|
Copy List
State of Fluoridation Science 2003
In the Sunday Times London, 18th May, 2003
Letters to the Editor, appeared an opinion on the U.K. Department of Health
by Sir lain Chalmers, Professor Trevor Sheldon (Chairman of Review) and the
Earl Baldwin of Bewdly (House of Lords).
Each of the above were members of the
officially appointed Committee of Review into Fluoridation on behalf of the
U.K. Government.
"NO PROOF: We served on the advisory
committee to the University of York's systematic review of water
fluoridation in 2000, which was commissioned by the Department of Health. In
its thoroughness, transparency and even-handedness this review is, we
believe, the only scientifically defensible assessment of the evidence
worldwide.
Water fluoridation has not been proved
to reduce tooth decay. There is, in fact, no 'conclusive research' (not just
'little') on either the possible benefits or harms of fluoridation, nor has
it been proven to reduce inequalities in decay. No drug would be licensed
for effectiveness or safety on the present evidence."
On the same page of letters the Chairman,
British Fluoridation Society, Professor Michael Lennon, stated:
"I was pleased to read that the government
seems poised to sort out the legislative mess surrounding water fluoridation
(News and Editorial last week).
As a member of the Medical Research
Council's working group on fluoridation, I strongly support the minister,
Hazel Blears, when she said: 'There is nothing in (the MRC's) report to
suggest any reason why water fluoridation should not be considered as a
public health measure in areas where dental health remains a serious
problem!"
(All on one failed scientific review).
That statement of "fact" by Professor Lennon
seems indisputable (sic) coming from such an academic, holding important
positions of trust.
The fluoridation promotional exercise by
Professor Lennon suggesting the MRC's report is of definitive scientific
quality is overstated, because of published scientific data to the contrary.
(Australian Fluoridation News Nov/Dec 2002).
Just one scientific fact the M.R.C.
presented makes scientific rubbish of their study, they stated:
"However, total exposure to fluoride
will depend on the volume of water consumed."
Having made that extraordinary statement of
medical and pharmaceutical principles of "medical dose" the same Committee
went on to recommend compulsory artificial fluoridation, admitting they do
not know the fluoride DOSE of any person, and, "any person" is represented
by hundreds of millions of people in an undefendable situation of consuming
poisonous fluoride via their kitchen taps. However, the MRC recommendation
of human safety is blindingly exposed in the following statement:
Summation on DOSE they state:
“Assessment of all sources, food, drink,
fluoridation, toothpaste, would in theory allow estimation of cancer risk
in relation to total fluoride intake, and assessment of the component
due to fluoridated water." (Emphasis added)
The old story about dressing a monkey in any
clothes you wish, but it still leaves the monkey a monkey. Such is the
ridiculous scientific approach attempting to dress sodium silico-fluoride as
a benign nutrient and essential chemical for human use.
The MRC expert evaluation:
"In conclusion, although a small increase
in cancer risk cannot be excluded, the data do not suggest any increase in
risk and in view of the type of data available, it does not seem appropriate
to estimate the number of cancer that might be caused by fluoridation."
Every person in the world will consider it
most important to give a scientific, medical, pharmaceutical definitive
statement of fact on fluoridation causing cancer in humans, but the MRC
ducked the issue - why?
Sodium Fluoride a drug
During 1963 the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration stated:
"Sodium fluoride used for therapeutic
effect (fluoridation) would be a drug, not a mineral nutrient. Fluoride has
not been determined essential to human nutriment. A minimum dose of
fluoride has not been determined."
That was 1963, some 40 years ago, but science
remains firm in such places as the FDA that protects human health by
examination of chemicals and drugs for human ingestion.
Safety
The recent declaration in the U.S. Senate,
where the FDA stated they have never seen scientific data proving sodium
silicofluoride as used in fluoridation as safe for humans. Sodium
silicofluoride is not a REGISTERED drug for human consumption.
Enjoy your importance of being a walking
waste-disposal unit for industrial chemical fluoride waste, and stop
complaining, you are embarrassing your Member of Parliament and your local
dentist.
Be a good sport and drink fluoridated water
knowing it helps the US Fertilizer factories rid themselves of this toxic
pollutant from their exhaust chimneys, because they cannot get rid of the
stuff any other way than dumping it into your drinking water supply.
You may not be the actual beneficiary, but
someone is!
Coinciding on the International Time Scale,
the City of Basel, Switzerland, 9th April 2003, stopped fluoridating their
City's drinking water supply, after 41 years experience, finally admitting,
"There is no scientific proof of fluoridation effectiveness," and officially
stating, "It does not stop tooth decay." they also stated fluoridation is a
health hazard.
Current fluoridation news does nothing to
support unscientific misinformation and exaggeration claims, entrenched in
positions of Health Government officials relative to fluoridation.
The Hawaiian Government has just approved a
Bill to, "Ban additives (fluorides) in Hawaii drinking water supplies."
The Bill stated:
"No person shall place additives into
Public Drinking Water Supplies, to treat or affect the physical or mental
functions of the body of any person rather than make the water safe and
potable."
The Senate Chairwoman, Water, Land and
Agriculture, stated:
"The Bill would free Hawaii from periodic
threats of mandatory community fluoridation, which has been occurring since
the 1950's."
One representative stated:
"Don't tamper with Hawaii water. It is
pure, it is healthy, and leave it alone."
Outside the U.K. there are different
scientific views and actions, and when taken into scientific balance,
fluoridation does not even tip the scales of democracy and pharmacology.
Copy List
|
