|
|
About Us Contact Us Useful Links Translation Site Map |
|
Infodocs Opinion Polls Pictures Propaganda Unethical Con. |
|
News Centre Press Release |
|
Political Register |
|
Dental Data Forums/Reviews Papers Statements |
|
Aus F News Copy List |
|
HREX |
|
Redding [2001] Another American opinion poll that leaves many questions unanswered. On this occasion the pro-fluoride lobby's contact was Donnell Ewert, a Public Health Program Manager. The poll was managed by Jon S. Ebeling, Ph.D. Please note the use of the term "This is a scientifically conducted study of 511 respondents inside the City of Redding." Never has the term "scientifically conducted study" been used in such a deceptive and misleading way ... Poll finds mixed support for fluoride Scott Mobley, Record Searchlight, Wednesday, November 7, 2001. www.redding.com/top_stories/local/ 20011106toplo004.shtml NB. Reporter Scott Mobley can be reached at 225-8220 or at smobley@redding.com From: Chris To: dewert@co.shasta.ca.us Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2001 6:52 PM [NB -8 hours] Subject: opinion poll To: Donnell Ewert, Public Health Program Manager I have been informed by Pam English that I can request the full details of the below mentioned opinion poll which should be available in about 2-3 weeks time. I look forward to receiving details. Regards, Chris Holdcroft ORIGINAL MESSAGE: 8th November 2001 Mr. Holdcroft, The telephone opinion poll regarding water fluoridation was conducted between October 27-31, 2001. The questions and survey will be available within 2-3 weeks. If you would like a copy of this information at that time, please e-mail your request to Donnell Ewert, Public Health Program Manager, at dewert@co.shasta.ca.us. Pam English, Executive Assistant. (530) 225-5594 From: Chris To: <dewert@co.shasta.ca.us> Sent: 11/29/01 07:12AM Dear Donald Ewert I have so far received no response from you concerning the below mentioned opinion poll. The full details of the opinion poll should now be available and I would appreciate a copy to be sent at your earliest convenience. NB. Please note that I am using an alternative e-mail address (my 'Supanet' mail is not always obtainable). Many thanks, Chris Holdcroft From: "Ewert Donnell" <dewert@co.shasta.ca.us> To: Chris Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 6:30 PM [NB -8 hours] Subject: Re: Fw: opinion poll Thank you for your inquiry about the public opinion poll conducted by Jon Ebeling, PhD, regarding water fluoridation in Redding. I have attached his report, which I hope you find useful. [NB. see bottom of page] From: Chris To: <dewert@co.shasta.ca.us> Sent: 12/03/01 11:24AM Dear Ewert Donnell Thank you for your quick reply and attachment. However, what I was actually looking for was a copy of the full opinion poll set of questions - preferably a copy of the actual paper used. The report you sent to me gives me no idea whatsoever how many questions were asked, the text of these questions, and in which order they were presented to the respondent. I would be very grateful if you could help me further and provide the information that I desire. Best wishes, Chris Holdcroft From: "Ewert Donnell" <dewert@co.shasta.ca.us> To: Chris Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 12:04 AM [NB -8 hours] Subject: Re: Fw: opinion poll Thank you for your interest in oral health and water fluoridation. I have provided you with the information that has been made available to the public and the media. The text of the question asked respondants [sic] is clearly stated in that report. Thank you for your inquiry and best wishes. From: Chris To: <dewert@co.shasta.ca.us> Date: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:40 AM Dear Ewert Donnell I am disappointed to learn that you are not prepared to be more forthcoming with information of the disputed opinion poll. While you are quite within your rights to conceal information which would be more instructive, you have chosen to release only that information which suits your particular argument - thus indicating a clear bias. Therefore, based on the secrecy you wish to maintain, I can only assume that opinion poll was potentially biased (in favour of a 'yes' vote for water fluoridation) and you do not wish this to be made public. Comments on the opinion poll will appear on my website: http://www.fluoride.org.uk. It is at this location you can find more information on other opinion polls, amongst a myriad of other information. Yours sincerely, Chris Holdcroft
The 'released version'
“It is easy to lie
with statistics, but it is easier to lie without
them.” Frederick Mosteller
SUMMARY OF INITIAL
FINDINGS REGARDING THE SURVEY OF RESIDENTS IN
REDDING ABOUT FLUORIDE IN THE WATER
By Jon S. Ebeling,
Ph.D. 11/6/2001
THE INITIAL
FINDINGS SUGGEST THAT THERE IS BROAD SUPPORT FOR THE
CITY TO INSTALL FLUORIDATED WATER SYSTEMS FOR THE
RESIDENTS
There is a majority of
respondents who support the idea of fluoridated
water. The reader should notice the column headed “cum.”
in Table 1. This cumulative column indicates that
the sum of those that said they strongly support or
support the idea is 66% of those who held an opinion
on the matter. Slightly more than 5% of the sample
of respondents refused to answer or did not know
about the topic. Those who responded as refused or
who said they did not know were asked the question a
second time before the coding of missing responses
was entered. Slightly more than 12% of the
respondents were undecided about the matter. The sum
of those that opposed or strongly opposed is 22 % of
the sample. Thus one might conclude that the ratio
of support to opposition on this matter is 3 to 1.
Table 1 illustrates these results.
TABLE 1 SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION TO FLUORIDATION OF THE WATER IN THE CITY OF REDDING Support or Oppose fluoridation
THERE IS BROAD SUPPORT FOR WATER FLUORIDATION AMONG
BOTH GENDER
GROUPS
AND ALL AGE
BRACKETS
The pattern of
support or opposition across gender and over age
brackets indicates that more than 60% of both
genders and all age groups support or strongly
support water fluoridation. Almost 69% of the
female respondents support the idea and 62% of the
males in the sample support the idea. It is
important to note further that females feel more
strongly on this matter by a factor of almost 1.5 to
1 than males. It may be that women are more
concerned with preventive
health issues in this matter than are men.
Twelve percent of the sample was undecided on the
issue.
While more than
60% of respondents in each age group support water
fluoridation, there is a very slight pattern of
increasing opposition as the respondent gets older.
Those within the age bracket of 18-29 are the are
the most supportive (72%) and those who are in the
age bracket 67 years or older are the most
infrequent supporters (61%).
THERE IS INITIAL
EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST A MAJORITY OF THOSE RESPONDING
WILL PAY A HIGHER PRICE FOR WATER FLUORIDATION
Of all
respondents, 56% indicated a willingness to pay some
increase in price for the service of fluoridated
water. Of these folks who are willing to pay higher
water rates, 87% were willing to pay at least a
$1.50 per month. When estimating through surveys the willingness of people to pay for price changes tends to produce an under estimate of what they would actually pay. Scientific studies and economic theory have demonstrated that respondents place a higher value on a public good than they are willing to reveal to an interviewer. Thus, it is probable that an even larger majority is willing to pay $1.50 per month. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TRANSLATION | EDUCATION | NEWS | POLITICAL | SCIENCE | AFN | HREX | ABOUT [fluoride.org.uk] | CONTACT | LINKS | SITE MAP |