sci.med.dentistry

  The Selling of Fluoridation In America* Americans’ Health is Being Compromised for Industrial Profit By John R. Lee, M.D. *This article  may  be copied, reproduced and quoted in full in any media, as long as the text is not changed in any way, or edited out of context, and as long as Dr. Lee’s byline above remains, and the copyright and contact information at the end of the article remains intact. Typical American citizens rarely think of fluoridation. If they hear of some debate or squabble about fluoridation they pass it off as insignificant, old news, nothing to worry about, nothing that competes with all the other anxieties and stresses of life these days. This laissez faire attitude is evidence of the success of media misrepresentation in the matter of fluoridation. Before your brain goes on autopilot and you lose focus, consider the following facts. Within the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) there is something called the Food and Nutrition Board that, in 1997, ...

ADA Distributing Misleading Information on Two Federal Fluoride  Reports NEW YORK, Aug. 21, 2007 -  /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) charges the American Dental Association (ADA) with circulating false and misleading information in its newsletter (8/15) that expressed concern over professional "opposition to community water fluoridation."(1) ADA misrepresented important findings in the 2006 National Research Council (NRC)(2) report and trivialized the significance of the dental fluorosis epidemic afflicting American children (CDC, 2005). "We don't understand why the ADA won't deal honestly with the science that caused 600 professionals to urge fluoridation be ended,"(3) says Paul Connett, PhD, FAN Director. The ADA says the NRC report is not relevant to water fluoridation, but, according to its website, made this statement before it had reviewed the report. In March, 2006 it wrote: "Additional information will appear on ADA.o...

  NYSCOF unread, Nov 9, 2002, 10:58:54 AM   to debbe...@aol.comnojunk (DEBBEE1023) wrote in message news:< 20021109004906...@mb-cc.aol.com >... > Congratulations Darlene!!! You go!!!!! YEAH!!!! Public figure, Steven Barrett MD, sued Darlene Sherrill (private citizen) because she posted information he didn't like on her website about him concerning water fluoridation. The original lawsuit is here: http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/final_trialmemo.pdf  (found on the wayback machine here: https://web.archive.org/web/20030319080429/http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/final_trialmemo.pdf ) And the decision is here:  http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/decision.htm (On Wayback Machine here: https://web.archive.org/web/20030210130758/http://www.rvi.net/~fluoride/decision.htm ) Actually, this is a case that protects freedom of expression on the internet, which everyone who posted on this topic (fluoridation) should applaud regardless of which side of the fluoridation issue you ...

June 8, 2001 Dr. Pollick, Co-chairman, California Fluoridation Task Force c/o Dental Health Foundation 520 Third Street, No. 205 Oakland, CA 94607 Dear Dr. Pollick Re: Your 6/4/2001 News Release, “California Fluoridation Task Force Takes Anti-fluoride Group to Task Over Alleged Mischaracterization of Canadian Fluoridation Study”(2) Your above-referenced news release was brought to our attention. We value your right to disagree with us. But you have put out serious misinformation that wrongly denigrates the New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation. This needs to be retracted. Perhaps you didn’t fact-check what your hired public relations firm got wrong. However, in the interest of truth and accuracy, you should want to correct your mistakes. These are your errors: 1) Our release (dated 4/23/2001) was entitled “Canadian Government Report Questions Value of Fluoridation” (1) not “Canadian study: Stop fluoridation in water” as your news release stated. 2) Our lead read “Fluoridatio...