International Fluoride Information Network
IFIN Bulletin: IFIN #793: Letters.
May 29, 2003

Dear All

First, apologies for confusing San Palo (Brazil!) and Palo Alto, California in my last IFIN. I was too much in a hurry to get out the good news!

Any of our readers who have ever tried to raise the issue of fluoridation in their community, know how quickly you become a lightning rod for abuse, or worse, people studiously ignore mentioning the subject! As you read the letters in the newspaper touting the authorities that have put their stamp of approval to the practice, you begin to doubt your own sanity. You tread the schizophrenic line between two different worlds. In the world of your own research, the data indicates that this practice is unethical, the benefits have been wildly exaggerated and the dangers have been ignored. However, in the other world of newspaper editorials and statements from government health officials, the practice is one of the best things that have ever happened in public health! It is a great moment when you move from a minority of one and find someone who you respect who agrees with you. It is also a wonderful when letters come in from outside -from other towns, even other countries -and confirm that you are not crazy. Maybe one of those letters even convinces a key person in your community that the Emperor of Fluoridation has no clothes.

All this by way of thanking all of you who so tirelessly write in your letters to help people who you do not know, and probably will never meet. You did this for us in Canton, and you have done it for many other communities. And it works. Those who are used to getting their own way locally, find it more difficult to fight off the wisdom from outside.

There are three places which urgently need our attention right now. Brisbane, Australia; Christchurch, New Zealand and Hamilton, New Zealand. Officials are trying to put fluoridation into Brisbane and Christchurch, and citizens are trying to get it out of Hamilton.

Below I have printed:
1) a letter Dr. Mark Diesendorf wrote to the Brisbane Courier-Mail, in response to a recent article in that paper (see IFIN #788) along with the email address for both the writer of the article and letters-to-the editor (thanks Ailsa Boyden)
2) a letter from Christine Cave explaining why she wants help in their battle in Hamilton, and the address of the local papers there, and
3) the email address for the Christchurch newspaper (see IFIN # 790).

If you can find the time please write SHORT letters explaining why Brisbane and Christchurch should not start fluoridation (they have been so wise to hold off for so long) and why Hamilton should follow the lead of Basel, Switzerland, which recently stopped fluoridation after 41 years. You may refer them to http://www.fluoridealert.org for details on this (it is the lead story) and to http://www.SLweb.org/bibliography.html for a comprehensive bibliography of fluoride's dangers to health. Do not feel obliged to cover all issues, simply choose one or two you feel most strongly about. Please copy Brisbane letters to Ailsa Boyden <boydens@mrbean.net.au> and Hamilton letters to Christine Cave <gladmark@wave.co.nz>.

Thanks again.
Paul Connett

1) BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA.

Medical chief backs fluoride
Leanne Edmistone, health reporter 27th May 2003

FLUORIDATION of the state's water supply is one of the first issues the new Australian Medical Association of Queensland president intends to put back on the political agenda.

Dr Ingrid Tall, 38, became the youngest AMAQ president when she took over from Dr Russell Stitz yesterday for her first day in office.

Dr Tall said improving public health education, as well as community understanding of the issues facing doctors and the industry, would be major goals during her one-year term.
She said Brisbane was the only capital city in Australia without a fluoridated water supply and the incidence of teeth decay in Queensland children was double that of children in other states.

She said the high incidence of teeth decay was a major concern especially because of the impact poor oral health could have on the rest of the body.

Dr Tall said that with the recent departure of Brisbane lord mayor Jim Soorley "lightbulbs turned on" in many health organisations, after a move to introduce water fluoridation was defeated by Brisbane City Council in 1997. "There are more than 150 scientific and health organisations worldwide that are actively wanting to provide fluoridation of the water supply, and there is a global trend towards it," Dr Tall said.

She said the AMAQ planned to let Lord Mayor Tim Quinn settle into office before raising the issue with him but stakeholders were "talking behind the scenes and mobilising the troops".

Cr Quinn yesterday said Brisbane City Council's position had not changed since a 1997 report compiled by a taskforce of community and expert representatives could not rule out any negative effects of introducing fluoride into the water. "But I want to stress that if there is any new evidence, I am always prepared to consider it," he said yesterday.

Liberal mayoral candidate Campbell Newman yesterday said he was against the move but would be prepared to discuss the issue.
ENDS -

Dear Editor,

Dr Ingid Tall's support for public health education in general is commendable, but her enthusiasm for the fluoridation of water supplies (Letters, 27 May) is poorly based. From the School Dental Service data for 1987, the permanent teeth of 10-year-olds in unfluoridated Brisbane had less decay than those in Melbourne, the same decay as in Adelaide and Perth, and more decay than in Hobart, Canberra or Sydney. All the other capital cities were fluoridated.

Almost all of continental Europe has either terminated or never implemented fluoridation, and yet children's teeth there have generally similar levels of decay to those in fluoridated countries.

Nowadays many expert fluoride research scientists accept that there is no benefit from swallowing fluoride. Fluoride toothpaste reduces decay through its action at the surface of teeth. Since the fluoride concentration of toothpaste is about 1000 times that of fluoridated drinking water, it is more effective.

So, people are being conned into swallowing an ineffective preventive medication with uncontrolled dose. Those who drink the most water -- e.g. athletes, outdoor workers, diabetes sufferers and infants who ingest milk formula reconstituted with fluoridated water -- are at greatest risk of chronic poisoning. Surely the medical profession should speak out against mass medication?
Dr Mark Diesendorf, Director, Sustainability Centre Pty Ltd, Adjunct Professor of Sustainability Policy Murdoch University, Perth W.A., Australia

Dear Paul,

The journalist <fclintonj@optusnet.com.au> who wrote the attached article (see above, PC), "Give water extra bite", has well and truly earned a round of letters from your IFIN Bulletin recipients.

My thought: the letters could be sent to the Courier Mail's editor: <cmletters@qnp.newsltd.com.au> and then carbon copied to her. If the letters were only sent to her they would never stand a chance of being printed.

My letter is below:

From one, so-called "fringe dweller" to another, Ailsa

Dear Sir,

Re. Medical chief backs fluoride [CM 27/05/03]

AMAQ's current president, Dr Ingrid Tall, would do well to inform herself of current events on the international fluoridation scene before attempting to impose fluoridation on Queenslanders.

On May 6th in Washington DC, the USA EPA hosted a Science Forum entitled, "Social Resistance to Fluoridation". This was intended as a one-on-one debate.

Speaking against fluoridation was Paul Connett, Ph.D., Professor of Chemistry at St Lawrence University, Canton, New York; however, although many scientists, and others, representing high-profile pro-fluoridation bodies were invited to debate for fluoridation, not one single person accepted the EPA invitation.

It is interesting to note how propagators of fluoridation frequently work behind the scene for fluoridation, but refuse to debate publically.

Dr Connett has suggested that a tremendous landmark on Dr Tall's road to her fluoridation dream would be to take him on in an open public debate on fluoridation, sometime between 21st June and 11th July when he will be in Australia again.

The time is overdue for Australian doctors and dentists to update themselves with the latest peer-reviewed and published scientific studies on fluoridation. They could do this by visiting >http://www.slweb.org/bibliography.html<. By doing so, they might realize why Basel, the only city in Switzerland to ever fluoridate, halted 41 years of fluoridation on 9th April, this year.

Yours faithfully,
Ailsa Boyden

2) Hamilton, New Zealand.

Dear Paul,

Great to get the email address for Christchurch. Some papers will not accept attachments so probably a good idea to mention that so all their good efforts do not go to waste. I will send one.

Any chance of some letters for Hamilton NZ as we are in the middle of our campaign here. We had a major coup after an information workshop at the local council. The Ministry of Health presented their twaddle. I spoke to ... I sent him some stuff over the email and then Siggi and I met with him to chat over what I had sent. He promised to read everything I sent. I believe he will read it and I know what he will find - just not sure if he is brave enough to stand up and proclaim what he has found. Unfortunately, in the end we have to rely on peoples integrity and courage - the facts are secondary.

There are 3 local newspapers:

1) <editor@waikato-times.co.nz>
2) <colin_vincent@wilsonandhorton.co.nz>
3) <hamilton.press@wkp.co.nz>

Thanks heaps

Regards Christine Cave

3) Christchurch, New Zealand.
editorial@press.co.nz

Call for fluoride in water
By Michelle Brooker, 28 May 2003

The fluoride debate looks set to rage in Christchurch with the Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) announcing it wants fluoride in the city's water supply.

The CDHB is formulating a policy which will support fluoridation.

CDHB chief executive Jean O'Callaghan said Canterbury tooth decay rates were high compared to other parts of New Zealand and developed countries with fluoridated water.
"Both national and international evidence shows water fluoridation to be the most effective method of reducing tooth decay in communities," she said.

Christchurch is the biggest metropolitan area in the country which is not fluoridated. Auckland, Wellington, and Dunedin have fluoridated water.

A recent study of Wellington and Christchurch five-year-olds showed Christchurch children had 30 per cent more cavities than Wellington children.

School and Community Dental Service head Martin Lee said there was a misconception that fluoride only helped children's teeth. "It helps anyone who has teeth," he said. "That includes dear old granny as well. The reality is the cost of not providing fluoride falls on the DHB. But the cost of providing fluoride is really, really cheap."

Christchurch City Council planning and projects manager, water and waste unit, Bruce Henderson, said the council had done cost estimates of putting fluoride in the water supply in 2000. These showed it would cost $3 million to put it into the water supply, with a $250,000 annual operating cost.

"It is more expensive here because places like Wellington and Dunedin only have about four pumping sites," he said. "We have 50."

Mr Henderson said a public survey in October 2000 showed 60 per cent of Christchurch citizens did not support putting chemicals, including fluoride, in the water supply. Council officers had not made any recommendations on the issue. "It is a debate for the health professionals," he said.

Mr Lee estimated fluoride in the water supply would save $52 million in dental costs over 30 years.

CDHB board member Randall Allardyce told last week's board meeting that the board needed the city council's buy-in on its fluoride policy. "They (council) are congratulating themselves about not polluting the water," he said. "That is like congratulating yourself for not providing vaccinations. It is putting a curse on youngsters with tooth decay."

Anti-fluoride campaigners claim the chemical causes cancer and weakens bones. Christchurch City councillor Ron Wright opposes fluoride in Christchurch's water supply.

"I don't think tooth decay is of such magnitude that we need fluoride in the water," he said. "I don't like fluoride and I don't think it is necessary when you have the standard and quality of the water in this city."

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: OK, here's a chance to make CTM's support work for the good people of Australia and New Zealand. Why not spend a few minutes writing and sending in your views to those concerned. Professor Paul Connett is to be applauded and admired for his tireless work on behalf of everyone to have the menace of fluoridation erased from our society. Remember, if you don't want to get dental cavities, stop eating sugar, white bread, etc. I know this is not a popular message for the farmers of Queensland!

FURTHER RESOURCES:
Health Wars, chapter entitled 'Water Under the Bridge'

Available from www.credence.org