Comments on: Anti-fluoride campaigner that tried to silence the science

By: Roger Stratford

Roger Stratford — Tue, 15 Sep 2020 08:35:47 +0000

Just as it will get cooler, so oral health will improve; science doesn’t know — we need four more years.

By: Roger Stratford

Roger Stratford — Sat, 05 May 2018 10:49:55 +0000

My original comments on Hamilton Fluoride Free Facebook page were an impromptu response to an over enthusiastic member. After 10 minutes I resolved to remove them from my server, due to their provocative nature, however changed my mind and left them there due to unexpectedly positive feedback from leader Pat McNair and other members.
Most of my local election opposition came from Antifluoridationist elements, despite myself publicly advocating their cause through the newspapers. I wanted to publicly debate the issue with a chemistry academic, so I emailed the departmental secretary at my alma mater university. The one proviso being that I alone would be able to bring in supporting texts. The academic would be confident enough in his knowledge not to require this. Unfortunately this turned sour when the Waikato Times got involved due to a claim from some nutter privately messaging me on Facebook, claiming I had ‘led’ (sic) to him.
In truth I had tried to set up a meeting with the chemistry department so that between us we could work out a common group of shared beliefs between the two opposing sides in the debate. Presented with the mutually accepted science facts, members of the public would be in a better position to decide their own positions in the upcoming fluoridation referendum. It was and remains my belief that these chemists have an inherent conflict of interest over fluoridation, since it occupies their subject area, hence their accusations of pseudo science over public opposition.
There was no intent to ‘silence’ science on my part, rather to simplify science for the voting public, so that they could choose where the greater strengths of argument lay.

R. Stratford,
BSc (Waikato).

By: Daniel Ryan

Daniel Ryan — Fri, 04 May 2018 08:42:03 +0000

In reply to Roger Stratford.

Hi Roger

Thanks for commenting. Since this was 4 year ago I had forgotten the details of this case. I had followed some of your comments on social media to try sum up the whole case. If you want to add a comment to the end of this article to explain your side of the story, I might be willing to edit the article for you.

“That little bit of extra protection”
Up to 40% fewer cavities.

“is not nearly enough to protect children’s teeth when exposed to soft drink daily”
Not a silver bullet but is part of the solution to improve oral health.

“We’ve done away with sunbeds, choosing vitamin B exposure by other means”
Sunbeds cause cancer. Fluoride ions at 0.7 ppm don’t.

“Fluoridation is an American science. Like Trump, it should stay there.”
Fluoridation is studied all over the world. There have been 17 major peer-reviews of fluoridation undertaken across the world by recognised academic authorities in the past twenty years:
http://www.dentist.ie/_fileupload/fluoridation/List%20of%20general%20health%20reviews%20of%20fluoridation%20since%201994.doc

All showing the safety and efficiency of fluoridation. There is no respected health organisation in the world that is against fluoridation.

The FDI World Dental Federation representing over one million dentists in 134 countries, reaffirmed their strong support for fluoridation as essential in promoting oral health, at its annual meeting.
http://msof.nz/wp-content/uploads/FDI-2014-Policy-Statement-on-Water-Fluoridation.pdf

Thanks.

By: Roger Stratford

Roger Stratford — Thu, 26 Apr 2018 09:35:05 +0000

Thank you, Dan, for showing an interest in my social media account. (Who sent you, come on now, it was Vladimir, wasn’t it?). I have been truthful throughout my campaigns, despite what this jumped-up school teacher and Turner Diaries’ troll otherwise imply. It’s true that most of my opposition originates from anti-fluoride side, in that respect, we share a similarity. (They don’t want to share credit with a lone wolf, especially a ‘mere male’).
All the university’s own published texts isolate fluoride among the halides as the exception from trend in chemical behaviour, noting the layout of the atomic orbitals, with reference to the energy required to excite an e- based on the relative energy levels of the d-orbitals, with respect to the 2s.
‘That little bit of extra protection’ you say is offered through fluoridation is not nearly enough to protect children’s teeth when exposed to soft drink daily. We’ve done away with sunbeds, choosing vitamin B exposure by other means. Fluoridation is an American science. Like Trump, it should stay there.

Roger.