October

2010

Leading international scientist presents the

case against water fluoridation
Over 100 people packed the Solent University
Conference Centre on 11th September to hear
Professor Paul Connett present the scientific
case against fluoridation. Professor Connett is
Emeritus Professor of Chemistry at St Lawrence
University, New York State and Executive Direc-
tor of the Fluoride Action Network. Together
with Professors Beck and Micklem he has just
published a book examining the scientific evidence
on water fluoridation (see page 3 for more infor-
mation).

His wide ranging talk examined both the evidence Professor Connett promotes the Fluoride Action Net-
— or rather lack of evidence — on the effective- work ‘Professionals DVD’ during his talk
ness of water fluoridation and the evidence on
health risks. Drawing on the material in the book he set out the history and beginnings of water fluorida-
tion before demonstrating that modern studies have found little difference in dental decay between
fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas. In an entertaining and hugely detailed analysis of the evidence, he
argued that ―this alone should be enough to make any public health policy maker stop water fluoridation
immediately‖. He then set out the evidence of harm and presented in some detail the wealth of scientific
studies that raise questions about the safety of fluoridation and the dangers of excess fluoride ingestion.
Pointing out the alarming increase in dental fluorosis in the USA, he particularly highlighted the effect of
fluoride on the endocrine system, bones, thyroid and pineal glands. Concerns that have been expressed in
other scientific reviews of the evidence.

His talk sparked many questions from the audience

and a lively discussion. Professor Connett also pre-
sented the Fluoride Action Network Scientist of the
Year Award to Dr Jennifer Luke, a UK dentist and
researcher, for her pioneering work on the impact
of fluoride on the pineal gland.

A film of Professor Connett‘s talk is now available on

YouTube and the Hampshire Against Fluoridation
blog spot.

Inside this issue:

Case for water fluoridation challenged by EU Scientific Committee ♦ New book published on the case against
water fluoridation ♦ Campaign against SHA

.www.hampshireagainstfluoridation.org
Safety of Water Fluoridation Questioned by EU
Scientific Committee on Health Risks
Water fluoridation has been described as ‗a crude and rather ineffective form of systemic fluoride
treatment to prevent dental caries without a detectable threshold for dental and bone damage‘.
This is the opinion of the EU Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks (SCHER) con-
tained in a recent report on the scientific evidence on water fluoridation. Their report also concludes
that ‗There is no obvious advantage in favour of water fluoridation compared to topical application
which is the most effective method for prevention of tooth decay’.

These and other aspects of water fluoridation‘s safety were discussed at a special hearing in Brussels
on 17th September. Hampshire Against Fluoridation‘s chairman, Stephen Peckham, was one of a number
of international scientists, health and environmental campaigners who presented detailed evidence of
the adverse effects of adding fluoride to drinking water.

The Committee‘s findings directly challenge the SHA‘s claim that fluoridation is ―safe and effective.‖
While the SHA continues to promote 1ppm as an ‗optimum level‘ of fluoride in water, the Scientific
Committee concluded that in areas where water contains fluoride at concentrations over 0.8ppm, chil-
dren under 12 years will exceed the upper limits for fluoride ingestion. Stephen Peckham said ―A s
Hampshire Against Fluoridation has always argued, the SHA have not properly considered the evidence .
This timely scientific review demonstrates that water fluoridation will expose children to excess levels
of fluoride. It is shocking that the SHA are ignoring this evidence.‖

Over-exposure to fluoride in the UK and ,

Stephen Peckham and John Graham.
Eire was a key concern. Despite the SHA
and PCT brushing-off such concerns, the
EU Scientific Committee took very seri-
ously the problem of excess ingestion, argu-
ing that there is an urgent need for further
research. They were particularly worried
about bone cancer in young boys – a concern
dismissed by the SHA in their consultation
document. At the hearing, Professor
Vyvyan Howard, a leading international re-
searcher in molecular bioscience at the Uni- Campaigners relax after the hearing—l-r Robert Pocock, Anna
Peckham, Ellen Connett, Rudolf Ziegelbecker, Vyvyan Howard, Paul
versity of Ulster, argued that if regulatory
Connett, Stephen Peckham, John Graham
approval for fluoridation chemicals was be-
ing sought today based on the data presented to the hearing by SCHER, the chances of obtaining it
were extremely remote.

US based Ellen and Paul Connett from the Fluoride Action Network and Dr Ziegelbecker from Austria
joined representatives from the National Pure Water Association, HAF, VOICE of Concern for the
Irish Environment, Dr Jennifer Luke and Professor Vyvyan Howard. Also in attendance were a leading
supplier of fluoride toothpastes in Europe and the Spanish company producing and supplying fluorosili-
cates to Ireland. The only UK pro-fluoridation attendees were the chairman of the British Fluoridation
Society and a representative of UK dental associations. No Department of Health or NHS representa-
tive attended despite their strong support for water fluoridation!

You can view a copy of the Scientific Committee‘s Preliminary Opinion on water fluoridation here:
http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/environmental_risks/docs/scher_o_122.pdf

.www.hampshireagainstfluoridation.org
The Case Against Fluoride
For the past 60 years, millions of people have unwittingly participated in a public health experiment us-
ing water fluoridation to reduce dental disease. But in a recently published book, this experiment is de-
clared a failure. The Case Against Fluoride: how hazardous waste ended up in our drinking water and
the bad science and powerful politics that keep it there , Professors Connett, Beck and Micklem sum-
marise the historical, political, ethical, toxicological, and epidemiological scientific data behind water
fluoridation. The book concludes that, if proposed today, fluoridation of drinking water to prevent
tooth decay would stand virtually no chance of being adopted, given the current status of scientific
knowledge.

The Case Against Fluoride is an incisive, research-driven indictment of the government-sponsored

practice of adding toxic chemicals to public drinking supplies. The authors examine mounting evidence
that fluoridated water is unsafe to drink, wreaking havoc on the human body – affecting the brain, en-
docrine system, bones and kidneys.

The book re-examines the justifications for fluoride and finds a shocking lack of evidence that fluori-
dated water has any proven dental or health benefits. After concluding that the risks far outweigh
the benefits, the authors turn their attention to why this practice continues. Their investigation leads
them – not surprisingly – to powerful corporate interests benefiting from these programs and profes-
sional organisations unwilling to change past endorsements. The book is very readable and packed with
detailed information about the evidence on water fluoridation and the politics of fluoridation policy.
While mainly focused on the USA, there are references to Southampton and the current fight locally
to keep fluoride out of our water.

The authors:
Dr Paul Connett is the Director of the Fluoride Ac-
tion Network. He holds a BS (Honours) degree from
the University of Cambridge and a PhD in chemistry
from Dartmouth College and is an Emeritus Profes-
sor of Chemistry at St Lawrence University, Canton,
NY, where his areas of expertise were environ-
mental chemistry and toxicology.
Dr James S Beck is a Professor Emeritus of Medi-
cal Biophysics at the University of Calgary and holds
doctorates in medicine from Washington University
School of Medicine and biophysics from the Univer-
sity of California, Berkeley.
Dr H Spedding Micklem is a Professor Emeritus in
the School of Biological Sciences at the University
of Edinburgh. He holds a DPhil from the University
of Oxford.

Order your copy from OCTOBER BOOKS

243 Portswood Road,
Southampton, SO17 2NG
Telephone: 023 8058 1030
Web www.octoberbooks.org
Email info@octoberbooks.org
Keep complaining …...
It is important that we keep up the pressure on the SHA — by April 2012 they will be abolished and re-
sponsibility for fluoridation will pass to local councils (all of whom have objected to the decision). De-
spite this, the SHA is continuing to contest the Judicial Review, which will be held on 19th and 20th
January 2011 — at a cost of £400,000. If you are unhappy about the decision made to fluoridate YOUR
drinking water, there are a number of effective ways you can complain. Governments have reassured us
that fluoridation will only be implemented where there is strong local support. This did not happened in
the Southampton area. 72% of the 2008 consultation respondents opposed water fluoridation. Write to
Dr Harris the Chairman or Andrea Young the Chief Executive.

It is also really worth complaining to the Health Ombusdman but this has to be done in two stages:
Write a letter of complaint to the South Central Strategic Health Authority outlining why you are un-
happy with the decision and what you feel they did wrong. You may do this by email if more convenient.
Wait until you receive a reply, then if you are not satisfied, you can complain to the Parliamentary &
Health Ombudsman by writing to your MP and asking them to pass on your complaint. Again, specify why
you are unhappy, what you feel was wrong with the consultation and decision and what you feel should be
done now.

Southern Central Strategic Health Authority Parliamentary & Health Service For MPs write to:
Rivergate House Ombudsman House of Commons
Newbury Business Park For further information see their website: London
London Road www.ombudsman.org.uk SW1A 0AA
Newbury
RG14 2PZ
http://www.southcentral.nhs.uk/

Join Hampshire Against Fluoridation

Contacts: Membership of HAF is open to anyone or any local groups or organisation that support our
Chairman: Stephen objectives of keeping our water fluoride-free. Keep updated on the latest developments on the
Peckham 02380 HAF blog : http://hampshireagainstfluoridation.blogspot.com/
493776 Please complete and send the membership form to:
Ann Richards, 4 South Road, Hayling Island, PO11 9AE
Secretary:
Tel: 02392 463761
Ann Richards 02392 annpeter@richards177.fsnet.co.uk
463761
Cheques payable to Hampshire Against Fluoridation
John Spottiswoode:
02380 789230
I wish to join HAF:
Anna Peckham
Name: ………………………………………………………………………….
02380 493776
Address: ……………………………………………………………………….
HAF is a non political ………………………………………………………………………………….
voluntary group and Post code:……………………………………………………………………...
relies on subscriptions
Email address:………………………………………………………………….
and donations.
Membership for one Tel. number: ………………………………………………….
year is £5.00. Please Membership donation £5 Donation to HAF funds: £
send a cheque together Please send me a free Professional Perspectives DVD…….YES/NO
with the form or pay by I agree to my details being held in HAF’s membership records:
Paypal through our
website. Signature: …………………………………………….. Date: …………

http://hampshireagainstfluoridation.blogspot.com/