Preliminary results. Click to enlarge.

Waikato University student Luke Oldfield was awarded a summer research grant to establish what role vested interests in the natural health industry had played in Hamilton City Council’s fluoride tribunal process. The project is called “Public Integrity and Participatory Democracy: Hamilton City Council’s Water Fluoridation Decision“. This evening he displayed a poster(above) to an audience of academic faculty sharing some preliminary results of his research.

One staggering statistic among these findings was that approximately 2/3 of all written submissions were directly or indirectly provided by parties associated with the ‘natural health’ lobby. No wonder why some anti-fluoridationists didn’t want this research to be done and calling it “bogus research” before results released.
Luke will be using the data to inform a broader discussion about abuse and misuse of democratic process in the provision of public health policy, which is the focus of his Masters dissertation.

The post Abuse of democratic process in Hamilton Tribunal? appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

Perhaps this result is partly due to the activity of pro-science groups who have become active of late. Maybe the success of anti-fluoridation activists in precious years has resulted in a fight back. Let us hope so.

Some results:

Boyne City, Michigan – 68% support for fluoridation
Bronson, Michigan – 63% support for fluoridation
Kalama, Washington – 73% support for fluoridation
Saline County, Kansas – 67% support for fluoridation
Healdsburg, California – 68% support for fluoridation

The post US elections show majority support for fluoridation 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.

“to be financially prudent and conservative ahead of any decision, $100,000 has been added to the 2014/15 budget for both the operational costs ($50,000) of re-commencing fluoridation and anticipated legal costs.”

So operational costs are as before (about $48,000 per year) but $50,000 has been put aside for the anticipated legal costs.
These are costs which could be incurred because of Fluoride Free’s threatened legal action. Action which has no chance of success after the High Court judgement.
So we have the trouble makers complaining about the costs of their own troublemaking!

The post Trouble makers complaining about the costs of their own troublemaking appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

“I attended the free public lecture by Dr Graham Saunders, senior lecturer in inorganic chemistry at Waikato University, last night, titled “Fluoride, Friend or Foe?” which was sponsored by the Waikato branch of The Royal Society of NZ. Despite constantly assuring his audience that his area of expertise was restricted to the chemistry of fluoride (which cannot be disputed), he regularly strayed dangerously off that path onto the “pro-fluoride” bandwagon and showed himself to be obviously well out of his depth when questioned further on dental and medical issues by some of the more qualified members of the audience.”

In fact, Dr Saunders was meticulously careful to acknowledge where his expertise stopped. On at least 2 occasions other audience members gave additional information relating to questions asked by others. He also – as is his right as an expert in the area of fluoride chemistry – pointed out where this had been misrepresented by those opposing fluoridation.

“I was even more astounded to hear Dr Saunders’ reply when he was asked if he had taken part in the Council-run fluoride tribunal in May this year. He replied that no, he had not been consulted, which had really annoyed him and that he had since contacted the council to complain about it. Is Dr Saunders arrogant or just ignorant?”

Dr Saunders is neither arrogant nor ignorant of this issue, & his answer was more complex than it has been represented by Pat. He made it clear that he was concerned that the University’s scientists had not been asked to provide expert opinion to the Council (& in fact a question from the floor asked him specifically – were you asked to provide advice?), but that he had made a personal written submission to the tribunal. He was not able to attend the actual hearings given other prior commitments, and yes, given his inability to attend he had expected that the Council might have contacted him to discuss some of the points that he made in his written submission.

“Surely Dr Saunders is aware that the council had very publicly advertised the tribunal and had asked for written and oral submissions from any person or organisation that had an interest in the issue. All were accepted, read and analysed and the council decision was based on this evidence by a vote of 7/1.”

See above. He was aware and made that written submission.

The post Fluoride Free Hamilton misinformation on Dr Saunders talk appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

Food varies quite a bit in its water content, but they’ve assumed an average of 50% water content and an average daily intake (from the USDA figure for average Americans) of 2.18kg wet weight, so 1.06kg dry weight of food per day.

On that diet our hypothetical someone would then need to take in 21.3mg F- each day to experience chronic fluorosis. Until fluoridation was discontinued, Hamilton’s town supply water had 0.7-1ppm fluoride ie a maximum of 1mg/L. This means our someone would need to take in 21.3 L of water a day, and maintain that intake, for fluorosis to become a reality. (At this level water intoxication would be a real threat.)

The estimated mean highest daily F- intake in New Zealanders – any age group, & from a combination of diet and town supply fluoridated water, is around 2.1mg/day (Cressey et al, 2010, J.Pub.Health.Dent 70: 327-336).

The post The maths to achieve a fluoride load commensurate with chronic fluorosis appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

So news of that decision has led to all sorts of activity defending good science. In some ways it is very similar to the way that climate scientists and their supporters have eventually organised to fight back against the highly organised and well-financed climate change denial machine.

This fight back against the anti-fluoridationists has taken a variety of forms ranging from institutional organisation around the referendum down to individual activity. An important tool has been online social media like blogs, Twitter and Facebook – venues which until recently the anti-fluoridation groups have dominated. It is heartening when googling now to see that Fluoride Alert does not have the dominance it once had – especially in New Zealand.

Facebook groups like ours are an important part of this fight back. There are several other Facebook pages playing a similar role in NZ, but I think more will develop internationally. An example I saw today was a new Facebook group formed in Lethbridge in Canada to fight a local campaign. Very new but a good start.

See:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/627025914004854/

http://ldskeptics.ca/2013/09/28/pro-fluoride-petition-planned/

So thank you FANNZ, Fluoride Free Hamilton and all your supporters. You may have pulled the wool over the eyes of the Hamilton City Council and won a single battle in Hamilton with the fluoride “tribunal” but you have given New Zealanders a needed wake up call. Basically you are responsible for the fact that people are fighting back and supporting good science.

The post Silver lining appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

Source:
http://www.health.govt.nz/publication/drinking-water-standards-new-zealand-2005-revised-2008

The post Drinking ‘pure’ water appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

“He put at least 6 people to sleep”. Click to read article.

It’s been a fine afternoon in Hamilton so I thought I would wander in to the Fluoride Free Hamilton Information meeting. Should have known better.

Didn’t stay long as the chairman announced first thing that the audience had to remain quiet during the meeting, no heckling or questions were allowed – anyone with a question had to write it down and hand to an organiser. A few of us gasped “What, no questions or comments from the floor?” The chairman responded – “Last warning” – this would treated as a disruption and we would be thrown out.

So I left. No point really. This wasn’t an “information meeting” it was a propaganda meeting – in the Stalinist mould.

On the way out I told one of the organisers this was a highly unusual procedure for an information meeting. She assured me that if I wrote down my question I would get a chance to ask it. I picked up the pen and paper, whereupon another organiser assured me that a written question might be read out to the audience by the chairman and the panel would comment. However, no member of the audience could ask their own question or respond to answers.

Seems incredible, but it is consistent with the way Fluoride Free bans comments on their Facebook pages. But it really is hypocritical for them to then moan because the DHBs refuse to “debate” them. And for them to turn up to DHB meetings, as they did in Hastings, to ask questions.

It really also puts those commenters here who ally with Fluoride Free in an ethically awkward position. We welcome their questions and comments (as long as there is no abuse or harassment). Perhaps they should have a word to the Fluoride Free people.

Oh well, a wasted Sunday afternoon. But every cloud has a silver lining – I did manage to get in a good walk – and that has been difficult lately with the rain and the World Cup races.

 

 

The post People sleeping at the Fluoride Free Hamilton meeting appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

• For ignoring the decision of their citizens made in 2006 in a citizen referendum that decisively supported continuation of fluoridation in Hamilton’s water supply.
• For the councillors best qualified to make the decision removing themselves due to perceived “conflict” with their Health Board roles.
• For the failure to do quality research as shown by the amount of poor quality, one sided information presented.
• For the failure to consult reliable health professionals.
• and finally, for the incredibly ill informed decision to remove fluoride from their water supply.

The post HCC wins the Bent Spoon Award! appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.