Sunday, December 29, 2013

"Dentistry Today" is about to publish a new study of how ending water fluoridation has affected Calgary, Alberta Canada -- Here's hoping we get some facts that can be "applicable" as the article states we no longer have, although the Alberta Health Services is expecting the study findings to create "more debate" about fluoride, so does that mean they already know how the study turned out?

Study Will Review Result of Ending Water Fluoridation in Canadian City

Written by Dentistry Today Thursday, 19 December 2013 09:58

People in Calgary, Alberta will soon find out how a controversial vote is affecting residents of the city.

The information from a study will soon be revealed after people voted to end water fluoridation in May 2011. The study will show the results based on data from children in grades 1 and 2.

The information will be beneficial to people in Calgary and even more beneficial to future cities, states or countries that vote to end water fluoridation.

Many of the studies on this particular matter are no longer applicable. It will (be) sic helpful to have current data to see the impact on people who recently went from fluoridated water to water without fluoride.

Alberta Health Services will present the date to the city council. The study could lead to more debate about the fluoridation issue.

Saturday, December 28, 2013

Updated fluoride report and video from Dr. Mercola, MD

Chemicals in Your Drinking Water That Could Be Wrecking Your Health
December 28, 2013

Story at-a-glance

  • Most tap water is far from pure, containing a vast array of disinfection byproducts, chemicals, radiation, heavy metals, and even pharmaceutical drugs
  • Federal scientists report finding traces of 18 unregulated contaminants in one-third of the water samples collected from 25 municipal utilities across the US in their most recent testing, including perfluorinated compounds like PFOA
  • Studies suggest a probable link between PFOA in drinking water and high cholesterol, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, testicular cancer, kidney cancer, and pregnancy-induced hypertension
  • The addition of contaminated fluoride to the water supply may be contributing to increased cancer rates in the US because of the arsenic it contains
  • The featured documentary, An Inconvenient Tooth, reveals the many problems associated with water fluoridation, and why it’s a practice that really needs to be stopped for the public’s greater good

Wednesday, December 25, 2013

"Follow the Money" on Fluoride?? Now where've we heard that before?!...

December 24, 2013

Fluoridation: Follow the Money
By Carol Kopf, Media Director, Fluoride Action Network

Multi-billion dollar international conglomerates, which benefit from tooth decay and fluoride sales, pour money into organized dentistry which is behind virtually every fluoridation initiative.  

The American Dental Association (ADA), many of its over 250 constituent state and city associations are benefactors along with other fluoridation-promoting dental groups and schools.

Dentists, inside and outside of government and industry, seem to have vast amounts of money and influence to promote fluoridation. Where does it come from?

The ADA and the ADA Foundation received over $28 million from pharmaceutical companies, dental equipment manufacturers and insurance companies, from 2006 – 2009, according to a January 20, 2010, letter from the ADA’s Chief Financial Officer to U.S. Senator Charles Grassley.

Grassley wants more accountability and transparency between the ADA and industry. The ADA didn’t comply with Grassley’s request to publish its corporate funders on its website. However, Grassley listed them on his own website:

Fluoride-selling pharmaceutical giants listed include: Colgate, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Pfizer, and others.

ADA’s Seal of Acceptance

Several companies on Grassley’s list paid a “Seal Program Maintenance Fee,” totaling $574,000 for four years (2006-2009).

The ADA requires a one-time, non-refundable submission fee before reviewing over-the-counter products ($14,500 per product). If given the ADA’s Seal of Acceptance, they are required to pay an annual maintenance fee of $3,500 per product, according to Jan Lord, Manager, Acceptance Program, ADA’s Council on Scientific Affairs.

Approximately, 260 items appear on the ADA’s current Accepted “Shopping List.” A large number are fluoride products.

More Legal Financial Exchanges between the ADA and Industry
Sometimes the ADA joins into “Cause-Related-Marketing” with for-profit companies. The ADA gives an example: the William Wrigley Company agreed to donate a percentage of its ADA Accepted chewing gum products to the ADA’s Give Kids A Smile program, according to Guidelines Governing the American Dental Association’s Corporate Relationships.

Wrigley paid the ADA $36,000 to review some of Wrigley’s sugar-free chewing gum studies to get the ADA’s Seal of Acceptance, according to CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Gupta writes, “The ADA stands by its seal and told us any company can apply for the seal, as long as the company pays for it."

Johnson & Johnson gave $900,000 to fund the ADA’s annual session’s distinguished speaker series (2006-2009).

In 2007, Barbara Walters and Lance Armstrong Headlined the ADA’s Distinguished Speaker Series.

Many prominent journalists and politicians have been paid to speak at ADA conventions. In 2013 former President Bill Clinton was the main event. Some might say it’s a good way to buy influence.

Colgate funds the ADA research institute newly renamed after dentist Anthony R. Volpe, who recently retired as Vice President of Clinical Research and Scientific Affairs at Colgate-Palmolive Company.

Colgate’s Volpe and a Henry Schein, Inc. representative serve on the Board of Directors of Forsyth Institute which bills itself as “the only independent research institute in America specializing in oral health and its impact on overall wellness.” The Forsyth Institute is where Dr. Phyllis Mullenix performed research that found fluoride can cause brain deficits in rodents. Mullenix was fired for publishing her results in a peer-reviewed, respected journal (1), against the orders of her Forsyth boss, as explained in the first chapter of Chris Bryson's “The Fluoride Deception.”

Members of the dental industry are on Boards of Directors for Dental Schools, other fluoridation promoting groups such as the Children’s Dental Health Project, Oral Health America, Dental product manufacturers are even Friends of the National Institutes of Dental Research.

At the forefront of most fluoridation initiatives are well-meaning but mis-guided dentists who fail to read the literature and are fueled only by the endorsements of dentists at the CDC’s Oral Health Division, or endorsements by dental organizations, or endorsements lobbied by dentists or from other groups and associations. Industry-funded dental groups even lobbied the Surgeon General until she finally caved in and endorsed fluoridation.

Dental Schools are corporation-subsidized
Henry Schein, Inc., the largest distributor of healthcare products and services to office-based practitioners gave the New York University Dental School a six figure gift in 2000 and a million dollars the year before.

The New York University Donor Honor Roll reveals that Colgate-Palmolive Company and Nobel Biocare USA, Inc gave from $1 to $4 million (2011-2012).

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

If a community elects to stop fluoridation, invariably a dentist and his posse shows up intimidating legislators into re-starting fluoridation. As ammunition, they state: “CDC has recognized water fluoridation as one of the 10 great public health achievements of the 20th century.”

That statement may sound impressive. However, it has been promoted by the CDC’s Oral Health Division, who are paid to promote fluoridation. The CDC also says, “It is not CDC's task to determine what levels of fluoride in water are safe.” (see 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence:

The CDC’s Oral Health Division may be a stepping stone into a more lucrative career promoting fluoridation for outside interests. When forced to defend fluoridation with words and not hide behind catch-phrases and government credentials, two former CDC Oral Health Division Directors fell short.

a) Dentist William Kohn, former director of the CDC’s Division of Oral Health until Feb 2011 - Now with Delta Dental, a dental “insurance” company that strongly supports fluoridation financially, Kohn does a poor job of convincing anyone to endorse fluoridation in a series of Delta Dental YouTube videos. I’ll bet he makes way more money in his new job.

b) Dentist William Mass, CDC’s previous Oral Health Director retired January 2010 from the CDC. But, In 2009, Dr. Maas was assigned by CDC to serve as an advisor to the Pew Children's Dental Campaign. Maas was equally impotent when asked to defend fluoridation before a county legislature in 2013 in his new job for the billion-dollar Pew Foundation’s (renamed) Dental Policy group. Under his guidance, Pew fluoridation initiatives in Portland, Oregon and Wichita, Kansas failed when voters rejected fluoridation 60% to 40% despite the vast amount of money spent trying to convince them to swallow the fluoride.

Dentists Doing Very Well, Thank You, Despite Fluoridation
Fluoridation hasn’t hurt dentistry’s bottom line at all. In fact, dentistry is big business today despite 7 decades of water fluoridation and a glut of fluoridated dental products. Americans spent about $108 billion on dentists in 2011, an inflation-adjusted increase from $64 billion in 1996, according to the General Accounting Office. But a dental crisis still exists.

Since fluoridation doesn’t reduce tooth decay, whose best interests are served by protecting fluoride’s image?

The Global Toothpaste Market is expected to reach $12.6 billion by 2015, according Global Industry Analysts, Inc.

And, as you know, toothpaste isn’t the only fluoridated dental product on the market.
The global dental equipment market is predicted to exhibit a compound annual growth rate of 9% to reach over $13 billion by 2016.
Cosmetic dentistry continues to surge with an annual U.S. expenditure of $2.75 billion.

Fluoridation has created a lucrative new market for cosmetic dentistry. Fluoride-overdose symptoms, dental fluorosis (discolored teeth) has increased in incidence and severity over the years. WebMD writes, “Although fluorosis is not a disease, its effects can by psychologically distressing and difficult to treat. Parental vigilance can play an important role in preventing fluorosis.”

Sales of fluoride varnish are soaring as organized dentistry lobbied legislators to increase, require or allow their use among more practitioners – even though the varnish contains a hugely toxic 22,600 parts per million fluoride and has never been FDA approved for cavity reduction or safety tested.

Money is Power

Why does the ADA need so much money? Money is power in American politics. The ADA’s Political Action Committee is considered a Heavy Hitter by the Center for Responsive Politics.

In the last cycle, the ADA gave Congressional representatives $302,500 and Senators $48,500.

It seems that organized dentistry lobbies mostly for laws that benefit their member dentists. Some legislation masquerades as a public benefit. Fluoridation wears such a mask.
The New York State Dental Association brags about its legislative victories on its website.
The New York Times reported about the NY Dental Association’s political clout and sleazy politicking, in 2008.

The Greater New York Dental Meeting which is billed as the largest dental conference in the country generates millions of dollars. Exhibitors look like a who’s who in the dental industry.

Healthy Diets Make Healthy Teeth without Fluoride

Even the ADA admits good dental health begins in the womb. It’s important for pregnant women to receive sufficient amounts of tooth-building nutrients, including calcium, protein, phosphorous and vitamins A, C and D  But dentists are mostly focused on fluoride, a drug with adverse side effects, that is not even essential for healthy teeth.

But there’s no money in selling nutrients and healthy eating.

So it’s not surprising that the U.S. is experiencing a tooth decay epidemic along with a fluoride-overdose epidemic. Up to 60% of adolescents have dental fluorosis. Yet 51% of them have tooth decay.

Who’s in Charge?

The CDC is not responsible for fluoridation safety. The FDA regulates fluoride as a drug for topical application and considers ingested fluoride such as fluoride supplements, an unapproved drug. The EPA regulates fluoride in water supplies as a contaminant. Organized dentistry, fueled by corporate cash, protects fluoride’s image and promotes fluoridation.                            

So Why Fluoridation? 

The dental crisis America faces today is because dentistry has become a luxury service that most Americans can’t afford. 80% of dentists refuse to accept Medicaid patients, 130 million lack dental insurance. Many with dental insurance can’t afford dentistry’s high out of pocket fees. The answer is simple - legalize Dental Therapists in the US as they have been for decades in other first world countries. They just need 2 or 3 years training to do simple dentistry. They will go into mouths and areas dentists refuse to go. Studies show they are highly effective and more affordable.

However, organization dentistry, with its pockets full of corporate cash, lobby long and hard to keep affordable dentistry an oxymoron in the US. Dentists lobby against dental therapists because, some say, they infringe upon dentists lucrative monopoly.


1. Mullenix PJ, Denbesten PK, Schunior A, Kernan WJ. 1996. Neurotoxicity of Sodium Fluoride in Rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1995 Mar-Apr;17(2):169-77.

Sunday, December 22, 2013

A FAN Update Plus a Report on Australia by Dr. Paul Connett -

December 20, 2013

Report from Australia 2013. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Introduction by Paul Connett

I have been to Australia at least eight times (3 times for waste issues and 5 for fluoridation). With respect to fluoridation it has been both an exciting and depressing series of experiences. On the one hand I have worked with some fantastic activists there including in the state of Victoria, Philip, David, Elaine, Genevieve, Gillian, Daniel and Jaya, in Queensland, Merilyn, Bob, Jeanie, Dr John R, Peter, Glenda, Colin, Bill, Ailsa and Jason, in South Australia, Dr. Andrew H, Anne and Darryl, in Western Australia, James, Anne and Derek, and in NSW, Dr. Mark D, Dr. John L, Dr. Caree A, Lisa, Sylvia, Ilga, Al and Amanda. That is the exciting part. These people are struggling among other things to keep democracy alive in this country. 

The depressing part of my experience on fluoridation in Australia is twofold: the behavior of the public health bureaucracies in the various states (bad) and the media (ugly). 

The public health bureaucrats

If the public health bureaucrats that promote fluoridation in Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK and US are irresponsible, those in the States of NSW, Queensland and Victoria simply take one’s breath away. They range from Chief Health Officers in Victoria like Dr. Carnie, who literally told communities there that they were going to get fluoridation whether they wanted it or not, to the faceless bureaucrats in Queensland's previous government whose propaganda in 2007 in support of the push for state mandatory fluoridation there would have made Edward Bernays blush. Just look at this photo-montage of what children’s teeth look like when comparing those who have been exposed to fluoridated water and those that haven’t. This was part of a leaflet that was distributed to MPs before they voted in mandatory fluoridation in 2008. 

Remember this was not put together by some group of pro-fluoridation dentists organized by the Pew Foundation or the ADA, this was put together by civil servants being paid by the Queensland taxpayers. The latter probably believed - in their innocence - that these people were there to provide objective and scientifically correct information to decision makers!

 The Australian media

The media in Australia is largely run by the Murdoch empire. Their editors appear to ape the words provided to them by the PR operatives working for the fluoridation promoters and are downright nasty to boot. Take the case of the town of Lismore in NSW. Partially influenced by the long stream of communities halting fluoridation in Queensland to the North (see the report below), this town’s council wisely voted not to proceed with fluoridation. Immediately the Murdoch press went after these councillors with a vengeance in a campaign they titled “Stop the Rot.” In one of the big state newspapers they printed the pictures of each of the members of the Lismore council who had voted NO to fluoridation with the headline, “These are the people who condemned kids to tooth decay” (see picture below). That along with statements from government and party officials quickly forced the councillors to back-off and you can see below the final outcome. 

I got a first hand view of the unscrupulous tactics of this newspaper. I received an email from one of the journalists seeking “objective information” on the debate. I provided him with a pdf copy of my book, a pdf of summaries of each chapter and fairly lengthy explanation warning him about how the promoters of fluoridation claim that all the science is on their side and that opponents were emotional and unscientific. So what does he do? He cites nothing from the material I sent him and used a headline that was derogatory of opponents.

Now back to some better news. Here is a report from FAN Australia for 2013.


Australia was a mixed bag for fluoridation in 2013. At the very end of 2012 the newish Queensland State government overturned the previous government’s mandatory fluoridation legislation. The year started very well with Cairns Regional Council rejecting fluoridation largely on the grounds of fluoridation being unethical mass medication. 

In the last 12 months in Queensland 17 Councils have rejected fluoridation either ending, or voting not to start fluoridation, with some councils even voting not to use fluoridation plants which were almost completed. Some of the councils are Regional Councils that include up to 5 towns. There are now more than 35 towns in Queensland that are free of fluoridation. 

Unfortunately, Queensland’s capital Brisbane is still fluoridated because within days of mandatory fluoridation being overturned, Brisbane’s Lord Mayor, without any consultation at all with his fellow Councillors or neighbouring councils, declared that fluoridation was staying in Brisbane. The Lord Mayor cited endorsements from the Australian Dental and Medical Associations and the WHO as his justification when refusing the people of Brisbane a Referendum. A water grid in South East Queensland is another complication to ending fluoridation.

As fluoridation is no longer mandatory, it is possible for Queensland councils to end fluoridation without the permission of the state government. An 18th Qld Council, Cook Shire Council has recently voted to keep fluoridating but to have a Referendum with the next Council election. Mount Isa Council earlier in 2013 had held a Referendum with 89 % of voters voting NO Fluoride. Mount Isa Councillors then voted to abandon fluoridation and not use the nearly complete plant.

Just over the border in New South Wales fluoridation became a very hot topic when Lismore Councillors in August voted to not fluoridate. The Australian Murdoch media then worked themselves into a frenzy, even having a name and shame campaign of Councillors who had voted against fluoridation. The Murdoch media also started an intensive campaign to get the NSW govt to force fluoridation on any unfluoridated NSW Council. Both the NSW government and Opposition party however shied away from this move, even though the Opposition could have forced it through when they obtained support from the Fishers and Shooters Party MPs.

After the personal attack campaign by the Murdoch media Ballina Council voted to fluoridate, however Byron Council voted to maintain their fluoridation free status. Byron Council also voted to ask NSW Health to provide a prenatal and post natal oral health education programme, similar to an extremely successful programme trialled by the University of Queensland in a low socio-economic area which reduced tooth decay in 2 year olds from a community rate of 23 % down to 2 to 7 %.

Unfortunately some of the Lismore Councillors wouldn’t take Byron Council’s wise decision as their guidance and on the 3rd December voted 6 to 5 to force fluoridation on Lismore residents. Two of the six Pro-fluoride Lismore Councillors were mute during the debate, but voted to force fluoridation anyway. Another Pro- fluoride councillor stated that she believed NSW Health and she believed fluoridation was safe at 1ppm stating that the USA fluoridated at 4 ppm! As all Lismore Councillors had been provided voluminous scientific information, for this Councillor to still believe that the USA fluoridated at 4 ppm illustrated her - and several other Pro- fluoride Councillors - lack of understanding but their willingness to trust Pro- fluoride authorities.

Lismore Council had previously held a Referendum on Coal Seam Gas with 87 % of voters rejecting CSG activities within the Lismore Council area. However the Pro – fluoride Lismore Mayor was not interested in allowing a Referendum on Fluoridation. The five Lismore councillors who voted against forced fluoridation gave intelligent and informed reasons for doing so, citing: the issues of no control over dose, the violation of both informed consent and the Precautionary Principle.

The very informed Byron Councillors and the five very informed Lismore Councillors who voted No to forced fluoridation are an inspiration and give us some hope of a fluoride free Australia in the future, despite the recent NSW setbacks with Ballina and Lismore.

Sunday, December 15, 2013

FAN's Best Fluoride-Free Videos for 2013

December 11, 2013

The Best Fluoride-Free Videos of 2013
2013 brought the fluoride-free movement some great content captured on film. And in this day and age, where most people—especially elected officials—don’t take the time or have the time to read through reams of fluoridation research and written materials, videos are becoming more important in the quest to educate people about the dangers of water fluoridation. To this end, the Fluoride Action Network has created FAN TV, where everyone can have free access to an extensive catalogue of films covering nearly every aspect of the fluoridation issue.

Before we take a look at the new FAN TV, lets take a look at a handful of the best fluoridation videos of 2013:

 Fluoridegate: An American Tragedy, A new film produced by Dr. David Kennedy. It’s a revealing and startling look into the practice of fluoridation and how the government, industry, and trade associations protect and promote the practice (the “policy”) regardless of the known health risks and the growing number of victims. Particularly dramatic is the interview with the Washington DC lawyer who defended Dr. William Marcus, the EPA toxicologist who was wrongfully dismissed from his position with the Office of Water for raising questions about the way the fluoride toxicity issue was being handled by his department. He stated, “They went after him with a vengeance…” For the record Marcus won his case against the EPA and was re-instated with back pay and compensation.

10 Facts About Fluoride, Attorney Michael Connett summarizes 10 basic facts about fluoride that should be considered in any discussion about whether to fluoridate water. To download the flyer that accompanies this video, click here.

Portland’s Fluoride Journey & Victory, This is an inspirational video set to music, showing footage and pictures from Clean Water Portland’s successful campaign to reverse the City Council’s fluoridation vote. There were a lot of great videos produced during this campaign, including footage of the Portland No Fluoride March, a comedic take on fluoridation in The Family Gets Fluoridation Chemicals, a number of personal perspectives including Frances: a Personal Story with Fluoride, as well as Howard Patterson’s educational peice, Fluoridation and the Environment.

Ed Asner: Fluoride should be a choice, not a mandate, In this short PSA, Ed Asner explains why he opposes water fluoridation. According to Asner, “common sense and common decency” suggest that, no matter how much a dentist or doctor might like a given medicine, in this case fluoride, they have no right to force it on an entire community, including those who don’t want it and those who are particularly vulnerable to harm.

 Ed Begley, Jr.: Many studies link fluoride to reduced IQ, In this short PSA, Ed Begley Jr addresses recent research linking elevated fluoride exposure to reduced IQ. Based on this and other research, Begley has added his voice to the growing number of people calling for an end to fluoridation.

Fluoride is Poison, The international television news program Breaking the Set with host Abbey Martin ran a great story on the dangers of fluoridation. Abbey’s show is on the Russian Today television network and is broadcast to more than 550 million viewers in over 100 countries.

Get it out, Michael created a fluoridation protest music video to the song “Get it Out” by composer and wordsmith Alex Wilson.

Response to Dr. Wu, Dr. Jay Levy, a practicing dentist in Portland, exposes the demonstrably false claims recently made by Dr. Phillip Wu, in a video made by the pro-fluoridation advocacy group Healthy Kids, Healthy Portland.

Mercola Fluoride Overview, This a 4-minute long video produced by Dr. Mercola and his staff. The video is a quick and easy introduction to the issue of water fluoridation and the arguments against the practice. While some portions of the video are specific to the current fluoridation fight in Portland, Oregon, most of the video is still relevant to any fluoridated community, or any community considering adding fluoride to the drinking water.

Fluoride: Reduces IQ, Huffington Post Live reports on the recent Harvard meta-analysis showing that fluoride reduces IQ.

Pennsylvania forum discussion on fluoridation, In March, a public tv station in Pennsylvania held this informative one-hour forum on fluoridation, featuring Michael Connett, Michal Meyer of the Chemical Heritage Foundation, and Dr. Craig Collison."

FAN’s video archives 

The Fluoride Action Network has taken our professional opposition to fluoridation and has captured and shared much of it on video with the development of F.A.N.TV, which is home to a comprehensive catalogue of both full-length documentaries and short clips on fluoridation that are free to the general public. The videos feature FAN's interviews with leading figures in fluoride research, including dentists, toxicologists, and award-winning journalists, seek to shed light on the health concerns with current fluoride exposures and the history/politics of the water fluoridation program. There is both archival footage and contemporary clips, and much of what you can view on FAN.TV has simply never been available to the general public until now.

Some of the films that can be found on FAN.TV include:

1.) Professional Perspectives on Water Fluoridation, featuring a Nobel Laureate in Medicine, three scientists from the National Research Council's landmark review on fluoride, as well as dentists, medical doctors, and leading researchers in the field, this professionally produced 28 minute DVD presents a powerful indictment of the water fluoridation program.

2.) The Fluoride Deception, an interview with Christopher Bryson, an award-winning journalist, former BBC producer, and author of “The Fluoride Deception”.

3.) The Benefits of Water Fluoridation?, a succinct review of recent research showing that fluoridating water provides little to no benefit to teeth.

4.) Dr. William Hirzy & the EPA Union on Fluoridation, On June 29th, 2000, Dr. William Hirzy was invited to give testimony before a subcommitee of the U.S. Senate. At the time, Dr. Hirzy was serving his sixth term as the Senior Vice-President of EPA's Headquarters Union of Scientists and Professionals. His presentation that day was, “Why EPA’s Union of Professionals Opposes Fluoridation.” This is a video that documents the presentation along with interviews with Dr. Hirzy where he describes the reasoning behind the professional and official stance of his Union members in direct opposition to the EPA’s administrative support of fluoridation.

5.) Consumer advocate and former U.S. Presidential candidate, Ralph Nader discusses his views on water fluoridation.

6.) The Politics of Fluoride, a short 5 minute introduction to how political pressures have thwarted scientific inquiry into fluoride's risks. The video features interviews with several scientists, including Sir Iain Chalmers and Dr. Phyllis Mullenix."

7.) Why I Changed My Mind on Fluoridation, In this 1998 interview, Dr. John Colquhoun (dentist, researcher, and former Principle Dental Officer for the Auckland, New Zealand Health District) explains why he went from being New Zealand’s leading promoter of fluoridation to being an opponent of the practice. Despite its technical limitations, this is Paul Connett's favorite interview.

8.) The Arizona Fluoridation Debate, an unprecedented full one-on-one Lincoln/Douglas style debate with powerpoint presentations featuring FAN’s Director and co-author of “The Case Against Fluoride”, Paul Connett, PhD, squaring off against Arizona dentist and long-time fluoridation proponent, Howard Farran, DDS.

Stuart Cooper, Campaign Director
Fluoride Action Network

Monday, December 9, 2013

"FAN to release industry's hidden fluoride files"

December 9, 2013 

Over the past few months, Michael Connett, FAN's Special Projects Director, has been actively working on several big projects that are nearing completion and which we are very excited about. In this bulletin, Michael describes one of these projects, and tomorrow, he'll describe several more. 

The Secret History of Fluoride "Science"

In October of this year, I had the opportunity to go through eight large boxes of historic documents that the journalist Chris Bryson amassed for his groundbreaking book The Fluoride Deception (2004). My interest in reviewing the documents was rather specific: to obtain several industry-funded studies on skeletal fluorosis that Bryson cited in his book. (Skeletal fluorosis is a bone disease caused by too much fluoride exposure). While looking for these studies, I found so many interesting documents that I could hardly stop reading. For 6 days, I went page-by-page through the entire collection, identifying those documents I wanted copies of and scanning them into pdf files (over 4,700 pages in total). I have since gone through Bryson's collection a second time and have scanned an additional 1500+ pages.

Paper in the works

I have now carefully read though many of these documents, and am in the process of writing a paper that details the findings of the suppressed industry studies, and how this suppressed research contradicts longstanding safety claims made by industry and government scientists. I believe it is absolutely critical for this information to be made widely available, not only to the scientific community, but to the workers who still inhale toxic levels of fluoride in the workplace, and to the public that may be consuming toxic levels of fluoride in their water and food. In the coming weeks, therefore, I will be submitting my paper for publication, and FAN will be releasing ALL of the documents we've obtained from Bryson's collection (minus any copyrighted material), as well as other documents that we've obtained (and are in the process of obtaining) from other researchers. (More on these other documents below)
There's something wonderful about "freeing" information -- to let it have its rightful influence on public discourse and understanding. The "safety" standards for fluoride (for both industrial workers, and the public at large) have been sustained for so long precisely because critical information has been imprisoned. It's time that people be entrusted with the keys to this information, and that's what FAN intends to do.

In these documents, you will get a front row seat to the scandalous politics that thrust fluoride into the water we drink and the air we breathe. You will see parts of this environmental crime take place before your eyes, and you will meet the people who did it: Robert Kehoe, Harold Hodge, Dudley Irwin, Nicholas Leone, and Frank Seamans to name a few.

There is still more investigative research that needs to be done, and there are almost certainly more buried documents that remain to be unearthed. But any such research should be done with full understanding of what we already know, and for those interested in such research, the Bryson documents (along with Bryson's masterful book) are a must.

How you can get these documents

We will be posting all of these documents on our website, and FAN will also be making them available in a Flash Drive for a donation of $75 during this month's fundraiser. The benefit of getting the Flash Drive is that you don't have to bother downloading all of the individual files, and with the Flash Drive, you'll have the files in a neatly organized folder system. To get a sense of the content and organization of the Drive, I have posted previews here, here, here, and here.

As noted above, the Flash Drive also contains other historic documents that FAN has obtained over the years, some of which we have already posted to our website. These cover (A) the politics behind EPA's safe drinking water standard for fluoride, (B) the FDA's woeful failure to protect the nation from ineffective and dangerous fluoride supplements, and (C) the Harvard/Bone Cancer scandal.

With the FAN Flash Drive, you will have this unique and unprecedented collection of fluoride history in a format that will make it easy to share with others.

We expect to release the flash drive in the last week of December, and will be posting the documents online sometime in January. In the meantime, I will be trying to obtain documents that were missing from Bryson’s collection, as well as some additional documents that Bryson did not have access to at the time of his research. If you live in Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, or Las Vegas and would like to help with this effort, please let me know. The documents are in publicly accessible archives and anyone able to obtain them will get a copy of the completed FAN Flash Drive, as well as a free DVD of our interview with Chris Bryson. If interested, please email me at

Michael Connett, Special Projects Director

Fundraising update from the Fluoride Action Network:

To sustain our work for next year, we are seeking to raise $120,000 from 600 donors by midnight on Dec. 31. As of this midnight this Sunday we have raised $18,111 from 143 donors.

Thanks to one of our generous angels the next $1000 donated will be matched dollar for dollar. In other words, whatever you donate now will be doubled.

If you wish to make a tax-deductible donation – large or small -you can either:

• Donate by using our secure online server.

• Donate by sending a check - payable to Fluoride Action Network – to: FAN, 104 Walnut Street, Binghamton, NY 13905

Remember, a donation of $75 will get you the Flash Drive. You can also choose one of our exciting gifts available at different donation levels.

Please Donate Today

Stuart Cooper, Campaign Director
Fluoride Action Network

Sunday, December 8, 2013

More exposure of behind-the-scenes deceit from pro-fluoride groups fighting the anti-fluoride groups in Portland, Oregon during last May's ballot battle against fluoride....

December 6, 2013

 We need every penny we can raise because we are up against big money in our efforts to end fluoridation in the U.S. and beyond. The ADA raises about $100 million a year and the CDC Oral Heath Division has a bottomless pit of taxpayers’ money to lavish on fluoridation promotion. On top of all that the Pew Charitable Trusts - a multibillion dollar foundation – has thrown its support behind fluoridation promotion. Here are some disturbing details on Pew’s fluoridation promotion from Carol Kopf, FAN’s media officer.

PEW Persistently Misinforms Legislators and the Public about Fluoridation

Launched in 2008, the Children’s Dental Policy arm of The Pew Charitable Trusts is using its political clout and money, coupled with misinformation and untruths, to promote fluoridation initiatives and preserve existing schemes in many cities and states.

According to Pew’s fluoridation promoter Matt Jacob (Ref 1), Pew’s outreach to states for community water fluoridation (CWF) included the following:
Arkansas: “Funded a poll and offered other assistance to pass a state mandate in 2011.”

California: “Provided assistance to a successful campaign to secure CWF in San Jose.”

Kansas: “Assisted oral health advocates in Wichita pass a fluoridation policy.”
Mississippi: “Provided message training for oral health field staff.”

Montana: “Assisted successful effort to preserve CWF in the city of Bozeman.”
New Hampshire: “Helped defeat a statewide ban on CWF.”

Oregon: “Offering funds and research for a campaign in Portland."

Wisconsin: “Provided research and technical assistance to preserve CWF in Milwaukee.”

Pew loses in Wichita and Portland

However, PEW’s PR, money and devious tactics lost big time to common sense and truth in Portland Oregon and Wichita Kansas when voters rejected fluoridation in referenda in both towns with a margin of 60% to 40%.

Buying votes

In Portland the pro-fluoridation team –aided by PEW - outspent citizens opposed to fluoridation 3 to 1 and gave at least $143,000 to local minority groups who supported fluoridation. These five groups each received $20,000: Urban League of Portland, the Latino Network, the Asian Pacific American Network of Oregon, Center for Intercultural Organizing, and the Immigrant & Refugee Community Organization. The Oregon Latino Health Coalition got $5,000, while the Native American Youth and Family Center received $37,810. The Portland chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), who opposed fluoridation, received nothing (Ref 2).

Pew hires Willam Maas

In an effort to sway voters and decision makers, Pew has hired as its fluoridation adviser, dentist William Maas, former head of the CDC’s Oral Health Division. Those credentials may look impressive on paper but not in person. When grilled by the Sedgwick (KS) County Commission, he looked nervous and admitted that the so-called “mild” fluorosis (in this category 50% of the enamel of the affected teeth is impacted) occurs even in children who live in non-fluoridated communities, and then he actually claimed fluorosis is attractive. (Watch the hearing – Maas speaks at 31:00 minutes).
This remark angered a Sedgwick Commissioner who says others may not find it so attractive. The Sedgwick Commissioner was right. Studies have repeatedly found that children find teeth with so-called “mild” fluorosis to be objectionable – a point that even the CDC, Maas’s old boss, has conceded.

The Sedgwick Commissioner added:

“If I found on my daughter’s teeth a substance that is abnormal, caused by chemicals introduced in our water supply … I’d be beyond irritated,” Skelton said. “I would wonder what internal effects would be going on, what kind of white spots is she going to have on her bones, etc. That’s a symptom of something larger, sir (Ref 3).”

Pew spokesperson Bill Maas insults opponent but won’t debate

In another appearance in Wichita a citizen asked Maas if he would debate the head of FAN, retired environmental chemistry Professor Paul Connett. He refused saying that Connett was a brilliant debater and he (Maas) had only given about 6 public presentations. But then he added that Connett was “the leader of misinformation on this issue in the country.” This didn’t sit well with citizens at the meeting, most recognizing that you shouldn’t insult someone if you are not prepared to take that person on in public when challenged.

Pew continues to mislead the public on the Harvard IQ study

In the Pew Children's Dental Campaign October 2013 letter to Des Moines Water Works (Ref 4) Shelly Gehshan, Director, Children’s Dental Policy continues to misrepresent and misreport the fluoride/IQ studies conducted by a Harvard team (Choi et al., 2012) even though FAN and others have corrected her misrepresentations in media release.

Pew’s Gehshan confuses concentration and dose

Ms. Gehshan writes that the “levels of fluoride in the water” (i.e. concentration) in the IQ studies were at least “four or five times higher than the level used to fluoridate water in Des Moines” (Ref 4) thus continuing to confuse the difference between concentration (measured in mg of fluoride per liter) and dose (measured in mg fluoride ingested per day). The latter depends upon how much water people drink and how much fluoride they get from other sources.

According to Paul Connett, “An above average water drinker in a fluoridated community, and also getting fluoride from other sources, could easily get more fluoride than a below average water consumer in several of the Chinese studies.”

The need for margin of safety ignored by Gehshan
Connett adds, “To make matters worse Gehshan’s simplistic comparison ignored the larger concern for the need to apply a margin of safety to a dose that has been found to cause harm in order to protect the most vulnerable children in a large population. For this a safety factor of 10 is usually chosen. The job of people in regulatory agencies is to make sure they are protecting everyone not just the average person. Gehshan should know that.”

A false charge

Gehshan also repeated the false charge that “the Harvard researchers [Grandjean and Choi] publicly distanced themselves from the way that anti-fluoride groups were misrepresenting these IQ studies.” In actual fact Choi and Grandjean tried to distance themselves from comments made by a Wichita journalist who claimed that the Harvard team thought the study was irrelevant to U.S. populations.

The truth,
Grandjean writes, is that "only 4 of 27 studies" in the Harvard review used had high water fluoride levels, and "clear differences" in IQ "were found at much lower exposures."

In his new book, "
Only One Chance: How Environmental Pollution Impairs Brain Development, Grandjean says fluoride is a brain-toxic chemical that may lower the intelligence of generations of children.
More distortion by Pew in Portland

One of the first tactics of fluoridation promotion, as advised by Pew’s PR fluoridation specialist Matt Jacob, is to identify a problem and lead with a need. So Portland fluoridation promoters claimed that non-fluoridated Portland has more tooth decay than fluoridated portions of Oregon. An ABC-TV investigative reporter looked into this claim and found it to be untrue. In fact, non-fluoridated Portland children actually have less tooth decay than those in fluoridated areas.Pew sullying its reputation

For many people who have respected the Pew Charitable Trusts on other issues, its cavalier disregard of the possibility that a practice that Pew is advocating – in the name of improving children’s health - may actually be lowering children’s IQ is very disturbing. Especially so since this Foundation claims on its website:

The Pew Charitable Trusts is driven by the power of knowledge to solve today's most challenging problems. Pew applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public and stimulate civic life. 

Where are they now?

Pew hired Salter Mitchell a PR firm to teach them strategy and created this website but this site is now under the umbrella of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Matt Jacob is now with the Children’s Dental Health Project (CDHP) Hopefully, the CDHP will be more careful about what Jacob says in their name about fluoridation.

In conclusion

The problem when advocates - with a lot of money to spend - hire a PR firm to present their side of the story is that truth and honest science go out of the window. Winning is everything. That’s what the PR firm is paid to do. That is what Pew is trying to do. But citizen power is capable of beating this “machine” when the truth is on their side and they are prepared to organize as the citizens in Wichita and Portland did. FAN was pleased to help.

Carol S. Kopf, Media Director
Fluoride Action Network

Please help FAN to help more communities. Donate today!


1. Jacob, 2012. Matt Jacob. A Prevention Agenda to Improve Children’s Oral Health, Florida Oral Health Conference, August 23, 2012. The Pew Center on the States. PowerPoint, page 33.

2. The Tooth Fairy: Minority groups backing Portland’s pro-fluoride measure have received $143,000 in payments from the campaign, by Nigel Jaquiss, Williamette Week (Portland), April 24, 2013.

3. Health aspects of fluoridated water debated at Sedgwick County meeting, By Dion Lefler, The Wichita Eagle, October 17, 2011.

4. Shelly Gershan. 2013. Letter to Des Moines Water Works, Iowa. October 15.

Watch Dr. Carolyn Dean, MD on video about health issues caused by Magnesium Deficiency

Magnesium—The Missing Link to Better Health
December 8, 2013

Story at-a-glance

  • An estimated 80 percent of Americans are deficient in magnesium. The health consequences of deficiency can be quite significant, and can be aggravated by many, if not most, drug treatments
  • Magnesium performs a wide array of biological functions, including activating muscles and nerves and creating energy in your body by attaching adenosine triphosphate (ATP)
  • Magnesium is very important for heart health. Excessive amounts of calcium without the counterbalance of magnesium can lead to a heart attacks, strokes, and sudden death
  • An ideal ratio between calcium and magnesium is thought to be 1:1. The recommended daily dose is around 700 milligrams of each
  • Anytime you're taking any of the following: magnesium, calcium, vitamin D3, or vitamin K2, you need to take all the others into consideration as well, as these nutrients work synergistically with one another

Thursday, December 5, 2013

Citizens for Health's recommended article from Huffington Post --

Huffington Post Covers Industry Impact on Scientific Research

December 5, 2013

Dear Friend,

We have exciting news: the Huffington Post has published an article discussing current scientific research on food and health as it is impacted by industry. The article was written by Alison Rose Levy, who covers health, food and environmental science and policy on AlterNet, EcoWatch and the Huffington Post, and can be read here!

If you are curious about the avenues that industry can take to distort science and manufacture controversy, then this article is a must read. If you are curious about the current controversies (both real and sham) concerning Statins, Trans Fats, and GMOs, then this article is a must read. Sincerely,
The Citizens for Health Team


What Statins, Trans Fats, and GMOs Tell Us About Scientific Controversies

Posted: 12/04/2013

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Elementary student performs a standard science experiment and discovers a big discovery about our food supply!

A Little Girl’s Project Shows Us Why We Need To Choose Organic Produce

December 3, 2013 by Mark DeNicola

As part of a simple school project a young student by the name of Elise was tasked with discovering how long it would take for a fully grown sweet potato to grow vines. The project itself is quite simple, and is a regular part of many elementary school curriculum’s since all that it involves is the sticking of toothpicks into the sweet potato and the suspension of it into a glass of water.

If left near a window that receives sunlight the sweet potato should grow vines, which is the exact process that Elise was looking to monitor. (Click HERE for an exact step-by-step guide on how to do this) Elise’s discovery however went a lot further than this when her initially purchased sweet potato failed to grow vines after three weeks of following the given instructions.

What initially started as a simple science experiment quickly evolved into a potential and unintentional piece of evidence in support of the purchase of organic rather than conventional produce. As Elise so adorably mentioned as a part of her explanation, the conventional sweet potato was sprayed with bud nip, alternatively known as Chlorpropham. Bud nip is just one of the many chemicals widely used in non-organic farming and agriculture.

What Is Bud Nip?

Bud Nip is a plant growth regulator used for the control of grass weeds on several fruit and vegetable plants. In potatoes, such as the sweet potatoes that we conventionally purchase, bud nip is used primarily to inhibit potato sprouting -the exact process that Elise was looking to create as a part of her experiment.

On the surface bud nip seems relatively harmless, however certain studies show that it also comes with a fair level of potential side effects -many of which Elise mentions -that do more than an adequate job at justifying the ‘caution’ warning that it is labelled with. Bud nip is considered moderately toxic for ingestion, an irritant for the eyes and skin and was responsible for a number of side effects and even death on several of the animals that it was tested on.

Despite this, bud nip is regularly used directly on an abundance of non-organic produce, and indirectly on other produce due to its highly soluble nature in both soil and groundwater. This could potentially explain how even the organic sweet potato that Elise had purchased from the conventional grocery store did not sprout nearly as impressively as the final one that she had purchased from the organic food market.

In summation, Elise’s experiment serves as a simple yet profound reminder of the option that we have to grow or purchase organic produce. It may currently be the more expensive of the two produce options that exists, but when it involves our health it certainly cannot be overlooked. For more information, check out another article we wrote on "The 12 Most Chemically Ridden Produce Items You Should Buy Organic."

Now this is great news!! 16 anti-fluoride bills in 9 different states!!

December 4, 2013

Fundraising update:

The Fluoride Action Network has gotten off to a good start in our campaign to raise funds for our 2014 budget. After three days, donations total to $4681 from 77 donors. To reach our goal, we need to raise $120,000 from 600 donors by midnight December 31, 2013.

Unlike most non-profits, we cannot raise money from the major foundations because the fluoride issue is simply too controversial! Yet the world’s best endowed foundation, The Pew Charitable Trusts, has become one of the biggest campaigners for water fluoridation in the U.S.! According to Wikipedia:

"The Pew Charitable Trusts is an independent non-profit, non-governmental organization (NGO), founded in 1948. With over US$5 billion in assets, its stated mission is to serve the public interest by "improving public policy, informing the public, and stimulating civic life."

We have received donations from small foundations and for that we are so grateful. We can only win if we are in this together.

A huge thank you to all who have donated so far.

If you wish to make a tax-deductible donation you can either:
Donate by using our secure online server.
Or by check - payable to Fluoride Action Network, send to:

-FAN / Connett, 104 Walnut Street, Binghamton, NY 13905

Have you seen the exciting gifts available at different donation levels. Don’t forget that a signed copy of Paul Connett’s new book from Chelsea Green (The Zero Waste Solution) is available for a donation of $103. 

Please Donate Today
State Legislation Update for 2013

In years past the dental lobby has been successful in getting pro-fluoridation bills introduced in state legislatures across the United States, including legislation that would mandate statewide fluoridation--a law 13 states presently have. But the tables are turning.
The most recent proposals for state mandates have been defeated by FAN with the help of fluoride-free campaigners, including two major attempts in 2012 to mandate fluoridation for New Jersey’s 9 million residents, and mandate attempts in both Vermont and Florida. In 2013 the tides further shifted, and instead of the introduction of pro-fluoride bills, we saw the exact opposite, with the introduction of 16 anti-fluoridation bills in 9 states.

A New Law in Utah
On April 1, the State of Utah became the first state to pass a “
Safe Drinking Water Disclosure Act.” This act requires that all shipments of fluoride additives into the state be accompanied by certificates of analysis detailing the contaminants within the additive. Representative Roger Barrus and Senator Jerry Stevenson sponsored the legislation. The law requires the certificates to be made available to the Department of Health, the town supplying the water, as well as available to any member of the public that requests them. If any shipment of fluoride lacks the certificate, then fluoridation can be temporarily, or even permanently, ended in the community served by the noncompliant fluoride manufacturer. The law took effect on July 1, and will ensure that additive manufacturers comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act, as well as make public the level of toxic contaminants found in their products.
Pro-Mandate Legislation

Instead of the usual handful of bills proposing new statewide fluoridation mandates across the U.S., there was only one state in 2013 considering a new mandate. HB270 was introduced in Hawaii this past January and was referred to the Health and Finance committees, but never even had a public hearing due to local opposition. Hawaii has a two-year session, so the bill can still be acted upon, though the deadline for action is only several months away if the bill is to move forward.

Reversing mandates

Meanwhile, legislation reversing existing state fluoridation mandates was introduced in several states in 2013, including South Dakota, Connecticut, Minnesota, Illinois, and Arkansas. With the exception of the Illinois bill, all of these proposals are still being considered and are expected to have public hearings in 2014. In preparation, FAN has been working with our point people and local groups within these states to organize grassroots campaigns in support of the legislation. If you live in one of these states and would like to get involved, please email .
Other Bills

A variety of additional fluoride-free bills were also introduced in Tennessee, Arkansas, Kansas, Massachusetts, and New York in 2013.

Tennessee is turning out to be one of the leaders in fluoride-free legislation. Several bills were introduced in 2013, including a House resolution (130) to require that state employees or agencies not take a position in support or in opposition to the fluoridation of public water supplies. SB1211 & HB1186 both require a referendum vote for communities to continue to be fluoridated. HB1215 & SB1274 both require that manufacturers of water additives verify the safety of their products, similar to the Safe Drinking Water Disclosure Act that passed in Utah.

Arkansas also had several fluoride-free bills in 2013. HB1312 would have reversed the statewide mandate and return control of fluoridation to local governing bodies. This bill received a party line vote of 9-9 in committee, which means the bill failed to pass out of committee; we suspect it will return next session. There was also HB1038 which reverses the statewide mandate only for towns with populations between 80,000 and 100,000 citizens. Third for Arkansas was SB225, the water additive accountability act. This bill would create criteria for water additives that would ensure that only the safest water additives are used in the public drinking water supply.

In Kansas HB2372 was introduced, requiring an IQ warning statement on water bills in fluoridated communities.

The Massachusetts bill would require the same infant fluoride warning that passed in 2012 in the State of New Hampshire, and the cities of Milwaukee, Wisconsin and Austin, Texas. This bill has already had a public hearing and is currently being debated by the Joint Committee on Health.

In New York, A141 was introduced to mandate that all fluoridated communities lower their fluoride levels to 0.7ppm. While this isn’t really an anti-fluoridation bill, it would at least requiring lowering the fluoride levels in the many NY communities that have ignored the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ 2011 recommendation of 0.7ppm instead of the higher 1.2ppm.

It doesn’t take an expert to see that the tide has shifted, that state legislators are discovering the truth about fluoridation, and that the momentum is clearly on our side going into the 2014 legislative sessions. But we need your help to maintain our momentum! Please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to FAN today.

Stuart Cooper
Campaign DirectorFluoride Action Network