For Immediate Release

A new fluoride-free toothpaste has changed its advertising after being challenged to provide evidence to back its claims that it reduces plaque and tooth decay.

The toothpaste, called Grin, launched earlier this year and relies on propolis, manuka oil and sea salt as its key ingredients.

A complaint filed with the Advertising Standards Authority challenged Grin’s claims that those ingredients are effective and the company voluntarily withdrew most of its claims to settle part of the complaint.

However, the ASA agreed with the complainant that Grin’s continuing claim that manuka oil could help oral hygiene was not backed up by evidence and was, therefore, likely to ‘mislead and exploit the lack of knowledge of consumers’.

Grin had provided a single study conducted in vitro rather than in the conditions of a human mouth, which the ASA considered well short of its social responsibility to consumers.

The advocacy group Making Sense of Fluoride welcomed the ASA ruling, noting that fluoride toothpaste has a well-documented effect in reducing tooth decay and ideally should be part of everyone’s daily routine for a healthy smile.

“People can certainly choose to use a fluoride-free toothpaste,” says MSoF President Daniel Ryan, “but they should do so in the full knowledge that the only protection they’re really getting is the act of brushing itself, rather than from the product. Experts advise all ages to use a full fluoride toothpaste twice a day.”

Grin has recently launched a range of toothpaste especially for children, which Mr Ryan says is particularly concerning. “Grin has a vigorous social media campaign and well-meaning parents may unwittingly put their children’s oral health at real risk because the marketing doesn’t tell you how ineffective a fluoride-free toothpaste actually is. As well as preventing cavities, fluoride helps developing teeth grow strong – so if parents don’t even know they’re using an ineffective toothpaste, children’s teeth are extra vulnerable. That’s beyond sad when it’s so easily preventable.”

For more information please contact:
Dr Ken Perrott
Science adviser, MSoF
[email protected]

Daniel Ryan
President, MSoF
[email protected]

The post Fluoride Free Toothpaste doesn’t do the job appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

Two more rulings released today find Fluoride Free New Zealand is not a reliable source of information – and MSoF president Daniel Ryan is urging Whakatane District Councillors to pay
attention to the rulings when they revisit the issue of fluoridation tomorrow.

The decisions by the Advertising Standards Authority relate to an information leaflet distributed by fluoridation opponents during November’s referendum in Thames and to their newspaper advertising at the time.

The leaflet made a number of claims such as ‘fluoride is harmful to health’ and ‘fluoridation does not reduce dental decay’, which the ASA found to be misleading and alarmist, while parts of the newspaper ads were found to unjustifiably play on consumers’ fears.

‘Fluoride Free NZ has no qualms about spreading false information,’ says Ryan. ‘This is just the latest in an ongoing series of successful complaints against FFNZ which in fact currently ranks as the 12th worst organisation in NZ for successfully upheld or settled ASA complaints; quite an achievement when taking into account the small scale of their advertising.’

Ryan says it’s disturbing that before voting narrowly in late January to remove fluoridation in the Whakatane District Council water supply, one of only four parties invited to address the council was FFNZ.

‘FFNZ is simply not a reliable source. The Advertising Standards Authority is a neutral body and it has demonstrated that you don’t need to be a scientist to see when a statement is an opinion rather than a fact.’

‘It appears some of the councillors take FFNZ’s information at face value,’ Ryan adds. ‘To be fair, opponents are slick at making their information look convincing which makes it challenging for councillors. It’s why we and so many other public health advocates keep calling on central government to give responsibility for fluoridation to the Ministry of Health.’

Meanwhile, MSoF calls on Whakatane District Councillors to be mindful of today’s ASA decisions, along with the overwhelming scientific consensus on the safety and effectiveness of fluoridation, when they meet to reconsider their decision tomorrow.

Full ASA decisions:
http://msof.nz/wp-content/uploads/ASA-complaint-15470.pdf
http://www.asa.co.nz//backend/documents/2016/02/10/15503.pdf

For more information please contact:

Dr Ken Perrott
Science advertiser, MSoF
[email protected]

Daniel Ryan
President, MSoF
[email protected]

The post More Strikes Against the Credibility of Fluoride Free NZ as Whakatane Councillors reconsider their decision appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

When Thames Coromandel District Council began to review fluoridation back in 2012, I assumed it was prompted by new information. Yet when I examined the alarming claims, not a single one stacked up. I became quite annoyed with the avid misrepresentation of a such a significant public health programme, so similar to the anti-vaccine lobby.

Fast forward 2 years through local public hearings where continuing fluoridation (in the Thames water supply since 1971) was twice upheld, to the dismay of committed opponents. But with at least a couple of councillors on their side, they kept unrelenting pressure on the council and almost a year ago, the mayor in particular appeared to throw up his hands in exasperation. And so a referendum was ordered for 2015, a stand-alone single issue postal ballot, usually the perfect vehicle for passionate campaigners to achieve their aim. And let’s be honest, among the general public, only the opponents are passionate about fluoridation. It wasn’t looking good.

Our small voluntary group of not-passionate-but-peeved fluoridation supporters (with a couple of health promoters added later) knew the antis would be tireless and highly visible. Fluoride Free NZ targeted Thames hard, with everything from free film nights to glossy magazines and with deep pockets for local advertising.

We worked hard too to maximise our limited resources using some advertising, social media and personal networking. With a significant ‘worried middle class’ as well as a thriving alternative community in Thames, we were far from overconfident. We also knew that while even a slight majority was enough to win, it wouldn’t be enough to stop the opponents.

Once balloting began, the TCDC website posted a vote tracking tool that showed how many ballots were returned each day. Predictably, the highest number was received early in the 3 week voting period, which had Labour weekend in the middle. I fretted in the closing days as the number of votes coming in gained momentum, rather than reducing to the trickle I expected.

Click to enlarge

It appears however, that during this time, our messages were not only sinking in, they were galvanizing voters, aided no doubt by the visible zealotry of the opposition foot soldiers.

We made a point of reminding the community the referendum was unnecessary because the antis had already had a fair go with 2 hearings. We had strong, unified support from the Children’s Commissioner, local identities, health professionals – including the crucial iwi-based health provider – and all Thames dentists. We had a powerful local story to tell in that Thames children barely feature in the 150 cases treated last year for severe tooth decay at Thames Hospital under general anaesthesia (only 8 from Thames addresses). And of course there is also the overwhelming scientific consensus.

The campaign felt very long, receiving a boost in its final hours from an Advertising Standards Authority ruling that the ‘toxic’ signs were misleading and scaremongering.
The entire town probably never wants to hear the word fluoridation again. And thanks to the resounding and highly gratifying results of the referendum, they won’t have to – and can just get on with reaping the benefits.

(Final results: 73% of voters supported continuing fluoridation with 57% of eligible voters casting a ballot.)

 

The post The Thames Referendum Experience appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

The website looks at all ASA complaints made since 2008. You can see the top complainants, most complained about companies, complaints by product and complaints by media, amongst other statistics.

Fluoride Free New Zealand (FFNZ) aka Fluoride Action Network NZ is ranked 13th in organisations having the most successful complaints made against them, with 8 successful (upheld or settled) complaints. These successful complaints make up 73% of all complaints made against FFNZ and puts them just below Jetstar (12th) and above Air New Zealand (14th). Given how few adverts Fluoride Free NZ have released compared to the likes of Jetstar and Air NZ, it is disappointing to see that so many were found by the ASA to be infringing.

In total 1,013 companies in NZ have had successful ASA complaints made against them.

Mark Atkin, who was the science and legal advisor for FFNZ, has made four complaints against the Ministry of Health, Waikato District Health Board and Fluoridate Our Water – and every complaint he made was rejected by the ASA.

The post Fluoride Free NZ ranks 13th worst NZ organisation by ASA complaints appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

While the NZOHS said “it was not one of the objectives of the 2009 NZOHS to compare the oral health status of people by fluoridation status, and therefore the survey cannot be considered a fluoridation study as such”; the anti-fluoridationists like to repeat this and say that this is an invalid study for fluoridation. This is far from the truth; the statement was taken in the context that the NZOHS did not take into consideration lifetime fluoride exposure, as it was a cross-sectional study. People moving from non-fluoridated to fluoridated areas would have been likely as well as the opposite. This would tend to increase the risk of underestimating the extent of the benefits from fluoridation.

The full ASA complaint from M. Atkin who was listed as the “Science and Legal Advisor” for FFNZ.

The post Attacks continue on the “40% less tooth decay” statement appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

Also for those who haven’t listen to the last episode, Skepticism Today interviewed Mark Hanna who talked about our ASA wins against Fluoride Free NZ in Episode 2 at 42:24.
Listen to the episode here.
He goes into detail on why they lost against our 5 complaints regarding their quizzes. You can read our initial press release here.
FFNZ also lied in their follow-up press release about the ASA not actually finding anything wrong, but that is to be expected.

The post Skepticism Today podcast: Chat on fluoridation and ASA complaints appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

After seeing these advertisements, Making Sense of Fluoride (MSOF) legal spokesperson, Christopher Atkinson contacted the ASA voicing his concern that they contained statements that were not factual and were likely to cause concern about the safety of community fluoridated water. Consequently, the ASA upheld Mr Atkinson’s complaints and ruled that the advertisements be removed.

MSoF warn the Kapiti Coast District Council that they are the latest Council to be targeted in a series of attacks from anti-fluoridation activists and urges the Council not take activists claims in face value.

Hamilton stopped fluoridating its water supply after pressure from anti fluoride activists in June last year. In A referendum was held, yet despite residents overwhelmingly voted for fluoridated water and the council backed down, reversing their decision.

It was only after the recent High Court case in Taranaki which affirmed the widely held view that community water fluoridation is a safe and effective public health measure and did not violate the Bill of Rights legislation, the Hamilton City Council voted to resume water fluoridation.

MSoF hope that Kapiti Coast District Council will not follow the Hamilton example and be pressured into decisions concerning public health by activists threatening legal action.

The online advocacy group Making Sense of Fluoride (MSoF) is a group of students, academics, medical professionals, and other concerned individuals advocating that this significant public health initiative be either introduced or maintained. It provides a forum to discuss all aspects surrounding this topic; fb.com/fluoridewater

The post Press release: Anti Fluoridation Advertisements Rejected by The Advertising Complaints Authority appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

Bay of Plenty District Health Board Newspaper Advertisement:
“Complainant, J. Burness, said: the Ministry of Health stated its survey was not designed as an in-depth water fluoridation study. The Complainant also said the safety of the product could not be proven and, given hydrofluorosilicic acid is a man-made substance the claim that “It’s natural” was not true.”
http://old.asa.co.nz/display.php?ascb_number=13459

Bay of Plenty District Health Board Flyer Advertisement:
“Complainant, J. Burness said the safety of the product could not be proven. The Complainant also said hydrofluorosilicic acid is a man-made substance and, therefore, the claim that it is natural is not true.”
http://old.asa.co.nz/display.php?ascb_number=13460

The post ASA complaints about pro-fluoride adverts “No Grounds To Proceed” appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.