This is the main coverage in the media, just don’t read the comments

Bay of Plenty Times
14th April
Editorial: DHBs best on fluoride choice
Water fluoridation in hands of health boards

16th April
Fluoridation decision takes away rights says campaigner

Dominion Post
14th April
Editorial: It’s right to switch the fluoride debate from local bodies to DHBs

Hawke’s Bay Today
13th April
Fluoridation possible: DHB

Hawkesbay
12th April
Changes to Napier’s drinking water part of “mandatory fluoridation by stealth”‘, says anti fluoride lobby
Napier’s ‘unadulterated’ water supply to be fluoridated?

Manawatu Standard
13th April
DHB’s possible fluoride decisions also to be met by vigorous lobbying

Nelson Mail
13th April
NMDHB supportive of decision to take control of water fluoridation

15th April
Fluoridation move leaves bad taste for TDC

Newshub
12th April
Govt wants DHBs to control fluoride
Fluoridation a no brainer says dentist / Govt praised for giving DHBs fluoride responsibility

14th April
PHA: Fluoridation battle not over

Newstalk ZB
12th April
DHBs given power to decide on fluoridation

13th April
DHBs may need more help to deal with fluoridation – Labour

NZ Herald
12th April
Govt proposes to give District Health Boards power to decide on water fluorination

14th April
Editorial: Government ought to show spine on fluoride

16th April
Nano Girl Michelle Dickinson: The quality of science

NZCity
12th April
Fluoride decisions to be shifted to DHBs
Stoushes over fluoride in water

Otago Daily Times
12th April
DHBs to decide on fluoridation
Concerns over cost of adding fluoride

15th April
Saving our children’s teeth

Radio Live
12th April
It’s now up to DHBs to decide on fluoride in water

13th April
DHBs to make fluoride decision “a step in the right direction”

RNZ
12th April
DHBs could make call on fluoridating water
Fluoride responsibility shifts to DHBs

13th April
More communities likely to fluoridate – DHB head

Rotorua Daily Post
13th April
Bill reopens fluoride debate

14th April
Editorial: Kids’ teeth a concern we must all share

Stuff
12th April
Water fluoridation: DHBs to take control from councils under Govt proposal

13th April
Health boards to handle water fluoridation
Why has Government proposed DHBs decide on water fluoridation? And what is fluoride anyway?
Southland and Gore districts face possible water fluoridation

14th April
Canterbury water could be fluoridated by 2018

15th April
Poll shows most oppose adding fluoride to Christchurch water

18th April
Health Minister Jonathan Coleman says DHBs ‘more motivated’ than councils to fluoridate water

Sun Live
14th April
DHBs could decide water fluoridation

Taranaki Daily News
14th April
Taranaki’s mayors delighted fluoridation of water debate is off their agendas

15th April
Ross Henderson: Government’s decision to put fluoridation decisions into DHB hands a good call

The Northern Advocate
16th April
Northland DHB upbeat on fluoride issue

The Press
14th April
Editorial: Fluoride’s benefits beyond doubt but Government’s approach weak-kneed

The Southland Times
13th April
Southlanders speak: yes or no to fluoride?

14th April
Fluoridation costs will fall on ratepayers

15th April
Fluoridation – it’s a health debate

The Wanganui Chronicle
15th April
Bill puts fluoridation in DHBs’ hands

Timaru Herald
14th April
SCDHB welcomes government proposal on fluoridation

TVNZ
12th April
DHBs to have control over fluoride in water, not local councils
‘If we can get more fluoride in the water tooth decay will decrease by 40% in children’

Whakatane Beacon
15th April
Fluoride debate not yet over

The post Surge of fluoridation news in NZ appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

We at MSoF want to see fewer teeth being removed out of children’s mouths (as shown in the video) and we agree that there should be a sugar tax. The evidence is currently limited to the fact that it will help prevent caries, so ideally should be combined with other plans like fluoridation. Most of the countries that have taxed unhealthy foods have only done so in more recent years. Taxing something requires a whole-country approach, and it is difficult to see an immediate result with disease like caries where the outcomes often take a long time.

While community water fluoridation (CWF) helps to reduce tooth decay, we currently don’t have nationwide CWF – some areas still miss out. Taxes on the other hand are nationwide.

The post Should New Zealand have a sugar tax? appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

They will speak at meetings organised by Fluoride Free NZ (FFNZ) – a local activist group affiliated to FAN – in Thames (Tuesday 24th February) and Taupo (Wednesday 25th February).

FFNZ will also promote these meetings, and their anti-fluoride message, via media releases and media interviews with Drs. Connett and Hirzy while they are in New Zealand.

Making Sense of Fluoride (MSoF) provides the following background information for news media covering this visit.

Background information on speakers and organisations.

1: FAN is the main U.S. based activist group and is very active in promoting an anti-fluoride message within the US and internationally. It is affiliated internationally to anti-fluoride groups throughout the world, including in Australia and New Zealand.

FAN is organisationally linked to the “natural” health/alternative medicine industry and the anti-vaccination movement through Mercola LLC’s Health Liberty Coalition. It is, at least in part, funded by the “natural’ health industry through the Mercola LLC company. This company also helps fund the anti-vaccination movement.

Mercola LLC reportedly brought in about $7 million in 2010, and has received three warning letters from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for violations of U.S. marketing laws, two of which charged Mercola with making false and misleading claims regarding the marketing of several natural supplemental products, which violated the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act.

FAN promotes its anti-fluoride message through media links to “natural” health/alternative medicine publications and websites and general press releases and articles via its network. It is also very active in reviewing and misinterpreting scientific publications

2: Speaker details:

A: Dr. Paul Connett has a PhD in chemistry. Now retired, he previously worked as a lecturer at St. Lawrence University, USA.

Although presented by his organisation and its local affiliates as “the world expert on fluoridation,” Dr. Connett has no research background in fluoride or fluoridation. His book, articles and presentations are based on his own interpretation (or misinterpretation) of the scientific work of others as presented in the scientific literature. (For example, in 2005 Professor John Spencer of Adelaide University said, “Dr. Connett misrepresents (my) study as an analysis of the benefits of water fluoridation, which it was not.  He also misinterprets the study’s indirect evidence on the benefits of water fluoridation on decay.”). He uses these misinterpretations to provide apparent authority to his anti-fluoride message.

Dr. Connett’s only relevant publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals are two letters to the editor and one, as junior author, of a review paper. The senior author of that paper, Anna Strunecká, is an Advisory Board member of FAN.

B: Dr.William Hirzy has a PhD in chemistry. Now retired, he formerly worked as a union official in the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)?

Dr. Hirzy has made statements and submission on fluoride and fluoridation in his role as a union leader. Unfortunately these are often disingenuously presented as representing the EPA and its scientific staff. They do not.

Hirzy’s only publications on fluoride or fluoridation in peer-reviewed scientific journals are two from 2013. The first argued that it is cost-effective to replace fluorosilicic acid as a fluoridating agent with sodium fluoride. The second paper effectively withdrew the conclusions of the first – admitting to a simple arithmetic error producing a 70-fold error in calculated costs which lead to a reversal of his conclusions.

3: Tactics of anti-fluoride activists.

Activist organisations like FAN and FFNZ target local body councils with campaigns to halt community water fluoridation or prevent its introduction using mass submission campaigns with templates provided by organisers. Submissions usually contain cherry-picked and misrepresented scientific citations which can impress and influence councillors who have little scientific background.

These organisations target newspapers with letter writing campaigns which usually attempt to discredit scientific and health organisations and experts.

Dr Paul Connett has made annual summer visits to New Zealand as part of these campaigns.

4: MSoF and contacts for comment

“Making Sense of Fluoride” is an incorporated society, whose main aim is to counter much of the misinformation on the internet and printed media related to community water fluoridation. We are a combination of students, academics and medical professionals advocating that this significant public health initiative be maintained in Australasia given the longstanding scientific consensus on its safety and efficacy.

For comments on the visit of Drs. Connett and Hirzy contact:

Dr. Ken Perrott

Email: ken.perrott@msof.nz

5: On-line resources

Review by Royal Society of NZ and the Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor – Health Effects of Water Fluoridation: a Review of the Scientific Evidence

NZ Community Water Fluoridation is Safe and Effective: A critique of Fluoride Free NZ’s criticisms of the NZ Fluoridation Review by Dr Ken Perrott

The Fluoride Debate – Paul Connett and Ken Perrott

Jason M Armfield “When public action undermines public health: a critical examination of antifluoridationist literature“

The post Press release: facts on Fluoride Action Network’s visit to NZ appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

He claims this report substantially underestimates fluoride intake by New Zealanders. But all he has shown is that he is incapable of reading scientific reports, and that he should not be trusted for claims he makes about it or any other scientific publication.

He says about tea:

“According to their study, the fluoride content of tea consumed in NZ contains less than 1mg F per L. In this study fluoridated tap water contained more fluoride than tea. No record is made of the brand of tea tested! (clearly it was not the most common types of black tea). The analysis was undertaken by a dental laboratory in the U.S.”

Waugh’s poor reading skills are shown by the fact that the report uses data for tea taken from previous surveys, not from a new analysis. The analysis mentioned in the Cressey report was for infant and toddler formula products – not tea!

The Cressey et al report used NZ survey figures of 0.35 and 1.75 mg/L and an US survey figure of 3.73 mg/L. It takes as a best estimate for the desk top estimation 1.15 mg/L when prepared with unfluoridated water and 2.04 mg/L when prepared with fluoridated water.

The relatively low NZ survey figures are not unusual – Declan Waugh obtains his high figures by considering only poor quality old dusty tea and brick tea.

On New Zealand beer he claims:

“According to their study the level of fluoride in bottled beer in NZ is 0.1mg/L. I have tested NZ beers and measured fluoride levels 7 times higher than what they reported in this study.”

Again wrong. The value of 0.1 he read was the value chosen for unfluoridated water ( the median of recorded values for NZ ranging from 0.0 – 1.8 mg/L)!

The values used by the Cressey report were for NZ surveys 0.20 and 0.11 mg/L, for US surgery 0.45 mg/L and for Australian survey 0.8 mg/L. It takes as the best desktop estimate for NZ beer prepared from unfluoridated water 0.16 mg/L.

If Waugh has tested NZ beers where has he published his data? (I am unaware of anything he has published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal – despite his claim to be a “scientist and fluoride researcher.” Let’s see your data and methodology, Declan.

Declan Waugh indignantly demands:

“These inaccuracies need to be brought to the attention of the media and public health authorities as a matter of public health urgency.”

We should be bringing Declan Waugh’s inaccuracies, in fact his blatant blundering and lack of respect for the published literature, to the attention of our media and public health authorities as a matter of public health urgency?

I suspect that while he may have fooled some of the media in Ireland, local Fluoride free activists and the Hamilton City Council – (see http://openparachute.wordpress.com/2013/09/15/when-politicians-and-bureaucrats-decide-the-science/), Waugh has not fooled our public health authorities.

Surely with his record they will avoid like the plague all his claims about fluoride and fluoridation.

The post Declan Waugh caught out telling porkies again. 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.

MSoF and SBH are already helping each other out on the fluoridation side of things.

They are currently looking for two types of members:

Firstly, they would be interested in hearing from anyone who is currently active or would like to be active in skepticism and the fight against pseudoscience in medicine and healthcare, and who feel they can offer their time and energy to the running of the society. This will involve helping with running campaigns that aim to ensure that healthcare in New Zealand is science based.

Secondly, they would like to attract as many people as possible who have a background in healthcare, science, law or other related fields (especially if you call yourself Dr.!). These people will help the Society by being available for advice and technical information, as well as supplying quotes and sound bites to be used in media releases and submitted complaints.

If anyone has a relevant professional and/or academic background and is also able to offer their time and energy to help run the Society, all the better!

If you are interested in helping, please contact them at sbh@sbh.org.nz or have a look at their website .

The post Society for Science Based Healthcare appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

PS: This is satire 

The post Convinced FANNZ, after a 3-hour discussion appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.

“Now saving 0.6 of a tooth surface does not seem something that I would go back for myself but if the other public health service policies… You might want to go back for it if you measured vaccination. Vaccination is worth billions of dollars to the pharmaceutical industry and we know in the United States there is a very unhealthy relationship between the FDA and the CDC and the pharmaceutical industry. There are more lobbyists for the pharmaceutical industry in Washington than congressmen, so you know, we’re pretty suspicious about that.

So in other words once again you’re seeing possibility a bad activity justified by the greater good. The greater good is to protect these other health policies that they really believe in and they feel for it. As I try to intimate to me is the sure way is to lose the public’s trust is to keep pushing this practice long after it can be justified scientifically. Um, so they need to do better if that is their calculation, they do better if they come out clean. I sometimes say ‘look’ and you can take it or leave it or this is just a way I can pitch it right.

It’s like defending a medieval castle. The medieval castle has an outer perimeter, an inner perimeter, a moat, a drawbridge and a castle. And a King in the castle. So what’s the analogy? The outer perimeter is fluoridation, the inner perimeter is vaccination. Pull up the drawbridge and defend the castle. And the castle is orthodox medicine; one pill for the pharmaceutical industry for every ailment, and of course the King here is the pharmaceutical industry and their control of modern medicine. That’s why I think they may take a special delight in attacking chiropractors, people that practice alternative medicine, it’s all part of the same thing of protecting orthodoxy. And as I say, the first battle, as they see it, is protecting fluoridation. They see the floodgates opening as we crazy lunatic people come out and attack all their other precious practices.”

It seems Connett is ignoring that globally, the alternative medicine industry is estimated to be worth some $60 billion a year according to the World Health Organization (WHO). That is a lot to pay for placebos.

You can listen to the full clip of that question. I apologise for the low sound quality.

The post Dr Paul Connett’s NZ talk on fluoridation appeared first on Making Sense of Fluoride.