other groups relates to scientific evidence that fluoride that cause neurological damage to children.
If the Irish authorities don’t adequately address the concerns expressed in our submission, we may be left with no option but to take similar legal action against elected politicians with responsibility for the governance of our State and public sector employees with responsibility for water services, food safety and public health, to ensure that they comply with their obligations with respect to the health, safety and welfare of Irish citizens.
Scientist & Risk
U S National
FAN reports with some excitement:
Judge just handed down his ruling — he has denied EPA’s motion to dismiss!
A federal judge has ruled in our favor, to allow our lawsuit against the EPA to continue to move forward. This ruling was picked up by a prominent law website, which in turn has been picked up by Reuters
And the following day
Here is Michael Connett’s 3 minute explanation of the judgement and its significance Â
,Judge denies EPA’s petition to dismiss RSCA case https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_ZS_JVwvSw&feature=youtu.be
Here is the considered and legal commentary mentioned
In Case of First Impression, Court Rules EPA Wrongly Dismissed Citizen Groupâ€™s TSCA Section 21 Petition
Saturday, December 23, 2017
On December 21, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had wrongly dismissed a Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 21 petition submitted by Food & Water Watch, Inc. and other citizens seeking the regulation of fluoridation of drinking water supplies under TSCA Section 6(a) on grounds that the ingestion of fluoride poses an unreasonable risk to humans. Food & Water Watch, Inc. v. EPA, Case No. 17-cy-02162-EMC (N.D. Cal.) (Food & Water Watch). In 2017, EPA denied the Section 21 petition on the grounds that it failed to address conditions of use other than the fluoridation of drinking water. 82 Fed. Reg. 11878 (Feb. 27, 2017).
In a fairly scathing rebuke of EPA’s legal positions, the court denied EPA’s motion to dismiss the petitioner’s judicial challenge of EPA’s administrative denial of the Section 21 petition and, in so doing, essentially rejected EPA’s interpretation that a citizen petition must evaluate all conditions of use of a chemical substance in a TSCA Section 6(b) risk evaluation. While we are hesitant to note that we told you so in our March 7, 2017, blog item, the analysis noted there was spot on.
At issue in Food & Water Watch is EPA’s legal position that TSCA Section 6 requires that EPA consider all conditions of use in proceedings under that provision. The court rejected this view noting that the argument has no basis in the statutory text, and there is no good reason to believe that the terms [conditions of use] appearance [in Section 21] obligates all citizen petitioners to address all conditions of use. The court also noted that EPA’s interpretation creates a disparity between citizen petitions and manufacturer requests for a Section 6(b) risk evaluation. Under the rules, a manufacturers request may be limited only to those particular conditions of use of interest to the manufacturer, citing 40 C.F.R. Section 702.37(b)(4). The court also noted EPA’s change of view on this issue between the proposed and final risk evaluation rule. EPA initially proposed that risk evaluations must consider all conditions of use, but concluded in the final rule that EPA may focus its review on fewer than all conditions of use.
The court’s analysis is clear and well written, and goes into some detail on EPA’s legal reasoning and the problems it identified with it.
This ruling raises interesting issues when viewed in the broader context of pending judicial challenges to EPA’s TSCA framework rules. In those challenges, citizen advocates challenge EPA’s view, as articulated in the final framework rules, that the Agency retains discretion to assess those conditions of use it believes are most relevant for a particular chemical evaluation. In other words, they challenge EPA’s view that fewer than all conditions of use must be considered in a risk evaluation, the very position the court in Food & Water Watch rejected for purposes of Section 21 petitions challenging EPA’s interpretation of a citizen’s legal burden under TSCA Section 6(a). Given that the judicial challenge to the risk evaluation final rule is being heard in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, this district court decision is particularly relevant
More international news
Athens officials continue to fluoridate water
Reverberations continue from an Athens City Council meeting in December on whether the city should add fluoride to the water supply, as it has for more than 30 years.
“The city continues to fluoridate its water until our current fluoride supply is exhausted, City Managing Director of Public Services Ryan Adams said. “While the issue was discussed at a recent council meeting, the city council did not give staff a specific direction relating to fluoridation.”
Bellows Falls Vermont
BELLOWS FALLS A grant awarded to the Bellows Falls Water Department to replace its water fluoridation equipment sparked recent debate among village trustees.
…Some trustees say they’ve received complaints from citizens opposing water fluoridation since the announcement of the grant award. The village has another scheduled regular meeting before its deadline to accept the grant. Should …While a petition would likely prompt a public discussion whether to end fluoridation in Bellows Falls, Keefe said that the decision to continue or cease the practice rests with the trustees.
A proposition calling for reintroduction of fluoride back into Buda’s city water supply failed by a wide margin, according to unofficial, final election results.
Proposition A, which dealt with adding fluoride to Buda’s water, was voted down with roughly 64 percent of the vote. Over 600 total Buda voters were against the measure, which has been a polarizing issue in the city.,,,. Roughly 320 of the 497 early votes were against Prop A.
Joe Stokes from Dallas, Texas, sent to FAN of his testimony before the Dallas City Council on April 27, 2016
Video of 3 minute presentation
Guest editorial Dallas
By Regina Imburgia, Guest Contributor
The Fluoridation Program needs to end. It is that simple. A vote from the Dallas City Council can get this done!
There is nothing redeemable about adding neurotoxins to drinking water. It would be criminal for a citizen to add arsenic and lead to municipal drinking water but the DWU (Dallas Water Utilities) adds these toxins to drinking water every day. The hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFS) added to our municipal water to raise the fluoride level is invariably contaminated with arsenic, aluminum, lead and other poisons are known to cause neurological and other medical harm in consumers, despite its rubber stamp of approval.
Since December 2013, the Dallas City Council has turned a deaf ear to the pleas of several hundred citizens demanding an end to the unsafe and ineffective Fluoridation Program. We have asked the Dallas City Council repeatedly for an open public forum where stakeholders and experts could have input. They ignore our requests.
The Dallas City Council cites the ADA and CDC endorsements of fluoridation as justification for their dismissal. But the CDC acknowledged in 1999, fluorideâ€™s benefit comes from the topical application of fluoride to the teeth in high concentrations such as toothpaste. In that fashion, it poisons bacteria.
It is also important to note the ADA (American Dental Association) is a trade group rather than a scientific association. The ADA mission is to benefit dentists, not public health. The ADA marketing implies that dentists are unanimous in their support of fluoridation policy, but only about half of dentist practicing in the United States belong to the ADA and not all ADA dentists agree with the ADA pro-fluoridation policy. Moreover, several other dental and medical groups who do have a scientific mission oppose fluoridation, such as the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT) who issued a position paper against fluoride use in September 2017.
There is no need to fluoridate the water supplies. Fluoride in the water is essentially a drug, it’s an uncontrolled use of a drug. The primary benefit of fluoride is topically, used as a topical addition, not internally. Dr. Michael D. Fleming, DDS, member of ADA, NCDA, IAOMT and FDA advisor on medical devices including dental products (2007)
Given the longevity of the fluoridation program, one would think that convincing statistical evidence must prove the program worked as promised. It doesn’t. Fluoridation for dental health is a 20th Century belief system, one that ignores 21st Century evidence of medical harm.
Could this be why our politicians fund the fluoridation program? Because they don’t want to admit that they have been on the wrong side of the issue for decades.
The Fluoridation Program needs to end. We must motivate the Dallas City Council to do their job as elected gatekeepers to open their ears and minds to the testimony of citizens and modern science.
Please join us, the most vulnerable need us to speak for them. Tell the Dallas City Council to turn off the spigot.
Regina Imburgia is a local resident, for more information please visit DallasforSafeWater.com. NDG’s recent story has resulted in a lively discussion via our comment section. Recently Ms. Imburgia, who spoke before the Dallas City Council last fall on this issue, was invited to submit a guest editorial.
Edgartown, Martha’s Vineyard: Massachusetts,
The decision about whether to add fluoride to Edgartown’s public water supply will now go before voters next April, following a successful petition effort by residents…
The Edgartown board of health stood by its controversial decision to add fluoride â€¦ knowing that enough signatures had been gathered by petition to bring the question of adding fluoride to the water to town vote rs.
Port Angeles, WA
PORT ANGELES The Port Angeles City Council has voted to abide by a public advisory vote to keep fluoride out of the municipal water supply and to remove fluoridation equipment.
The council voted 5-2 Tuesday to pass a resolution that adheres to the outcome of the vote, directs staff to surplus and dispose of the city’s idle fluoridation equipment and removes any remaining fluorosilicic acid from city facilities.
Mayor Patrick Downie sided with a new 4-3 majority that voted to stop fluoridation, The advisory vote on fluoride garnered more votes – 5,552 – than any other citywide measure or contested City Council race.
Salem M Massachusetts
BOSTON Activists are pressuring the state to ban the practice of adding fluoride compounds to public drinking water, saying it amounts to mass-medicating without public consent.
A proposal that went before a legislative panel on Monday would outlaw the practice. Filed by Sen. Barbara L’Italien, D-Andover, on behalf of a constituent, it would end a decades-old public health campaign aimed at preventing tooth decay.
“Medical mandates like this are politics pretending to be science,” said Karen Spencer, a Gloucester activist who is involved with anti-fluoridation campaigns. “…
…The Massachusetts Water Resources Authority â€” which serves more than 2.5 million people across 61 communities including Marblehead, Peabody, Swampscott and Lynn â€” has fluoridated the water for more than 30 years.
Concerns about the health effects have kept several towns on the North Shore and Merrimack Valley including Georgetown, Merrimac and Rowley â€” from doing so. Other communities, such as Rockport and Gloucester, have voted to keep using it….
San Jose CA
In the latest step toward the effort by dentists and health officials to end San Jose’s status as the largest city in America without fluoride in its drinking water, Santa Clara County has contributed $1 million to add fluoride for the first time to drinking water from wells operated by the San Jose Water Company.
On Tuesday, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 to spend $1,027,713 from the county general fund to help install fluoridation equipment on six new wells being constructed by San Jose Water Company for customers of East San Jose.
Spotysylvania, Frederickesburg, VA
In June, Spotsylvania County resident Larry Plating offered a grim take on the county’s long-standing practice of adding a small amount of fluoride to drinking water.
He told the Board of Supervisors that fluoride can reduce IQ levels and cause serious health problems, and said more than 40 percent of American teenagers show signs of overexposure to fluoride. It might be time to turn off the spigot that has been fluoridating Spotsylvania’s water since 1981, Plating added in his remarks to supervisors.
…Plating continued his self-proclaimed crusade at subsequent meetings, urging supervisors to stop what he considers a threat to public health. Emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show that Plating has complained about fluoridated water for at least three years.
His persistence may pay off. Spotsylvania supervisors are thinking about eliminating fluoride from the water supply and could vote to do so as early as Tuesday. Such a move would also impact Fredericksburg, which gets its water from Spotsylvania’s Motts Run Water Treatment Plant.
…Plating first asked supervisors to stop fluoridating water in an email January 2015, I am not a kook, I’m just a guy who has thought this through Plating said.
…the Board of Supervisors stopped short of making any decisions on the matter after hearing a presentation about the benefits of fluoridated water, which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control says reduces cavities by 25 percent. Critics say the practice amounts to forced medication.
Supervisor David Ross, who is concerned about alleged health risks, suggested listing fluoride levels on county water bills, Supervisors Chairman Greg Benton proposed surveying residents, perhaps on the water bills, about their stance on fluoridated water. He noted that most of the folks who spoke at the meeting live outside Spotsylvania. The discussion will likely continue at future meetings….
Some teas contain more fluoride than EPA allows in public water supplies, which can do skeletal damage, according to research published in Environmental Pollution (Das, et al. 12/2017), reports the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc. (NYSCOF)
More details in Reports
Another reminder of how much fluoridation is big business
Global Water Fluoridation Chemical Market Growth Trends by Manufacturers, Regions, Type and Application, Forecast 2023
Posted: Jan 16, 2018 8:21 PM GST <em class=”wnDate”>Tuesday, January 16, 2018 3:21 PM EST</em>
Water Fluoridation Chemical Market Report covers the present scenario and the growth prospects of the Water Fluoridation Chemical Industry for 2018-2023. Water Fluoridation Chemical Market analysis reports provide a valuable source of insightful data for business strategists and competitive analysis of Water Fluoridation Chemical market.
At the January 8 meeting the Nipawin council decided to stick to their decision, made in July, 2017 to not add fluoride to the community drinking water supply, despite a letter received from the Primary Health Care Leadership Team, asking council to re-consider.
Parsons receives a $35 thousand dollar grant to bring fluoridation back to the water treatment center. The city stopped the process of adding fluoride to the water a few years ago after old pipes started to corrode. Once those issues were fixed, the additive was never re-introduced
SUPPORTERS on both sides of the Gunnedah water fluoridation debate are putting their case forward to Gunnedah Shire Council (GSC) ahead of the December meeting.
A coalition of 13 leading health organisations and professional bodies, including the Australian Dental Association NSW, and the National Rural Health Alliance, have submitted an open letter to GSC. The letter composed by the organisations urged council to support water fluoridation.
…Fluoride Action Network Australia chair Merilyn Haines said she had been invited to speak to councillors before a decision is made. I have accepted an invitation from the mayor to give a presentation to councillors on Wednesday, December 13,â€ Mrs Haines said.
After ongoing debate, Gunnedah Shire Council has voted to seek approval from New South Wales Health to begin adding fluoride to the town’s water supply.
Mayor Jamie Chaffey supported the decision, saying the move had been under consideration since 2009.
If approved by the state’s health body, fluoridation of the water supply is expected to commence in 2020.
GUNNEDAH could have fluoride in its water by 2020 after Gunnedah Shire Council (GSC) commenced the process to fluoridate the towns water supply.
The decision to accept a proposal to add fluoride to the water supply was passed in December when council resolved to write to NSW Health to commence the water fluoridation process.
This story first appeared on Namoi Valley Independent.
The earlier article was accompanied by a poll, which was still open in January and yielded the following result.
Thank you for voting!
No way, keep it out of the water. 62.5% (245 votes)
Absolutely, I can’t believe it’s not in there already. 33.16% (130 votes)
We need more information. 2.55% (10 votes)
Other: 1.79% (7 votes)
Total Votes: 392
Anti-fluoride campaigners are calling for the shutdown of fluoride plants in the Lismore and Ballina areas after documents have apparently revealed a â€˜litany of breakdowns and fluoride overdose spikes.
The Fluoride Free Northern Rivers (FFNR) group said documents released under Freedom of Information laws revealed breakdowns at the plants at Corndale, Knockrow, Clunes and Durroughby.
The group also said its plan to launch legal action against selected North Coast councils was still going ahead but had been delayed as they were awaiting judgement from another fluoride challenge currently underway in the Federal Court.
FFNR has accused Rous of failing to provide any information or warning to the public arising from the break downs and overdose spikes that had occurred in the first 20 months of operation of the four fluoride dosing plants
The list of problems revealed in the documents obtained by FFNR include:
* Unmixed residual fluoride in a batch tank leading to two overdose spikes at Corndale
* Pipework failure leading to leaks and fractures in tanks, and dosing pumps
* Failure of safety sensors
* Failure of the circuit breaker and flow meters requiring the Corndale plant to be further modified
* Constant problems with fluoride solutions in holding tanks and pumps
* Switch failures on fluoride analyser
* Blockages to the hopper at Corndale
* Flood water ingress into the waste holding tank at Corndale
Further, plants are being shut down due to insufficient staff.
At Oberon Council’s ordinary meeting on Tuesday, May 20, 2014, Veronika Cvitanovic from the Oberon Residents Against Fluoridation (ORAF) group presented a petition to council with 672 signatures and said the overall consensus was that it was a waste of money and most of the water would go down the drain. Now the issue is back on the Council agenda…
FAN-NZ campaign is continuing its postcard campaign.
Having sent postcards to the Labour, Fluoride Free and Green MPs, another batch of postcards is going to the National MPs and all DHB members in the country., with each National MP about 50 cards from 50 different people, and each DHB member 16 cards from 16 different people
.FAN-NZ is are also organising Events around the country so that MPs are given the message that they must attend Prof Connett’s presentation at Parliament in February.
Well done everyone! Parliament has been in touch and they are organising for Prof Connett to speak at Parliament when he is here in February. MPs from all parties will be invited.
Prof Connett, one of the worldâ€™s leading experts on water fluoridation, is returning to New Zealand in February. Prof Connett makes the most compelling Case Against Fluoridation. He will be speaking in Whangarei, Cambridge, Te Awamutu, Napier, Whanganui and Carterton. See speaking tour details here.
Not everyone is happy. The new Prime Minister has been asked to confirm the Labour Party’s support for fluoridation She stated that she was just giving the opponents an opportunity to speak. The row may help ensure a good attendance; it could also entrench the views of those pushing for mandatory fluoridation.
The Prime Minister has been forced to clarify Labour’s stance on fluoridation, after it was confirmed two Government MPs plan to host an anti-fluoride group at Parliament
Prominent US anti-fluoride campaigner Paul Connett is understood to be briefing MPs at Parliament in the coming weeks, hosted by Labour backbencher Duncan Webb and NZ First MP Jenny Marcroft
Legislation to allow DHBs, rather than district councils, to decide whether a town water supply should befluoridated, is before the House awaiting a second r reading
Connett is to be brought to New Zealand by Fluoride Free New Zealand, to hold a number public briefings on their position throughout the regions
But National Party health spokesman Jonathan … questioned why those views would be treated as expert opinion in a briefing to MPs…
Here is a typical bit of double-speak
The new chair of parliament’s health select committee is looking forward to making progress on some major pieces of legislation. Louisa Wall says the committee tends to set aside party political interests as members strive for a health system that works for all New Zealanders.
On the table is a government bill that will make district health boards rather than local government responsible for fluoridating water supplies.
…”The intent of this piece of legislation is to take it out of the hands of a political process and allow DHBs to lead about whether or not we should have fluoride in our water, whose main purpose is to help prevent tooth decay,” Ms Wall says….