.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

UK Against Fluoridation

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Southampton Echo 31st May



Friday, May 30, 2008

Dr Hans Moolenburgh and Sheila Jones (BFS) interviews, Perspective, 23 May 2008

Download radio programme and play

UK - Huddersfield Fluoride debate

Fluoride debate
May 29 2008 by Andrew Baldwin, Huddersfield Daily Examiner

NEW figures on the state of children’s teeth have inevitably led to a renewal of calls for fluoride to be added to the region’s water.
It is a demand that we have heard many times before, but which always meets with stiff opposition from those who claim it amounts to a form of involuntary medication.
The argument will rage. But in the meantime is it not true that parents need to play their part in ensuring their children’s oral health?
The worsening state of young people’s teeth – especially in Batley – seems to suggest that many are ignoring their responsibilities. Surely it is not asking too much for regular brushing and periodic checks at the dentist.

UK - Southampton - Fluoride: You decide (We hope)

Fluoride: You decide
Comment | Read Comments (2)
HEALTH CHIEFS are today one step closer to adding fluoride to Southampton's tap water supply.
They have agreed to launch a £178,000 three-month public consultation into the controversial plan.
Those supporting the scheme say that it could be the solution to the city's poor dental health record.
But campaigners have vowed to fight the plan to add what they describe as "poison" to South-ampton's water supply.They say a scheme to top up levels of fluoride in tap water delivered to two-thirds of the city's households could cause side effects including cancer and brain damage.
During the consultation, residents will get the chance to hear the arguments for and against fluoridation at public meetings, while views will be gathered through questionnaires.
Reader Poll
Should fluoride be added to Southampton's drinking water?
Yes
11.8%
No
88.2%

The board of the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA), which oversees the region's healthcare, yesterday agreed residents should be consulted on the scheme.
But the controversial plans have caused anger among campaigners who say the evidence in favour of adding fluoride is flawed.
Hampshire Against Fluorid-ation is a group dedicated to fighting the scheme, arguing it can cause skeletal fluorosis, brittle bones, brain damage, bone cancer, thyroid problems and hypersensitive reactions.

"It is a poison - that's its only status in UK law," the group's treasurer, Peter Richards told the Daily Echo last night.
"It comes out somewhere between lead and arsenic for toxicity. It's hugely dangerous stuff.
"Our bodies can only excrete half of it, and the rest gets stored in body tissue, particularly bones."There can only be one reason to fluoridate and that's if it is effective in improving children's dental health. It's been proven over and over again that it doesn't work."

His organisation is affiliated to the National Pure Water Association, and both plan to vigorously oppose the scheme during the public consultation, which is expected to start in August. John Graham, the association's vice chairman, told the SHA board that adding anything to the water supply would be against European law.
He said the Convention on Human Rights says all citizens must give their informed individual consent before receiving medication, and must be free to withdraw that permission at any time.

Mr Graham also argued that if anyone were to fall ill as a direct result of the added fluoride they could take those responsible for putting it there to court.
"It constitutes an assault," he said.
"Water companies carrying out that will be guilty of an act of battery, and criminal charges could result if people suffer."
The association says there is little scientific evidence to show the benefits of fluoridated water, and worries that proof of other side- effects has been covered up.

"Fluoridation is fundamentally wrong," said Mr Graham.Health bosses last night defended the scheme and welcomed the decision for a public consultation to go ahead.
Dr Jeyanthi John, a Southamp-ton PCT dental public health consultant, said fluoridation could drastically improve the state of the city's teeth.
Preventable "We compared Shirley in Southampton with Shirley in Solihull, because they are very similar areas with vastly different dental health," she said.
"The only difference was water fluoridation.
"If this benefits so many people, why should we deny the people of Southampton those benefits?
"It is totally unacceptable in the 21st century that we have an entirely preventable disease that we allow people to suffer from."
Details of the public consultation will now be finalised before the SHA board's July meeting.
The exercise, which the SHA insists will be thorough and fair, is expected to begin in mid-August, and must run for at least 12 weeks.
Once residents' feedback has been independently assessed, the board will decide whether to give fluoridation the green light in January 2009.
"It must be emphasised that no decision to fluoridate water supplies has been taken," said Professor John Newton, Regional Director of Public Health.
"It is important that before any decision is made, everyone who lives and works in the area has the opportunity to look at the available facts and have their say."
The Daily Echo requested confirmation from the SHA that the scheme would be dropped if the public consultation shows residents are opposed to it, and also why four identified priority areas would not receive fluoridated water under the proposals. At the time of going to press we had not received a response.

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Babies at risk from fluoride

Babies at risk from fluoride
Thursday, 29 May 2008, 11:28 am
Press Release: Safe Food Campaign
Safe Food Campaign media release 29 May 2008
Babies at risk from fluoride
Babies having formula made up with fluoridated water are getting a dose that could affect their thyroid. The Safe Food Campaign is presenting material on fluoridation to Wellington City Council on their draft annual plan today at 10.50am.

"It is time for Wellington City Council to review the artificial fluoridation of our water supplies, especially because more and more evidence is coming to light regarding the risk to babies and the foetus in the womb," stated Alison White, Co-convenor of the Safe Food Campaign. "Recently two public health bodies in the US, the American Dental Association and Centre for Disease Control, have issued warnings about the risk of giving babies formula with fluoridated water. Careful analysis of studies reveals that the benefits of water fluoridation are not proven, and that various adverse health effects are being increasingly discovered."
The US National Research Council, in their 2006 review of fluoride, advised that apart from infants, diabetics, those on dialysis, those with impaired kidney function, such as the elderly, and those with high water consumption are at particular risk.

"By adding fluoride to our water the Council is overriding the rights of those who don't want a poison like fluoride in their water. It also penalises those on low incomes who don't want fluoride - a water filter to remove fluoride is expensive," Ms White added.

New Zealand is only one of eight countries in the world where more than 50% of water supplies are artificially fluoridated. Most European countries have not fluoridated and their dental decay rates have also fallen. An increasing number of areas in Canada and the US are choosing to discontinue fluoridation.

The Safe Food Campaign aims to give consumers information about the risks of artificial water fluoridation.

NOTE: The US National Research Council has calculated that a fluoride dosage of 0.05 to 0.13mg/kg could adversely affect thyroid functioning. A baby at six months of age who is fed 1 litre of formula with fluoridated water could receive 0.10mg/kg/day.

ENDS

Australia - Anti-fluoridation information 'propaganda'

Anti-fluoridation information 'propaganda'
By Susan Sandys
The Ashburton District Council will publicise anti-fluoride information prior to a Methven referendum on the issue later this year.
This has raised the ire of the Canterbury District Health Board, which plans to ask the council to reconsider its approach.
The council claims it is neutral in the contentious fluoride debate, and will put “both sides” in front of the public. But health professionals have accused it of bias in favour of anti-fluoridationists.
A referendum date has been decided, it will be August 2. Voting documents will be delivered to Methven residents July 11 to 14.
Canterbury District Health Board medical officer of health Daniel Williams said he will formally ask the council to reconsider publicising anti-fluoridation claims “which fly in the face of the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence”.
Council corporate services manager John Rollinson announced the referendum date to Methven Community Board members at their six-weekly meeting on Monday, and presented them with information which had been distributed to Ashburton ratepayers leading up to that town’s fluoride referendum in 2006.
The information, published in the council’s District Diary which is delivered to Mid Canterbury residents, included half an A3 page contributed by anti-fluoride campaigner Don Church.
Mr Rollinson suggested the council post out similar information to Methven voters, and Methven Communtiy Board members nodded their approval. However, councillor Ken Lowe was concerned about the cost and board members instead decided to distribute the information to each household as a supplement in the community newspaper Snowfed.
After the meeting dental surgeon Justin Wall said the information reflected councillors’ views.
“They are not neutral because their actions have been against the status quo (of having fluoride in the water).”
The information was in fact propaganda, he said.
“What happens in a situation like that you are validating stuff that’s patently incorrect. By publishing it you are making it valid and that’s wrong,” Dr Wall said.
An example was an American study summary which suggested teenage boys in fluoridated areas were more prone to bone cancer. However, the study was conducted by a PhD student whose professor never validated it because it was poor science. Anti-fluoridationists held the professor up as evidence of a pro-fluoride conspiracy.
“There’s no conspiracy,” Dr Wall said.
Dr Williams said if the council believed there was “any truth in the claims that Mr Church makes about fluoridation, then it should stop fluoridating the Methven water supply immediately.”
Link to page of information published by council prior to Ashburton referendum: http://www.ashburtondc.govt.nz/NR/rdonlyres/1010D9E8-BD68-4F9F-A250-04879890C918/40937/ddfeb07Page45.pdf
May 28 2008

USA - East end water to lose its fluoride

East end water to lose its fluoride
Posted By Jordan Press
Posted 1 day ago
Residents in the east end of Kingston should soon be drinking water from their taps that is free of fluoride.

For years, CFB Kingston required the chemical additive to its water supply. Utilities Kingston added fluoride to the water that it supplied to the base and to the rest of Pittsburgh district.

The base has signalled to the city that it can do without fluoride. That piece of information comes about a week before city councillors were to debate a proposal that, if passed, could have led the city to remove fluoride from the water.

Deputy Mayor Rob Matheson said the city needed to look at stopping the practice because of the cost to do so and the potential health problems associated with fluoridated water.

Recent studies have linked fluoride in drinking water to some diseases, including cancer.

"Those new scientific concerns [drive] me," Matheson said. "The only reason we're still doing it is [because of] antiquated regulations from CFB Kingston."

Utilities Kingston adds fluoride to the drinking water at the James Street booster station in Barriefield. It doesn't do so at any other drinking water plants or booster stations in the rest of the city.

The fluoride goes into the system to create a "fluoride residual" for the base. The Department of National Defence requires fluoride in the water for the base to help prevent tooth decay, according to the Utilities Kingston website.

However, the base has told the city that it no longer requires fluoride because there are other sources for the dental chemical. As well, more than 80 per cent of workers at the base live in the community, meaning they don't all drink fluoridated water.

Utilities Kingston president Jim Keech said the addition of fluoride to the water in the east end isn't a major strain for Utilities Kingston.

"It's a bit of a maintenance issue," he said .

Advertisement

Adding fluoride into drinking water has recently returned to the mainstream of public debate. Scientific data and media reports have linked fluoride in water to impaired thyroid function, reduced intelligence in children and possibly the onset of osteosarcoma in teenage boys.

Osteosarcoma is the rare form of bone cancer that killed Terry Fox. Opponents say that the health risks outweigh the potential benefits. Fluoride, opponents argue, is better absorbed through brushing with a toothpaste and not through drinking water.

Proponents of the practise say that the introduction of fluoride has caused a sharp decrease in the development of cavities in children. They argue it is a safe practice that should be sustained.

jpress@thewhig.com

UK - Southampton Fluoride plan gets green light

Fluoride plan gets green light
By Jon Reeve
Comment | Read Comments (18)

CONTROVERSIAL plans to add fluoride to Southampton's tap water have today taken a major step forward.

Health chiefs have agreed to launch a public consultation gauging opinion of the city's residents on proposals that would see 67 per cent of them receiving fluoridated water.

Southampton has one of the poorest records for dental health among children of anywhere in the country and the city's Primary Care Trust (PCT) sees fluoridation as a solution.
Today its call for a £178,000 public debate on plans to add the mineral to mains supplies was backed by the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SCSHA), which oversees healthcare in the region.

Despite opposition from campaigners who claim fluoridation has negative side effects including brittle bones, brain damage skeletal fluorosis and bone cancer, the SCSHA board unanimously agreed to launch the public consultation.

"We want to find out the level of public support and want to gauge opinion once people have the chance to understand what it's all about," said Professor John Newton, regional director of public health.

advertisement
The consultation is likely to start in August.

The results will be independently assessed and will go before the health authorities board for a final decision in January next year.

1:10pm today

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

USA - A roundup of recent editorials from Michigan newspapers

A roundup of recent editorials from Michigan newspapers
5/27/2008, 2:18 p.m. EDT
The Associated Press
(AP) — In 1945, Grand Rapids became the first city in the nation to add fluoride to drinking water to prevent tooth decay. Today, following the city's lead, more than two thirds of Americans drink from public systems where fluoride is added to the water. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calls water fluoridation one of the 10 great health achievements of the 20th century — along with vaccinations and control of infectious diseases.

Against that backdrop, the announcement from a City of Grand Rapids official that he is studying whether to continue fluoridation should be met with considerable skepticism from the public and the Grand Rapids City Commission. Municipal water fluoridation here and elsewhere remains a success.

Only serious evidence to the contrary should be allowed to compromise those gains and reverse the city's historic role in the fluoride revolution.
Corky Overmyer, director of sustainability for the city of Grand Rapids, recently announced that he is working with scientists at Grand Valley State University to study whether to continue to add fluoride to the city's water supply. He is responding to anti-fluoride advocates, who have linked fluoride to everything from cancer to Down syndrome.

There is no indication Overmyer's musings have moved beyond the let's-take-a-look stage for Grand Rapids and the 11 suburban communities served by its water system. Certainly there is no harm in reviewing the hard science on fluoridation's benefits and reviewing the concerns of critics.

The discussion should begin with the conclusions of credible groups such as the World Health Organization, the American Dental Association, the American Medical Association and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. All affirm the proven benefits of fluoride in drinking water in the proper amounts — roughly 1 part per million, about a drop in a bathtub full of water.

Based on a review of the scientific literature, the ADA has concluded that water fluoridation today reduces tooth decay by 20 percent to 40 percent. The organization finds no credible scientific links between the proper levels of fluoride and cancer, Down syndrome, poor thyroid gland function, infertility or a host of other ills cited by fluoride opponents.

The chemical can cause some health problems if it exceeds recommended amounts. Over-fluoridation happens through natural occurrence in water or, for instance, when children are allowed to ingest too much toothpaste when they brush their teeth. The effects range from enamel fluorosis, a discoloration and pitting of tooth enamel, to skeletal fluorosis, which increases bone fractures.

So there is reason to be cautious about the amount of the chemical ingested. But any attempt to get rid of fluoride altogether faces a long, uphill climb against the considerable evidence that fluoridation remains a safe, cost-effective tool for promoting healthier lives. Opponents will have to produce evidence to the contrary that has real teeth before Grand Rapids should even think about backing down from that great public health advance.

LISTEN! CONTACT LOCAL AUTHORITIES! Fluoride = Poison !

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

UK - Manx radio

Hans Moolenburgh's call to Manx Radio's Mannin Line, Sunday, 27 May 2008

Monday, May 26, 2008

USA - Saving water is event focus

LAYTON — Weber Basin Water Conservancy District, 2837 E. Highway 193, will open its new Water Conservation Learning Garden from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday.
The new garden is designed to give the public ideas for yards and gardens with water conservation in mind. Also offered will be tours of the district's drinking-water treatment plant and vendor booths showing water conservation products.

Saturday also will begin the first day of use for the district's fluoride-free filling station. This is located in the garden area and will allow residents who prefer drinking water without fluoride to fill their own containers.

Now, a tooth mousse 'to protect against decay'

Now, a tooth mousse 'to protect against decay'
Melbourne, May 23 (PTI) Here's some good news! You no longer need to control your craving for chocolates, for scientists have developed a tooth mousse that protects against decay and repairs any existing damage.
A team at Melbourne University has produced the new product which can penetrate ten times deeper into teeth than current fluoride treatments -- in fact, it repairs damage by replacing the minerals lost through the decay process.

Tooth decay or cavities are consequences of dental caries. If left untreated, the disease can lead to pain, tooth loss, infection, and in severe cases, death of the tooth.

According to lead researcher and the Head of Dental Science at the university, Professor Eric Reynolds, the Tooth Mousse Plus is a breakthrough in oral healthcare and it would benefit thousands of people worldwide.

"Laboratory tests and clinical trials have shown Tooth Mousse Plus not only provides the highest level of fluoride protection now available for teeth but that it can also repair existing decay damage.

"It's the result of a real team effort by molecular scientists, dentists and formulation chemists," he said.

The Cooperative Research Centre for Oral Heath Science (CRC-OHS) at the University of Melbourne has also been awarded a prestigious prize for Excellence in Innovation, recognising the achievements of Tooth Mousse Plus. PTI

No need for fluoridation then?

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Prof says fluorosis is good.

This is part of Prof John Newton's published paper to sell the idea to the Strategic Health Authority's board to fluoridate Southampton, making out fluorosis makes your teeth even more attractive. No mention of kiddies being called "shit teeth" as in an earlier YouTube news video.

Australia - Why even ask?

Why even ask?
BY DIANA COZADINOS23/05/2008 3:28:00
PMTHE decision not to fluoridate the Eurobodalla’s water supply has sparked a greater debate as to the relevance of council’s public consultation process.
Almost a quarter of the shire’s population responded to an extensive council survey, and two-thirds of respondents supported fluoridation.
This week’s 5-4 vote by councillors against fluoridation launched a swathe of angry letters to the Bay Post/Moruya Examiner, accusing the five councillors of ignoring the community they were elected to represent.Dr Graham Thomas described the “disastrous vote” as “a litany of error, incompetence, and just plain
ignorance”. “To say that there is no proven evidence that fluoridation reduces dental decay and that dentists are just wanting to earn thousands of dollars by fixing up the evil side effects of fluoride is also nonsensical.”
He said fluoride tablets, the alternative suggested by Councillor Allan Brown, were not recommended by dentists except for in remote rural areas under strict professional supervision, which was not available in the shire.
He encouraged all councillors to read the scientific and clinical information that underpinned safe and effective use of fluoride in drinking water and change their vote to the affirmative at next week’s council meeting.
Dr Grant Miles said he was appalled by the decision that went against both demonstrated community support and the willingness of the State Government to provide resources.
“The decision was foolish, arrogant and wicked in its impact on the dental health of our young and defenceless,” he wrote.
A Surf Beach parent said it was another example of council not listening to ratepayers.
“Shame on them for not considering the benefits to our children. My two eldest children raised in Sydney have healthy teeth, not so lucky is my third that was raised here.”
Phil Teece, of Sunshine Bay, described the decision as bizarre, and a travesty for public health and democratic process.
“In public policy, it is a given that opponents of change are invariably more vociferous than supporters.
“This suggests the paltry 27 per cent identified in council’s extensive public consultation process almost certainly overstates total community opposition, while the registered 67.5 percent support probably fails fully to reflect the extent of public acceptance of fluoride.
Phil Armstrong, of Jeremadra, asked if the five councillors were waiting for 100 per cent approval.
“I am sure that in September nearly seven out of every 10 electors in the Eurobodalla Shire will consider their votes for councillors and mayor very carefully because that is one “survey” where the community does have the final say.”
However anti-fluoride campaigners welcomed council’s decision as a victory for those committed to giving residents the right to make their own individual choice.
“That is democracy in action,” Eurobodalla Fluoride Issues Incorporated public officer Marilyn Vine said.

Saturday, May 24, 2008

UK - Southampton's turn to be poisoned

UK - Normal balanced diet is enough

Normal balanced diet is enough
23 May 2008
In the latest MORI survey, there was a majority of support for water fluoridation across all age groups in the population.
The highest level of support (78 per cent) was among 16 to 24 year olds.
Consultant in dental public health to Birmingham Health Authority, John Langford, commented: “This poll shows that there is still a massive majority of support for adding fluoride to water to promote better dental health."
The questions were as follows: Do you think that fluoride should be added to the water supply if it reduces tooth decay? Second was, Do you think there is fluoride naturally present in water?
First question after reading that is, why did Langford use the word ‘still’? Was it in the wake of the York report not stating that it was a panacea for healthy teeth, but a concern of fluorosis and people now, are having second thoughts on fluoride?
It is also at this stage that I also add that Julie Kirkbride MP is on the panel for Mori and that she also supported the addition of fluoride.

We are told by South Staffs Water in a letter this paper has that it and the PCT carried out a public opinion poll in 1985 before adding fluoride asking people those very same questions, but according to Strategic Health that covers the whole of the West Midlands, when we asked under the Freedom Of Information Act, it said there was no such undertaking.

Fluoride is present in all manner of foods - water, tea leaves, meat, fruit, vegetables, milk, and poultry. So if you eat all these foods in a balanced way, you get the protection you need. But Langford ignores this information and he should use his position to teach the nation better eating habits.

Stan Francis
Bromsgrove Clean Water Group.
Romsley

Biased question - do you think that fluoride should be added to the water supply if it reduces tooth decay? If you were ignorant about fluoride you are bound to say yes.

USA - Fluoride dangerous toxin to ingest

Fluoride dangerous toxin to ingest
- Last modified: May 23. 2008 10:39AM
Let’s suppose the head of your local health department, who isn’t a physician, but has approval of your city council, none of whom are doctors, decides to medicate you with small quantities of a poisonous drug containing lead, arsenic, radium and fluoride. Normally, if anyone other than a doctor prescribed a drug for you, he could be prosecuted under the law.

The great health tragedy is that 66 percent of Americans are unwittingly, and many unwillingly, being dosed daily with a drug call hydrofluorisilic acid. This waste toxin from the fertilizer industry comes from smokestack scrubbers installed to remove the above noted toxins from the manufacturing process.

The accepted knowledge that fluoride is good for your teeth is a myth based on biased and falsified research. This myth causes irreparable harm when swallowed daily, building up for years in the body’s cells.

Much of the initial research done proving fluoride prevented dental cavities was falsified for profit. Recent research has revealed this toxin ingested daily can result in osteosarcoma in boys, brittle bones in older women, hypothyroidism, mottled teeth in 30 percent of American youth and dulling of the mind.
Do your own research at www.fluoridealert.org, or Youtube then Fluoride.
Mark Clifton

Hendersonville

USA - Improved oral health

Letters for May 24
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Improved oral health
In 2005, 60 years of public water fluoridation was commemorated. Grand Rapids was the first city to adjust the level of fluoride in its water supply.

As a dental hygienist with over 30 years of practice, the difference between children drinking fluoridated water and those without it is very evident. Since 1945 fluoride has dramatically improved the oral health of Grand Rapidians.
In a time when our state is in a crisis financially, when decay rates of our youngest children are on the rise and access to dental care for many is hard to find, let's not be penny wise and pound foolish.

For every $1 spent on water fluoridation more than $380 is saved in dental bills. The average cost for one filling is $101.94. The cost to fluoridate water for one person for their lifetime can be less than the cost for one filling.

Families are spending unlimited resources on bottled water. Consumption of bottled water is growing. The vast majority of bottled water has less than the optimal amount of fluoride, so families are missing the benefits of water fluoridation.
In all the 60 years of research and practical experience with water fluoridation, no charge against the benefits and safety of fluoride has ever been substantiated.
Mr. Corky Overmyer, director of sustainability for the city of Grand Rapids, should save our smiles for sustainability

-- SHARON BREUKER
Grand Rapids

Not much doubt then, fluoridation wonderful if we believe her.

Chemical Dumbing Down of America

Friday, May 23, 2008

Fluoride, Triclosan & the Kosher Connection 1

UK - Sugar in booze is rotten news for your teeth

Sugar in booze is rotten news for your teeth
Experts are warning that people are putting their teeth at risk because of the amount of sugar they consume through alcohol.
22 May 2008
By Tim Booler
Boozers on Wearside down up to half a tonne of sugar in a lifetime through alcohol, a survey has revealed.
Health chiefs have regularly warned about the effects of drinking too much beer, wine and spirits, which increases people's chances of developing serious liver and heart disease.

Now dentists have joined the throng, highlighting the effect of sugar consumption through alcohol on teeth.

Sunderland, seemingly, has the most to fear, being recently ranked second in the country's booze league.

A new national poll has confirmed the problem, showing that the North East consumes more sugar through alcohol than any other UK region.

The survey of 3,500 people, conducted by Philips Hydroclean, found that people from the region down an average of 6.37 units of alcohol per week.

With 15g of sugar in every unit, it adds up to a staggering 387kg in a lifetime through alcohol alone.

In contrast, the Welsh consume an average of 274kg through booze.

However, the problem could be even worse, as another study found Wearside men down about of 21.4 units a week, which amounts to 1.3 tonnes of sugar.

Dentist Dr Henriette William warned: "Although sugar is not the only factor that plays a role in the development of oral disease, the control of intake is essential in preventing oral diseases such as tooth decay.

"If the intake of sugar is at the levels suggested in this report, then regular and effective removal of plaque is essential."

As a result of poor oral care, one fifth of respondents to the Philips survey said they had suffered from inflamed gums and tooth loss, with half admitting to toothache.

As well as older boozers, Sunderland children also have bad teeth problems.

Surveys have shown that by the age of six, more than half of children in the city have decayed, missing or filled teeth – prompting renewed calls for the fluoridation of water supplies to the city.

Experts believe sugar should form no more than 10 per cent of a person's daily intake, and people should eat only 10 teaspoons, or 40g, a day.

But hidden sugars in canned or processed foods, sausages, cereal bars, smoothies, pies and pasties mean people are often unaware of the quantity of sugar in their diet.

Vivienne Palmer, from Philips, said: ''We are all more aware of which foods are good for us and how to lead a healthier lifestyle these days, but we seem to take our teeth for granted.

"They need as much care as any other part of the body, so we wanted to find out more about people's tooth care regimes and knowledge of sugary products so we can make it easy for anyone, young or old, to keep their teeth and gums in tip-top condition."

Your drinking water causing depression?

Your drinking water causing depression?
Other impacts of fluoridation: 'Constipation, fuzzy thinking'
Posted: May 22, 2008
By Bob Unruh
A New York organization whose members are raising alarms about the damage from fluoride in America's water supplies says a government study available online suggests the additive can be blamed for a multitude of problems stemming from thyroid imbalances including cardiac disease, depression, constipation, fuzzy thinking and fluid retention.
The New York State Coalition opposed to Fluoridation, Inc., said, "There is clear evidence that small amounts of fluoride, at or near levels added to U.S. water supplies, present potential risks to the thyroid gland."
It cited the study by the National Research Council which reviewed fluoride-thyroid research and literature.
"Many Americans are exposed to fluoride in the ranges associated with thyroid effects, especially for people with iodine deficiency," Kathleen Thiessen, Ph.D. and co-author of the government-sponsored NRC report, wrote.

(Story continues below)




"The recent decline in iodine intake in the U.S could contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals," she said.

"A low level of thyroid hormone can increase the risk of cardiac disease, high cholesterol, depression and, in pregnant woman, decreased intelligence of offspring," she continued.

The statement said other common thyroid symptoms include fatigue, weight gain, constipation, fuzzy thinking, low blood pressure, fluid retention, depression, body pain and slow reflexes.

The New York group said fluoride, in the form of silicofluorides, is added to public water supplies across about two-thirds of the United States. The program dates back decades and was "ostensibly to reduce tooth decay, [but] was never safety-tested," the group said.

Robert Carton, Ph.D., an environmental scientist who worked for more than 30 years for the U.S. government including managing risk assessments on high priority toxic chemicals, told the New York organization, "Fluoride has detrimental effects on the thyroid gland of healthy males at 3.5 mg a day. With iodine deficiency, the effect level drops to 0.7 milligrams/day for an average male."

The report also cites studies documenting fluoride concentrations in thyroids exceeding that found in other soft tissues except kidney, an association between endemic goiter and fluoride exposure or enamel fluorosis in human populations and how fluoride adversely affects thyroid and parathyroid hormones, which affect bone health.

The National Research Council functions under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine and is one branch of a private, nonprofit institution that provides science, technology and health policy advice under a congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863.

The collective mission of the organizations is "to improve government decision making and public policy, increase public education and understanding, and promote the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge in matters involving science, engineering, technology, and health."

WND recently reported a group of private citizens in San Diego County is working on a large-scale lawsuit in federal court against public water districts to challenge the constitutionality of using industrial-grade additives to fluoridate drinking water.

Jeff Green, national director of Citizens for Safe Drinking Water in San Diego, told WND, "We are raising funds for a lawsuit that has been prepared for plaintiffs who are asserting their constitutional rights under the Ninth and 14th Amendments to be free of what they term 'bodily intrusions' by a water wholesaler adding an unapproved drug into their water."

WND also recently reported, there is growing and fierce opposition to plans to fluoridate public drinking water after shocking new studies that seriously question a practice routine among U.S. municipalities for nearly the last 50 years.

"Most people think that fluoride is what you have in your toothpaste or water, but they are unaware of the fact that Prozac is a fluoride product," Green said. "Almost all psychotropic drugs are fluoride products.

The study itself notes various studies have linked secondary hyperparathyroidism to fluorosis and that other studies have found "there are some data to suggest that fluoride does adversely affect some endocrine glands."

The study also includes other chapters on studies that found lower IQ scores for subjects of Chinese studies who had exposure to fluoride.

"The IQ scores in both males and females declined with increasing fluoride exposure," the online study reported. "Of special importance, 21.6 percent of the children in the high-fluoride village scored 70 or below on the IQ scale. For the children in the low-fluoride village, only 3.4 percent had such low scores."

'Tooth mousse’ to protect against decay

Tooth mousse’ to protect against decay
May 23rd, 2008 - 2:21 pm
Sydney, May 23 (IANS) Now you can ignore parental warnings and gorge on chocolates - scientists have developed a “tooth mousse” that not only protects against decay, but actually “repairs” decayed teeth. The new product, currently under lab tests at Melbourne University, is said to penetrate 10 times deeper into teeth than current fluoride treatments.
“Clinical trials have shown Tooth Mousse Plus not only provides the highest level of fluoride protection now available for teeth, but that it can also repair existing decay damage,” said Eric Reynolds, who heads the team testing the mousse.
Known as peptide-calcium phosphate nano-complex, the tooth mousse repairs tooth damage by replacing the minerals lost through the decay process.
Australian and Japanese researchers at the Cooperative Research Centre for Oral Heath Science had set out to find a method of using fluoride in a more effective way than traditional forms to prevent tooth decay.
“It’s the result of a real team effort by molecular scientists, dentists and formulation chemists,” said Reynolds.

Thursday, May 22, 2008

New Dangerous Rotavirus Vaccine and fluoride

UK - IOM -

Health Minister Eddie Teare says he can’t tell how much money has been spent on children’s dental services – because all dentistry money comes from the same pot. He faced a question for written answer in Tynwald this week from Rushen MHK Quintin Gill.
In it, Mr Gill asked how much had been spent on children’s dental services over the last 15 years, and who was to blame for what the DHSS describes as ‘disgraceful’ state of oral health among the Island’s youngsters.
Mr Teare said he couldn’t give a figure, but his department wasn’t to blame.
Mr Teare said personal choices and lifestyle decisions were the main factors

USA - Don't dismiss fluoride in Grand Rapids

Don't dismiss fluoride in Grand Rapids
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
In 1945, Grand Rapids became the first city in the nation to add fluoride to drinking water to prevent tooth decay. Today, following this city's lead, more than two thirds of Americans drink from public systems where fluoride is added to the water. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calls water fluoridation one of the 10 great health achievements of the 20th century -- along with vaccinations and control of infectious diseases.

Against that backdrop, the announcement from a City of Grand Rapids official that he is studying whether or not to continue fluoridation should be met with considerable skepticism from the public and the Grand Rapids City Commission. Municipal water fluoridation here and elsewhere remains a success.
Only serious evidence to the contrary should be allowed to compromise those gains and reverse the city's historic role in the fluoride revolution.
Corky Overmyer, director of sustainability for the city of Grand Rapids, recently announced that he is working with scientists at Grand Valley State University to study whether or not to continue to add fluoride to the city's water supply. He is responding to anti-fluoride advocates, who have linked fluoride to everything from cancer to Down Syndrome.

There is no indication Mr. Overmyer's musings have moved beyond the let's-take-a-look stage for Grand Rapids and the 11 suburban communities served by its water system. Certainly there is no harm in reviewing the hard science on fluoridation's benefits and reviewing the concerns of critics.

The discussion should begin with the conclusions of credible groups such as the World Health

Organization, the American Dental Association (ADA), the American Medical Association and the Centers for Disease Control. All affirm the proven benefits of fluoride in drinking water in the proper amounts -- roughly 1 part per million, about a drop in a bathtub full of water.

Based on a review of the scientific literature, the ADA has concluded that water fluoridation today reduces tooth decay by 20 percent to 40 percent. The organization finds no credible scientific links between the proper levels of fluoride and cancer, Down Syndrome, poor thyroid gland function, infertility or a host of other ills cited by fluoride opponents.

The chemical can cause some health problems if it exceeds recommended amounts. Over-fluoridation happens through natural occurrence in water or, for instance, when children are allowed to ingest too much toothpaste when they brush their teeth. The effects range from enamel fluorosis, a discoloration and pitting of tooth enamel, to skeletal fluorosis, which increases bone fractures.

So there is reason to be cautious about the amount of the chemical ingested. But any attempt to get rid of fluoride altogether faces a long, uphill climb against the considerable evidence that fluoridation remains a safe, cost-effective tool for promoting healthier lives. Opponents will have to produce evidence to the contrary that has real teeth before Grand Rapids should even think about backing down from that great public health advance.

USA - CDC Oral Health Division Must Be Investigated

CDC Oral Health Division Must Be Investigated
Federal Statistics Show Fluoridation has Failed - Officials Promote It Anyway
2008-05-21 17:07:09 - Fluoridation did not lower tooth decay rates according to US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) statistics. (1)
Man-made fluoride chemicals are added to 2/3 of US water supplies ostensibly to reduce tooth decay to levels found in people consuming naturally fluoridated water. This began in 1945 and promised a 60 - 70% cavity reduction.
A 1981 government report reveals the first evidence of fluoridation's failure: (1a) 'Regional differences in caries prevalence in the United States were reported as
early as 1941 and have evidently persisted over four decades.'
The most highly fluoridated states have very high cavity rates, much of it untreated (2), the CDC reports.
For example, CDC statistics show that:
-- Despite a 60% fluoridation rate, Arkansas has the most third-graders suffering with tooth decay (72%) with 42% untreated.

-- Oklahoma third-graders endure the third worst cavity rate (69%) even though 3/4 of the state is fluoridated. (40% is untreated)

-- Nevada's 69% fluoridation rate didn't stop 67% of third-graders from getting cavities. (30% untreated)

-- Similarly, although South Dakota is 78% fluoridated, 67% of their third-graders have cavities. (30% untreated)

The CDC also reports that up to 48% of US school children are fluoride overdosed sporting dental fluorosis - white spotted, yellow, brown and/or pitted teeth (3). Yet tooth decay is rising in our most fluoridated generation - toddlers (4)

The U.S. Surgeon General reports that excessive fluoride increases
susceptibility to cavities. (10)

Also, Chemicals commonly used to fluoridate drinking water may actually increase rather than decrease tooth decay, according to a study published in a U.S. government journal, "Environmental Health Perspectives." (9)

By neglecting the poor, organized dentistry helped create an oral health epidemic.(5) Eighty percent of dentists refuse Medicaid patients and 108 million Americans lack dental insurance.

'Promoting fluoridation may deflect government regulators from forcing dentists to treat poor children but will solve no problems and create more,' says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation, Inc.

The CDC calls fluoridation one of the Ten Great Public Health Achievements of the 20th century (7) citing, as its source, a 1999 Dental Textbook by Burt and Eklund, "Dentistry, dental practice, and the community' (published by WB Saunders Company)

This is what the Burt, Eklund dental textbook also reveals:

* Fluoride is neither a nutrient nor essential.

* Fluoride incorporated into developing teeth does NOT reduce tooth
decay but does increase fluorosis. Alleged beneficial effects occur
topically.

* There is no evidence that "optimal" intake inhibits cavities. In
fact, the authors suggest "optimum intake" of fluoride be dropped from
common usage.

* Near universal fluoridation in the U.S.A. hasn't leveled out tooth
decay rates, instead fluorosis has spread and increased.

* Not every possible hypothesis regarding fluoride and human health was
tested before beginning fluoridation.

* "No clear reasons for the caries (cavities) decline (in the U.S.)
have been identified"

* At between 3 and 4 times "optimal," fluoride causes tooth decay

* "Dental fluorosis cannot be classed as a public health problem in the
United States ... It would be a mistake, however, to assume that it
could not become so."
***
Over 1,700 professionals signed a statement urging Congress to sponsor a fluoridation hearing so that those in government agencies who continue to support the procedure, particularly the Oral Health Division of the CDC, be compelled to provide the scientific basis for their ongoing promotion of fluoridation. They must be cross-examined under oath if the public is ever to fully learn the truth about this outdated, ineffective and harmful practice.

Eleven environmental protection agency employee unions, representing over 7000 environmental and public health professionals of the Civil Service, called for a halt on drinking water fluoridation programs across the USA and asked EPA management to recognize fluoride as posing a serious risk of causing cancer in people.(8)

You can support this professionals' statement and our EPA scientists by petitioning your representatives here:
congress.fluorideaction.net

The Importance of Fluoridated Bottled Drinking Water

Joseph Silva
May 21, 2008
Because it is extremely important to stay well hydrated all year long, carrying bottled drinking water with you or having bottled water delivered to your home or office can be of great benefit to you, your family, and your colleagues. You may have noticed that your favorite bottled drinking water also has added fluoride, or that your local community water utility offers fluoridated water. Your dentist may have spoken to you about the benefits of fluoride for preventing cavities as well. Drinking fluoridated water maybe a good way to increase your fluoride intake while you go about your daily routine......................

No mention of anything negative - you can't have too much.

"The Fluoride Deception"

"The Fluoride Deception"
Thursday, 22 May 2008, 9:22 am
Press Release: Fluoride Action Network
Fluoride Action Network New Zealand proudly present "The Fluoride Deception"
To be screened on Dunedin's channel 9 Monday 26th May @ 9pm
and Family TV on Tuesday 27th May @8.30pm.
For the first time the public are being given access to the real story behind water fluoridation
Giving citizens the power to make an informed choice about the medication they chose to consume.
See yesterday's interview with Dr Bruce Spittle & Fluoride Action Network member Olive McRae.
http://www.ch9.conz/content/local-campaigners-dead-against-fluoridation-water


As well, the Fluoride Action Network is proudly releasing this compelling half hour documentary to video stores and book shops throughout the country. This documentary is an interview with award winning BBC producer Christopher Bryson and author of the book "The Fluoride Deception". Bryson spent ten years researching fluoridation and uncovered recently declassified documents. In this documentary, you will discover the real reasons why fluoridation was introduced into American influenced countries & what happens to scientists who try to tell the public of the dangers.

"This startling and terrifying book could not be more timely."
-THE ECOLOGIST "Book of the Month", September 2004
"The fluoride deception by Christopher Bryson examines the background of the fluoridation debate. Bryson, who has had the advantage of access to recently declassified files, concludes that fluoridation is a triumph not of medical science but of US government spin."

-The Guardian
" The Fluoride deception points to the suppression of medical information, the sacking of experts who found damaging evidence of potentially nasty side-effects that governments didn't want to hear and a powerful political lobby that grasped fluoridation as a cheap means of mass medication."

-Irish Independent
"Bryson is right on in his emphasis on the ineffective of fluoridation of water with industrial wastes, and its risks of nerve and brain damage, and cancer, coupled with the long-standing industrial conspiracy to suppress this information."

-Dr. Sam Epstein, Chairman of the cancer prevention coalition and professor Emeritus of Environmental and occupational medicine, University of Illinois school of public health

ends

USA - Recycled Water

Recycled Water: Letters for Thursday, May 22, 2008
Article Last Updated: 05/21/2008 06:22:06 PM PDT
Re "Mayor rethinks, favors hot-button plan to put recycled water into taps" (May 15): Once again, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has come up with a brilliant idea. He now proposes we should use reclaimed water, better known as treated sewage.
It has already made its way into Orange County, and the process involves chemical treatment, filtering and radiation zapping. It yields water they say that is nearly distilled, which is then injected into the underground water supply.

Our water supply is already filled with the toxic chemical fluoride. Now they want to add radiation and put it through a distilling process, which takes out all beneficial minerals. Not only is it an expensive process; it will cause more people to buy bottled water.

Perhaps we wouldn't be running out of water if we would close our borders and slow down urban sprawl.

CATHERINE SHAFFER

Growing concerned

Collect rainwater in a barrel.
"In many areas, tap water has fluoride in it which is not helpful for your plants," said Meyer. "Rainwater is an efficient way to conserve water and give your plants the best water possible. Make sure your barrel has a sealed lid so mosquitoes can't lay their eggs in there."

Not helpful to humans either.

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

UK - IOM - Announcement on fluoride poll due

A PUBLIC announcement is shortly expected on the result of a telephone survey on fluoridating water supplies.
The survey has been completed and the results are expected in 10 to 14 days, Health Minister Eddie Teare told Tuesday's Tynwald.
It will be 'interesting to see the final outcome', he said, adding that he felt confident the outcome received would be 'a true reflection of views of the Isle of Man'.
Up to 1,000 people were surveyed and it is understood the poll conducted by GfK/NOP, was designed to obtain opinions of a cross-section of the population.
Public health officials are convinced fluoridation is the most cost-effective way of tackling alarmingly high rates of dental decay among the Island's children. But the anti-fluoride lobby has accused them of 'state-sponsored propaganda' and insist fluoride is unsafe and far from cost-effective.
Both the fairness of the telephone polling methods and the fairness of the questions themselves were questioned by Tynwald members.
Health and Social Security Minister Eddie Teare in response to David Callister MLC's request for the details of the questions, explained questions were formulated by GfK/NOP, without any input from anyone else.
He also responded that the survey was confidential with no names or addresses required.
Mr Callister asked why in calls to three residents, once it was established they were not under 35 years, the conversation came to an end.
The exercise was designed to gain opinions of a range of ages, said Mr Teare.
David Quirk (Onchan) asked what value the minister intended to place on the survey and whether there had been complaints over it.
The minister said there had been 'very few complaints' and that the value placed upon it was that he would be guided by the views.
Clare Christian MLC suggested calls targeting under-35s would have been to obtain a cross-section of that age group. Mr Teare added it showed the callers were 'up front about age' before ending the call.
Quintin Gill (Rushen) claimed that the public health directorate had had an input into the survey and said it was 'very disingenuous to say "nothing to do with us"'.
Mr Teare refuted this. He admitted that to have any input into the questions could result in them being deemed leading.
'We did go back to the company undertaking exercise for us and they prepared the questions. I can only assume that the member is scared of the outcome of the survey,' he said.
Peter Karran (LibVan, Onchan) also suggested that questions should be balanced and neutral and claimed it was an insult to Tynwald to claim the DHSS had nothing to do with devising the questions.
Survey results are expected in 10-14 days, after which a report will go to the Council of Ministers and the health minister will make a public announcement.
Mr Teare said it was inappropriate to comment on two tabled questions relating to his department's published leaflet on water fluoridation after it had been referred by a third party to the police, who was now seeking the attorney general's advice.
Anti-fluoride campaigner Graham Joughin, of Glen Elfin Road, Ramsey, wrote to Chief Constable Mike Langdon last month formally requesting the arrest of public health officials Dr Paul Emerson and Dr Parameswaran Kishore for allegedly breaching the 2003 Medicines Advertising Act in connection with the leaflet on water fluoridation distributed to homes by the DHSS.
Deputy Chief Constable Gary Roberts told the Manx Independent that the letter has been passed to the attorney general's chambers 'as a matter of routine' for advice on whether there was any offence in law to investigate.
Quintin Gill (Rushen) quizzed the health minister, that following his earlier admission that the state of the children's teeth in the Island was 'disgraceful', what measures, other than fluoridation of drinking supplies, his department intended to take to counter this 'indictment' on his department.
Mr Gill said a 1993 survey showed the Island had the best standards of teeth and 'now we have the worst'.
Mr Teare denied his admission was an 'indictment' on the department and said steps to better the state of children's teeth had involved improved access to NHS dentists and dental packs for three month old babies.

USA - Fluoride Is Hazardous To Your Health

Fluoride Is Hazardous To Your Health
Scientific Evidence Shows How and Why
Professionals Urge End to Water Fluoridaiton Citing Harmful Effects
Over 1,700 professionals signed a statement urging Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks. (http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html)

Signers include a Nobel Prize winner, three members of the prestigious 2006 National Research Council (NRC) panel that reported on fluoride’s toxicology, two officers in the Union representing professionals at EPA headquarters, the President of the International Society of Doctors for the Environment, and hundreds of medical, dental, academic, scientific and environmental professionals, worldwide.

Signer Dr. Arvid Carlsson, winner of the 2000 Nobel Prize for Medicine, says, “Fluoridation is against all principles of modern pharmacology. It's really obsolete.”

An Online Action Petition to Congress in support of the Professionals' Statement is available on FAN's web site, http://congress.fluorideaction.net and over 11,000 individuals have signed so far.

“The NRC report dramatically changed scientific understanding of fluoride's health risks," says Paul Connett, PhD, Executive Director, Fluoride Action Network. "Government officials who continue to promote fluoridation must testify under oath as to why they are ignoring the powerful evidence of harm in the NRC report,” he added.

The Professionals’ Statement also references:

-- The new American Dental Association policy recommending infant formula NOT be prepared with fluoridated water.
-- The CDC’s concession that the predominant benefit of fluoride is topical not systemic.
-- CDC data showing that dental fluorosis, caused by fluoride over-exposure, now impacts one third of American children.
-- Major research indicating little difference in decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.
-- A Harvard study indicating a possible link between fluoridation and bone cancer.
-- The silicofluoride chemicals used for fluoridation are contaminated industrial waste and have never been FDA- approved for human ingestion.

The Environmental Working Group (EWG), a DC watchdog, revealed that a Harvard professor concealed the fluoridation/bone cancer connection for three years. EWG President Ken Cook states, “It is time for the US to recognize that fluoridation has serious risks that far outweigh any minor benefits, and unlike many other environmental issues, it's as easy to end as turning off a valve at the water plant.”

Further, researchers reporting in the Oct 6 2007 British Medical Journal indicate that fluoridation, touted as a safe cavity preventive, never was proven safe or effective and may be unethical. (1)


Many communities rejected or stopped fluoridation over the years. See: http://www.fluoridealert.org/communities.htm

USA - Unending fight about fluoride leaves a cavity in kids

Toothache
Unending fight about fluoride leaves a cavity in kids'
healthPD EDITORIAL
Published: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 9:15 a.m. Last Modified: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 at 1:15 p.m.
If you wait long enough, everything seems to come around again. So it goes with this golden oldie: whether to put fluoride in Sonoma County's drinking water.
The science was long ago settled but the battle throbs on like a toothache.
Fluoridation is a "safe and effective way" to prevent tooth decay, the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says unequivocally. As if that's not straightforward enough, the CDC lists fluoridation as "one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century."
But more than 60 years after Grand Rapids, Mich. became the first U.S. city to fluoridate its drinking water supply, many communities -- including ours -- haven't followed suit, in part because the idea generates fervent opposition.
The lone exceptions in Sonoma County are Healdsburg and the adjacent Fitch Mountain area where residents voted in the 1970s to add fluoride to their water.
Some say there's a risk of serious health problems if fluoride levels are too high. Others object to the concepts of compulsory medication. Go back far enough, some people claimed fluoridation was a Communist plot.
Mostly it's a big cavity in our dental health program, a missed opportunity for front-end prevention to avoid bigger problems later.
California actually has required fluoridation of drinking water since 1995 -- but the law isn't enforced because, like too many state mandates, it's never been funded.
Last week, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors broached the idea of fluoridation after receiving an assessment about widespread tooth decay and oral disease in Sonoma County children.
Surveys presented to the board included several alarming findings. Among them, 39 percent of schoolchildren have untreated tooth decay, a figure that rises to 60 percent for low-income children, and 13 percent of children in the lowest grade levels never have been to a dentist.
"It is inconceivable to me that we have a way of treating that problem and we are not," board Chairman Mike Kerns said.
It's inconceivable to us, too, as were the warnings that there will be opposition to taking this relatively simple step to improving everyone's dental health. Imagine the outcry if Kerns suggested free Wi-fi.

One sided "safe and effective way" "one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century."

The Cost of Clean

The Cost of Clean
Posted: May 20, 2008 07:08 PM
Bob Segall/13 Investigates
Detroit - Bill Catalfio has been washing cars for 17 years, but there is one day at his car wash he'll never forget.
"It was the worst day of my life," Catalfio recalls. "I cried for days."
The owner of Mr. C's Carwash in suburban Detroit says that day is October 30, 1999. A teenage worker named Kelly was cleaning tire rims when the rim cleaner leaked onto two of her fingers. Kelly went home at the end of her shift, not realizing that an ingredient in that cleaning solution was penetrating through her skin and seeking out her bones. No one at the car wash realized Kelly had been exposed to a potentially deadly chemical until she came to work the next day.
"The two fingers on her left hand were black. They looked like sparrow's claws," Catalfio said, shaking his head. "The chemical attacked her. Doctors tried to save the fingers but they couldn't. They ended up cutting off the fingers at the knuckle."
The chemical that injured Kelly is hydrofluoric acid or HF. The powerful acid - sometimes used in car washing products as a cleaning agent - has a nasty reputation, and scientists say that reputation is well deserved.
"The acid is deadly"
Scientific journals and safety data information sheets report small amounts of hydrofluoric acid spilled on less than 10% of the body can be lethal, and even brief exposure to HF vapor can cause serious injury......................

When I left school at 15 I started working in the stained glass window business. First job was pouring from a large pot an acid that burnt into the glass. No protection of any sort just told it was acid and to be careful. I quit after 2 days not because of that but I couldn't stand my employer. Glad I quit.

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Water Fluoridation: Public Meeting Highlights

USA - Fluoride Damages the Thyroid, report shows

Fluoride Damages the Thyroid, report shows
First-ever government review of fluoride/thyroid toxicology shows risk .
2008-05-19 15:54:10 - There is clear evidence that small amounts of fluoride, at or near levels added to U.S. water supplies,
present potential risks to the thyroid gland, according to the National Research Council's (NRC) first-ever published review of the fluoride/thyroid literature.(A)
Fluoride, in the form of silicofluorides, injected into 2/3 of U.S. public water supplies, ostensibly to reduce tooth decay, was never safety-tested.(B)
"Many Americans are exposed to fluoride in the ranges associated with thyroid effects, especially for people with iodine deficiency," says Kathleen Thiessen, PhD, co-author of the government-sponsored NRC report. "The recent decline in iodine intake in the U.S could
contribute to increased toxicity of fluoride for some individuals," says Thiessen.
"A low level of thyroid hormone can increase the risk of cardiac disease, high cholesterol, depression and, in pregnant woman, decreased intelligence of offspring," said Thiessen.(C)

Common thyroid symptoms include fatigue, weight gain, constipation, fuzzy thinking, low blood pressure, fluid retention, depression, body pain, slow reflexes, and more. It's estimated that 59 million
Americans have thyroid conditions.(D)

Robert Carton, PhD, an environmental scientist who worked for over 30 years for the U.S. government including managing risk assessments on high priority toxic chemicals, says "fluoride has detrimental effects on the thyroid gland of healthy males at 3.5 mg a day. With iodine deficiency, the effect level drops to 0.7 milligrams/day for an average male."(E) (1.0 mg/L fluoride is in most water supplies)
Among many others, the NRC Report cites human studies which show
- fluoride concentrations in thyroids exceeding that found in other soft tissues except kidney
- an association between endemic goiter and fluoride exposure or enamel fluorosis in human populations
- fluoride adversely affects thyroid and parathyroid hormones, which affect bone health
"If you have a thyroid problem, avoiding fluoride may be a good preventive health measure for you," writes Drs' Richard and Karilee Shames in "Thyroid Power."(F).
Over, 1,700 Physicians, Dentists, Scientists, Academics and Environmentalists urge Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation is ineffective and has serious health risks. (http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html)
Please sign the petition and Congressional letter to support these
professionals http://www.FluorideAction.Net

USA - No go for fluoride!

No go for fluoride!
20/05/2008 4:06:00 PM
THREE Eurobodalla Shire Councillors have already lodged a rescission motion after council yesterday voted 5-4 not to fluoridate the shire's public water supply.
The decision came despite 67.5 per cent of respondents to council's community survey having said they wanted fluoride in the water supply.

Councillors Peter Cairney, Chris Kowal, Graham McGillivray and Alan Morton supported a motion put by Cr Allan Brown not to fluoridate the water supply.

Mayor Neil Mumme reminded councillors before the vote that almost seven out of 10 residents who responded to the survey were in favour of fluoride and that to vote for the motion was to disregard the clear direction given by the community.

The survey and information sheet was delivered to the Eurobodalla's 17,000 households during March. Just over 3400 surveys were returned, representing 6000 responses or about 22 per cent of the shire's adult population. This is considered to be a large return rate for a voluntary survey, according to the independent consultant hired to conduct the consultation.

Cr Mumme chaired yesterday's meeting, which began with a lengthy public forum session. Councillors were presented with the results of the community consultation at a workshop prior to the meeting.

"While I respect the view of council, I'm disappointed that the decision was arrived at with scant regard for the community's stated views," Cr Mumme said.

The State Government asked council to consider fluoridation prior to construction of the shire's first water treatment plant, planned to commence next financial year.

Crs Mumme, Rob Pollock and Fergus Thomson lodged the rescission motion immediately after the meeting. The possibility of rescinding the previous motion and taking another vote on the issue will be discussed at next week's meeting.

I wonder how the council's community survey was worded?
I spoke to a neighbour last week and I asked him about fluoridation and he said, Fluoride, it is good for the teeth, isn't it? He doesn't read the local paper which has had quite a few articles on the contentious subject recently. I ran through several of the arguments against fluoridation and showed him pictures of fluorosis and told him of the cost of veneers. He was horrified that anybody can consider putting the stuff in our water. Without all the facts surveys are no good except to get the result you want.

USA - Don't force fluoride on us

Don't force fluoride on us
May 20, 2008
I am writing this letter, in response to the May 13 article "Aldermen consider shutting off fluoride. I'd like to address a few concerns in regards to water fluoridation.

First of all, fluoride is the only chemical added to water for purposes of medication. The use of the public water system as a vehicle for mass medication is wrong and it creates a constitutional and civil liberty issue. It violates our right to informed consent of medication. Also, fluoride is not a nutrient. There is no such thing as a fluoride deficiency. People can have perfectly healthy teeth without fluoride. The CDC has acknowledged that the benefits of fluoride are topical, not systemic. There is no reason to force people to drink fluoride against their will. There are easier, less expensive, and less intrusive ways of delivering fluoride to those who actually want it. Toothpaste comes to mind.

As of November 2006, fluoride is no longer recommended for babies. Fluoride exposure puts infants at high risk for developing a permanent condition known as fluorosis. It has also recently been found that fluoride may damage the developing brain, causing learning deficits and other problems.

Over 99 percent of the tap water is not even consumed by human beings. It's used to wash dishes, flush toilets, take showers, water gardens, etc. So that means 99 percent of the fluoride added to the water is wasted anyway.
Fluoride has been associated with numerous health effects that the city should be researching and considering when making their decision. Here are just a few concerns:
Fluoride is not approved by the FDA.
Fluoride is a toxic and corrosive chemical.
Fluoride is a carcinogen.
Fluoride has been linked to Alzheimer's disease, thyroid problems, and insomnia.
The benefits of fluoride have been greatly exaggerated. Remember, when fluoride was being promoted 50 years ago, there were also studies showing that cigarette smoking had benefits as well.

To quote the article, "The city's water treatment plant manager told the aldermen the corrosive chemical has eaten through multiple storage tanks and done damage to pumps and electrical systems." So this "corrosive chemical" is eating through metal, but we should believe its saving our teeth? Think again.

HEATHER BURDITT

Rutland

Monday, May 19, 2008

I Think Water Fluoridation Is Bad

Car clinic Marks on dark paintwork

Q I am about to buy a new car and would like a black model. However, I live in a hard water area and find the water leaves marks on dark paintwork. Should I just give up and buy silver? - KH from Reading

A Regardless of whether you live in a hard or soft water area, tap water contains chemicals (such as chlorine or fluoride) that mean it can dry with a white tinge.

One easy way to avoid this is to wipe the water off quickly with an absorbent cloth. The Halfords Easy Glide Chamois XL at £6.99 (0845 762 6625, www.halfords.com ) is an award-winning synthetic chamois and soaks up huge amounts of water because it’s so large.

If you want to go further, you can buy a water filter, such as the one marketed by Ionic systems (08452266 001, www.ionicsystems.com/cars ). This fits easily onto your garden hose. As the water passes through the filter, the chemicals are purged, leaving pure water and a streak-free finish (though you should still remove excess water). It costs £47.29 including UK carriage and typically lasts for 20 washes, depending on the size of the car.

Wondered why I always found streaks over the paintwork after cleaning. Same with cleaning windows. I thought it was the hard water

USA - Something to chew on

Something to chew on
May 19, 2008
The Rutland City Board of Aldermen's recent debate over fluoridation of city water borders on the Twilight Zone.
First, it's as close as we're likely to get to a settled argument in the convoluted world of public health policy:
Fluoridation of municipal water supplies has a 60-plus year history, having begun in Michigan in 1945 and now having spread to cover about two-thirds of the population, including the vast majority of the 50 biggest cities in the country. If it had hidden dangers, they would have shown up by now.
The Centers for Disease Control has called it "one of 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century." It's endorsed by the CDC, the U.S. Public Health Service, the American Dental Association and the last five surgeons general, among many others.

City water treatment plant director Michael Garofano called fluoride "some corrosive stuff."

The active element, fluorine, is a naturally occurring volatile gas, so is almost always found in combination with some other element, which makes it chemically stable.

Sodium fluoride is the salt most commonly used in treating drinking water; for reference, sodium chloride — with chlorine instead of fluorine — is table salt.

Both chlorine and fluorine are indeed harsh poisons in concentrated form; both are routinely applied to drinking water in minute amounts. The recommended level for fluorine in drinking water is around 1 part per million, for chlorine, it's 2 to 3 parts per million. There are places around the country, mostly in the south and southwest, where fluorine in water naturally exceeds 4 parts per million, the maximum recommended safe level for consumption, and there's a debate over whether that limit should be lowered.


Beyond a concern that infants fed primarily or exclusively formula made with fluoridated water may get damaged tooth enamel if they get too much fluoride, there's no credible debate that it is good for teeth.

According to the Public Health Service, "Extensive studies over the past 50 years have established that individuals whose drinking water is fluoridated show a reduction in dental caries (cavities).

Although the comparative degree of measurable benefit has been reduced recently as other fluoride sources have become available in nonfluoridated areas, the benefits of water fluoridation are still clearly evident. Fewer caries are associated with fewer abscesses and extractions of teeth and with improved health. The health and economic benefits of water fluoridation accrue to individuals of all ages and socioeconomic groups, especially to poor children."


As half the children in Rutland's public schools qualify for free or reduced lunches, there are a lot of kids helped by this program. And the CDC notes that as more older citizens are keeping their teeth into later life, the benefits accrue to them, as well.

That brings us to the second point and the core of Mayor Christopher Louras' argument, supported by three of the five aldermen on the Public Works Committee, that fluoride has gotten too expensive.
According to a recent University of Georgia study, fluoridated water results in average savings in dental bills, per person, of $19 per year. So at $14,000, Rutland's treatment pays for itself in preventative dentistry after just 737 people. That's a great bargain, and a conservative estimate. A CDC study says it's closer to $38 per year saved at the dentist for every $1 spent on fluoride.

If the city board is really that concerned that the voters directly decide every $14,000 line item in a multimillion-dollar budget, they should let us vote on the entire thing, either line-by-line or in an up-and-down vote.
We could start with the overhead cost for the Public Works Committee.
For more information visit www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/.

One sided argument for fluoridation

Sunday, May 18, 2008

How Could We Allow This To Happen? Pt 1



Is it this bad?

UK - IOM - Recurring themes in Tynwald

Recurring themes in Tynwald
17/05/2008 06:07:16
There are some recurring themes on this month's Tynwald question paper.
Following the collapse of EuroManx a week ago, assurances are being sought about the future of airline services, while fluoridation also causing concern for some members.
Tynwald's newest member will cut his teeth on the issue.
David Callister MLC wants to know how the Department of Health's leaflet on the subject showed balance and what questions will be used in the telephone survey.
Rushen MHK Quintin Gill mirrors the scepticism of the policy and has similar questions on the subject.

India - Still no safe water for fluoride-affected villagers

Still no safe water for fluoride-affected villagers
Sabyasachi Roy
NALHATI, May 17: The fluoride-affected people of Nashipur village under the Nalhati-I block in Birbhum are slowly dying.
Although the government has made many assurances, people are not provided with the necessary treatments and safe water. Even the CPI-M led previous board of Baoutia panchayat failed to give hope to the affected people. For 16 years many villagers have been suffering from ailments such as tooth decay, limb deformities, skin diseases, nervous breakdowns and bending of the spinal chord. Fluoride-victims Partha Let, Susanta Let and Durga Das said they have already spent a lot of money for treatment The doctors who failed to prescribe proper medication said the diseases occurred due to water pollution.
In 1997, following the reports published in newspapers, the state government became aware of the situation and a team of doctors was sent to the village to examine the water. The team collected water samples from many sources and they reported the water layer of that area contains fluoride.

New News video on Fluoride

Alex Jones and Luke Rudkowski Cover Water Fluoridation

Saturday, May 17, 2008

USA - Fluoride foes, supporters assess what happened

Fluoride foes, supporters assess what happened
By Jen Ouellette
Wed May 14, 2008, 04:00 PM EDT
YARMOUTH, MASS. -

YARMOUTH, MASS. - It’s not often that 40 percent of Yarmouth voters show up at the polls and with that kind of turnout in last week’s town election, many of those who supported the fluoridation of the town’s water are asking, “what happened?”

“My husband is a dentist and we’ve tried four times to get this by the board of health and when the board voted in favor of it, we thought we had done it,” said Sheila Gagnon one of the leaders of the pro-fluoride campaign.

Question 6 on the ballot, asking voters to affirm the Yarmouth Board of Health’s decision to fluoridate the town’s water, was soundly defeated with 1,600 voting for it and 4,895 voting against.

Gagnon said she and her husband have done research and gathered materials and presented them to the board of health on several occasions, but the board of health had never publicly acknowledged the information.

Last year, however, they had Selectman Bill Marasco in their corner who also pushed for the board to vote on the issue of fluoridating the town’s water supply.

Gagnon said there are 12 to 15 members on the committee and they haven’t yet held a meeting to discuss why they weren’t successful at the polls.

The pro-fluoride group had the support of some big names in the dental world from the Massachusetts Dental Association, Healthcare for All out of Boston and many of the local dentist’s offices.

The group sent out a mailing of more than 5,000 flyers to people who had voted in the February primary and had signs and buttons printed supporting fluoride in the water.

“We went out to speak to different groups at the senior center, parents groups and had our brochure translated into Portuguese and got it out to the churches,” Gagnon said.

She said one problem with their awareness campaign was being forced to spend so much time countering myths about fluoridation.

“The media, as you know, does the pro and the con. But in a scientific situation like this, it’s not just opinion against opinion. It’s fact against partial fact or even hysteria,” she said, adding they only had about four months to launch an educational campaign regarding piles of scientific research.

In addition, Gagnon said the big issue ballot questions and tough economic times might have put voters in a negative mood.

“The two ballot questions for the schools didn’t pass and they didn’t even pass Question 7, which was a non-binding question. They didn’t even want to hear about new curbside trash collection options. It was just a very negative thing.”

Vi Pacitto, spokeswoman for the opponents to fluoride, said the proof is in the passion.

“This was a group of individuals that banded together and spread the word and believed in it with all their heart,” Pacitto said.

She said her group began with about 15 or 20 people and grew to more than 50.

Pacitto said they created homemade signs and had a few printed up, but their efforts were mainly comprised of public outreach activities.

“It was something that took over my life and the last few weeks have been extremely hectic. I swear I’ve gone around with a phone attached to my ear,” Pacitto said.

She said they were even surprised by the response of the voters, who defeated the question soundly.

“I honestly wanted it to be overwhelming to send a message, but I did not think it would be as overwhelming as it was and that was extremely gratifying,” Pacitto said.

Pacitto said she’s not done.

“There is something on the books now saying [the state] wants to fluoridate all of our water. We want to take that off the books and replace it with a mandate saying they cannot put fluoride in the water in Massachusetts,” Pacitto said.

“When you try to force something on a population, that is the wrong thing to do. Everyone has a choice,” she said.

Meanwhile, those in favor of fluoride in the water say they are not done with their fight either. While state law mandates fluoridation cannot be ordered again by the board of health for two years, the group plans to maintain the Web site, moresmilesaroundyarmouth.org and education efforts.

“Residents can go on that site any time and see what’s happening, and if and when it ever comes up again the general public will be more informed,” said Gagnon.

Comments (4)
Thank you for the abuse report. We will review the report and take appropriate action.
Loading comments, please wait...
nyscof2 days ago
Report Abuse
It's sad that the fluoridationists are so unaware of the current science showing that even small amounts of fluoride can be harmful to some people.

Instead of evaluating their political defeat based on their PR efforts, we wish the would actually evaluate the fluoride toxicology data neatly wrapped and available on line produced at the request of the Environmental Protection Agency to the National Research Council. It's here

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11571

Every person who actively pursues fluoridation via legislation is required to read this book first otherwise you are just operating on hearsay.

If you don't understand it, then you have no right to force fluoridation on those who do.
Jim Schultz1 day ago
Report Abuse
See Yoder km 2007 study of dental professionals to understand that only 17% of dentist in Indiana understood the science of fluoride and reminerization after eruption and how this is a topical effect. Most still believed the disproved theory of preeruption ingested benefit which was the theory when they went to school. In Illinois only 14% got it right . Detroit schools with the worst graduation rate in the nation rate a 25% to graduate. I strongly believe dentists have the ability to read the current science just not the desire. I will pray for the children until the dentists are better able to advise them on fluoride science and risk of dental fluorosis. The ADA interm guideline on infant formula from Nov 9, 2006 still is not getting out to the public and most Health departments ignore it as they do the CDC and FDA warnings. I have not found WIC or health start giving notice of this risk either. I found out on my computer on Nov 9,2006 but it took my dentist mayor 2 weeks before he could believe it. In Ireland they voted 9-0 for a warning in 2000 only to reverse the finding when warned it would mean the end of fluoridation to admit childrens teeth are damaged. In Florida I was told because dental fluorosis is not a medical effect they keep no records of it and would not discuss it. Honesty is required for informed consent . Knowledge is required for informed consent. That would be a small step in the right direction. See fluoridealert.org for the science and the real reasearch not the 60 year old theory as fact. Jim Schultz
Jim Schultz6 hours ago
Report Abuse
I found a new really excellent quality site with lots of videos and non conflict style information based on solid current science. Some really excellent power point material keeping the points basic. Canada and Ireland both have been trying to slow down explosing of dental fluorosis by reducing fluoride level in water and seem to be heading for .6ppm now. Canada now advises no fluoride supplements for kids and no fluoride toothpaste before 7. The cost of dental fluorosis repair now exceeds any claimed benefit which is like saying owing 300,000 on a 200.000 house is a good thing. Ingested fluorides benefit is too small for the russian roulet by people that do not know of any risk. Safe for all and everyone benefits makes a good slogan but was never true. Kids need dentists and good nutrition (Burt 2007) and the poor kids with most of the problems get neither. Lets work together and solve the real problem. Being very cheap and huge promises make it so inviting. The fluoridated cities are now having large increases of cavities and much is the ugly baby bottle tooth with fluoride no help at all. Parents need skils and less soda and chips that Burt found the basic diet with fluoridated tap water not bottled. Jim Schultz
jim Schultz6 hours ago
Waterloowatch.com is that site and it has real class by good people and a 1979 canadian study showing cancer risks with data and little benefit. Advises to not fluoridate as good policy.

USA - Get chemicals out of water

Get chemicals out of water
May 17, 2008
I was very interested in reading the article regarding the shutting off of fluoride in the Rutland water system. It seem the concern that was raised was that it would adversely affect the oral hygiene and health of the children of this community.
Anyone familiar with the debate, fluoride vs. no fluoride, is aware of the following facts.
Fluoride is a highly corrosive chemical which was a by-product of the steel industry in the '50s (stannous fluoride).
On every tube of toothpaste there is a warning against possible overdose or poisoning due to a misuse of the product. "Seek medical attention if more than a pea size amount is swallowed by children under 6." That probably explains why toothpastes come in all those great flavors.
The information and statistics come from testing done in the 1950s (no conclusive benefits, but it was still heavily promoted to dentists by the steel industry).


A normal school lunch contains enough fluoride to exceed the daily recommended safety intake for human consumption.

Let's not confuse the benefit of fluoride in our water with the fact that good dental hygiene, regular dental cleanings, and better nutrition have all played a part in healthier smiles over the last 20 years. Cavities really didn't become an issue until we started consuming a diet of sugar-laden soft drinks and corn syrup in most convenience food products.

It's time we get the chemicals out of our water system. Did anyone ever do a study on the effects of chlorine and fluoride mixed together?

Poison for thought.
BILL GRAF
Mount Holly

USA - Settlement May Help Poor Get Dental Care

............In April, Linden was among scores of volunteer dentists who spent a weekend in the gym of Tolland High School treating more than 1,000 people who lined up before dawn for the chance to have their teeth fixed for free.

Sponsored by the state dental association, the program called Mission of Mercy invited anybody who needed care for free treatment by dentists who volunteered their time starting at 5 a.m. on a rainy Saturday and Sunday.

Linden said the overflow crowd at the school underscored the atrocious state of dental care for needy people in the nation's richest state. He called the experience "a real eye-opener."

In two days, Linden said he cared for adults with decaying and broken teeth, and young children whose front teeth already were riddled with decay.

But he cautioned that the settlement doesn't automatically mean dentists will flock to Medicaid....................

Fluoridation mandated Connecticut:NYSCOF

Friday, May 16, 2008















Fluoride?

Thursday, May 15, 2008

USA - Fluoride foes, supporters assess what happened

Fluoride foes, supporters assess what happened
By Jen Ouellette
Wed May 14, 2008, 04:00 PM EDT
YARMOUTH, MASS. -
YARMOUTH, MASS. - It’s not often that 40 percent of Yarmouth voters show up at the polls and with that kind of turnout in last week’s town election, many of those who supported the fluoridation of the town’s water are asking, “what happened?”

“My husband is a dentist and we’ve tried four times to get this by the board of health and when the board voted in favor of it, we thought we had done it,” said Sheila Gagnon one of the leaders of the pro-fluoride campaign.

Question 6 on the ballot, asking voters to affirm the Yarmouth Board of Health’s decision to fluoridate the town’s water, was soundly defeated with 1,600 voting for it and 4,895 voting against.

Gagnon said she and her husband have done research and gathered materials and presented them to the board of health on several occasions, but the board of health had never publicly acknowledged the information.

Last year, however, they had Selectman Bill Marasco in their corner who also pushed for the board to vote on the issue of fluoridating the town’s water supply.

Gagnon said there are 12 to 15 members on the committee and they haven’t yet held a meeting to discuss why they weren’t successful at the polls.

The pro-fluoride group had the support of some big names in the dental world from the Massachusetts Dental Association, Healthcare for All out of Boston and many of the local dentist’s offices.

The group sent out a mailing of more than 5,000 flyers to people who had voted in the February primary and had signs and buttons printed supporting fluoride in the water.

“We went out to speak to different groups at the senior center, parents groups and had our brochure translated into Portuguese and got it out to the churches,” Gagnon said.

She said one problem with their awareness campaign was being forced to spend so much time countering myths about fluoridation.

“The media, as you know, does the pro and the con. But in a scientific situation like this, it’s not just opinion against opinion. It’s fact against partial fact or even hysteria,” she said, adding they only had about four months to launch an educational campaign regarding piles of scientific research.

In addition, Gagnon said the big issue ballot questions and tough economic times might have put voters in a negative mood.

“The two ballot questions for the schools didn’t pass and they didn’t even pass Question 7, which was a non-binding question. They didn’t even want to hear about new curbside trash collection options. It was just a very negative thing.”

Vi Pacitto, spokeswoman for the opponents to fluoride, said the proof is in the passion.

“This was a group of individuals that banded together and spread the word and believed in it with all their heart,” Pacitto said.

She said her group began with about 15 or 20 people and grew to more than 50.

Pacitto said they created homemade signs and had a few printed up, but their efforts were mainly comprised of public outreach activities.

“It was something that took over my life and the last few weeks have been extremely hectic. I swear I’ve gone around with a phone attached to my ear,” Pacitto said.

She said they were even surprised by the response of the voters, who defeated the question soundly.

“I honestly wanted it to be overwhelming to send a message, but I did not think it would be as overwhelming as it was and that was extremely gratifying,” Pacitto said.

Pacitto said she’s not done.

“There is something on the books now saying [the state] wants to fluoridate all of our water. We want to take that off the books and replace it with a mandate saying they cannot put fluoride in the water in Massachusetts,” Pacitto said.

“When you try to force something on a population, that is the wrong thing to do. Everyone has a choice,” she said.

Meanwhile, those in favor of fluoride in the water say they are not done with their fight either. While state law mandates fluoridation cannot be ordered again by the board of health for two years, the group plans to maintain the Web site, moresmilesaroundyarmouth.org and education efforts.

“Residents can go on that site any time and see what’s happening, and if and when it ever comes up again the general public will be more informed,” said Gagnon.