Fluoride in water 'improves children's dental health' claims new report by PHE

Daily Echo: Fluoride in water 'improves children's dental health' Fluoride in water 'improves children's dental health'

HEALTH chiefs say adding fluoride to water in Southampton and Hampshire will improve children's dental health.

Public Health England (PHE) has today published a report which says adding the chemical to tap water will provide “significant benefits”.

The Government body's report says youngsters living in areas where fluoridation schemes are in place are less likely to have tooth decay than those in other regions.

The saga over whether fluoride should be added to the water of 200,000 homes in Southampton, Totton, Eastleigh, Netley and Rownhams has rumbled on since the South Central Strategic Health Authority (SHA) were given the go-ahead in 2009.

Campaigners have argued that no public consultation was carried out about introducing the scheme in Hampshire, and they also say it could lead to health problems and reduced IQs if introduced.

PHE took over the responsibility for implementing fluoridation after the SHA was scrapped last year, and the organisation has insisted the measure is “safe and effective”.

The organisation is currently locked in a legal dispute with Southampton City Council and Hampshire County Council, who believe the scheme does not exist due to a failure to hand over key documents between the SHA and PHE.

Both councils want a public referendum on fluoridation.

The authors of the PHE report, experts measured the dental health of five-year-olds with baby teeth and 12-year-olds with adult teeth from fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas.

They said that on average 15 per cent fewer five-year-olds have tooth decay that needed intervention in fluoridated areas.

And when deprivation and ethnicity - both important factors for dental health - are taken into account this figure rises to 28 per cent fewer cases of tooth decay.

Meanwhile there are 11 per cent fewer 12-year-olds with tooth decay in fluoridated areas compared to non-fluoridated areas.

This figure rose to 21 per cent when deprivation and ethnicity were taken into account, the authors said.

And in areas which participate in the water adjustment scheme there are 45 per cent fewer hospital admissions for tooth decay among children aged one to four.

The research compared rates of the effect on fluoridated Newcastle and non-fluoridated Manchester.

They found that the number of 12 year old children in Newcastle with moderate dental fluorosis was around 1% compared to 0.2% in Manchester.

But the authors said the overall dental benefit of the schemes were ''important''.

''Dental caries (tooth decay) is a significant public health problem in England,'' the report states.

''Sizeable inequalities in the incidence of caries exist between affluent and deprived communities, and it is a common cause of hospital admissions in children.''

Professor John Newton, chief knowledge officer at PHE, said: ''There is a good deal of speculation about water fluoridation schemes. This report provides new data which is direct evidence of the safety and efficacy of water fluoridation in England.

''There is no evidence of any effect on general health in fluoridated areas compared to non-fluoridated areas. There are important benefits in terms of dental health - it does look as if there are really significant benefits in those areas that have water fluoridation schemes.

''We will use this report as a basis for discussions with local authorities on the scope and content of further reports and on the role of fluoridation as a public health measure.''

Sue Gregory, director of dental public health at PHE, added: ''These findings highlight the important contribution that water fluoridation makes to children's dental health and general well-being.

''It is notable that the benefits of this public health measure appear to be greatest for children living in the most deprived areas of the country.

''This is significant for reducing the large differences we see in dental health between deprived and more affluent areas of the country.''

Comments (68)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:31pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph

.co.uk/news/politics

/10380523/Birmingham

-is-national-disgrac

e-says-Ofsted-chief-

inspector.html
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html Dan Soton
  • Score: 21

12:31pm Tue 25 Mar 14

soobear says...

It is not a new report, it is the same old propaganda doing the rounds again. A decent education programme on healthy eating and good oral hygiene will improve childrens dental health.
It is not a new report, it is the same old propaganda doing the rounds again. A decent education programme on healthy eating and good oral hygiene will improve childrens dental health. soobear
  • Score: 21

1:06pm Tue 25 Mar 14

meteorquake says...

Obviously we should fluoridate not the water, but the sugary and acidic sweets and foods where the problem lies. Regulating them where feasible.
Those who don't drink/eat them can therefore enjoy unfluoridated water, getting their fluoride by brushing their teeth and not consuming it.
d
Obviously we should fluoridate not the water, but the sugary and acidic sweets and foods where the problem lies. Regulating them where feasible. Those who don't drink/eat them can therefore enjoy unfluoridated water, getting their fluoride by brushing their teeth and not consuming it. d meteorquake
  • Score: 10

1:13pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Drhysted says...

I'm quoting straight from the instructions of my toothpaste.

"In case of intake of flouride from other sources, consult your doctor".

Is the NHS ready for everyone to consult their doctor? After all it is a poison.
I'm quoting straight from the instructions of my toothpaste. "In case of intake of flouride from other sources, consult your doctor". Is the NHS ready for everyone to consult their doctor? After all it is a poison. Drhysted
  • Score: 22

1:29pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Mary80 says...

Or how about Parents actually ya know PARENT THEIR KIDS and make sure the kids stop eating so much bloody sugar, there the problem is solved. you don't need to dump crap in our water just EDUCATE people to encourage kids to brush their teeth if dental health is such an issue. Christ on a stick it smacks of laziness to just go "meh us parents can't be arsed to stop piling sugar down our kids gobs, lets just dump fluride in the water to solve it". Its about friggin time parents started actually giving a crap about the level of sugar their kids ingest.
Or how about Parents actually ya know PARENT THEIR KIDS and make sure the kids stop eating so much bloody sugar, there the problem is solved. you don't need to dump crap in our water just EDUCATE people to encourage kids to brush their teeth if dental health is such an issue. Christ on a stick it smacks of laziness to just go "meh us parents can't be arsed to stop piling sugar down our kids gobs, lets just dump fluride in the water to solve it". Its about friggin time parents started actually giving a crap about the level of sugar their kids ingest. Mary80
  • Score: 16

1:53pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph


.co.uk/news/politics


/10380523/Birmingham


-is-national-disgrac


e-says-Ofsted-chief-


inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 17

2:03pm Tue 25 Mar 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: -22

2:06pm Tue 25 Mar 14

good-gosh says...

It was easy to get my children to brush their teeth. Every night I tucked them up, kissed them gently and told them their breath stinks
It was easy to get my children to brush their teeth. Every night I tucked them up, kissed them gently and told them their breath stinks good-gosh
  • Score: -2

2:14pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Inform Al says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
If it was just Fluoride that is used in the water I personally would not be too alarmed. The fact that it is the industrial waste scrapings from filtered chimneys, used to stop the stuff polluting fauna, is a big worry. The fact that money is paid to lose this poison in our drinking water should be a worry to any thinking person. We are told that the concentrations are too low to affect us, if this is the case how does it benefit teeth that it only has a passing contact with before going into the system?
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]If it was just Fluoride that is used in the water I personally would not be too alarmed. The fact that it is the industrial waste scrapings from filtered chimneys, used to stop the stuff polluting fauna, is a big worry. The fact that money is paid to lose this poison in our drinking water should be a worry to any thinking person. We are told that the concentrations are too low to affect us, if this is the case how does it benefit teeth that it only has a passing contact with before going into the system? Inform Al
  • Score: 8

3:03pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph



.co.uk/news/politics



/10380523/Birmingham



-is-national-disgrac



e-says-Ofsted-chief-



inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l
2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 12

3:17pm Tue 25 Mar 14

lowe esteem says...

Most "children's" dental health products contain little or no fluoride compared to the adult equivalent, yet we have this quack quango pushing for more mass consumption of same in the name of juvenile oral health.
I smell somethin', and it ain't bad breath.
Most "children's" dental health products contain little or no fluoride compared to the adult equivalent, yet we have this quack quango pushing for more mass consumption of same in the name of juvenile oral health. I smell somethin', and it ain't bad breath. lowe esteem
  • Score: 9

3:19pm Tue 25 Mar 14

hantslass says...

Has SHA changed their initials to PHE, When are these idiots going to listen to the public WE DONT WANT FLUORIDE IN OUR WATER . it is mass poisoning , we want clean drinking water there is enough additives without adding more .
Has SHA changed their initials to PHE, When are these idiots going to listen to the public WE DONT WANT FLUORIDE IN OUR WATER . it is mass poisoning , we want clean drinking water there is enough additives without adding more . hantslass
  • Score: 11

3:51pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Fluoride has been shown to collect around the pineal gland and cause brain damge, it can also be deadly to those with liver/kidney problems, such as a friend of mine who only has 1 kidney.
Fluoride has been shown to collect around the pineal gland and cause brain damge, it can also be deadly to those with liver/kidney problems, such as a friend of mine who only has 1 kidney. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 5

3:52pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Mary80 says...

If you look at the sugar levels in most food it would shock you its why its so important to try and encourage kids to eat more fruit and veg
If you look at the sugar levels in most food it would shock you its why its so important to try and encourage kids to eat more fruit and veg Mary80
  • Score: 5

3:58pm Tue 25 Mar 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

I am against it, too late for me anyway.
I am against it, too late for me anyway. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 1

4:25pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ReflexD says...

Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.
Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you. ReflexD
  • Score: 9

4:30pm Tue 25 Mar 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

ReflexD wrote:
Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.
'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'.

By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake.

Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?
[quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.[/p][/quote]'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'. By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake. Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense? WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: -12

4:57pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Inform Al says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
ReflexD wrote:
Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.
'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'.

By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake.

Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?
No Plank, they are doing it for the money.
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.[/p][/quote]'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'. By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake. Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?[/p][/quote]No Plank, they are doing it for the money. Inform Al
  • Score: 5

5:01pm Tue 25 Mar 14

southampton liza says...

soobear wrote:
It is not a new report, it is the same old propaganda doing the rounds again. A decent education programme on healthy eating and good oral hygiene will improve childrens dental health.
I agree with soobear completely, it wouldn't hurt to drop the cost of healthier foods either, I mean come on you go to any local shop and you can buy choc bars, crisps and treats cheaper than you can buy fresh fruit how is this right.
this would be the 1st step into helping kids improve dental health etc.
Now going back to the topic of fluoride........ fluoride has been proven to lower the IQ of kids and is linked to brain damage, chronic fatigue, cancer growth and arthritic symptoms to name a few so I say no way ...no no no every time.
In fact, what’s being heralded as a safe and effective prophylactic against cavities is actually a toxic industrial waste product, and it’s being added to water supplies because they have so much to get rid of, and toxic waste disposal is expensive. In a nutshell, a solution was devised in which hazardous waste could be eliminated at a profit...I will repeat its a toxic waste product so why the heck would anyone want to drink it...Just read the back of tooth paste or mouthwashes it clearly states on there how fluoride is not to be swallowed and if swallowed please seek medical advise asap as toxic if swallowed....need we say more.... :-(
[quote][p][bold]soobear[/bold] wrote: It is not a new report, it is the same old propaganda doing the rounds again. A decent education programme on healthy eating and good oral hygiene will improve childrens dental health.[/p][/quote]I agree with soobear completely, it wouldn't hurt to drop the cost of healthier foods either, I mean come on you go to any local shop and you can buy choc bars, crisps and treats cheaper than you can buy fresh fruit how is this right. this would be the 1st step into helping kids improve dental health etc. Now going back to the topic of fluoride........ fluoride has been proven to lower the IQ of kids and is linked to brain damage, chronic fatigue, cancer growth and arthritic symptoms to name a few so I say no way ...no no no every time. In fact, what’s being heralded as a safe and effective prophylactic against cavities is actually a toxic industrial waste product, and it’s being added to water supplies because they have so much to get rid of, and toxic waste disposal is expensive. In a nutshell, a solution was devised in which hazardous waste could be eliminated at a profit...I will repeat its a toxic waste product so why the heck would anyone want to drink it...Just read the back of tooth paste or mouthwashes it clearly states on there how fluoride is not to be swallowed and if swallowed please seek medical advise asap as toxic if swallowed....need we say more.... :-( southampton liza
  • Score: 7

5:09pm Tue 25 Mar 14

southampton liza says...

Drhysted wrote:
I'm quoting straight from the instructions of my toothpaste.

"In case of intake of flouride from other sources, consult your doctor".

Is the NHS ready for everyone to consult their doctor? After all it is a poison.
Thank you Drhysted someone else has the same thought pattern as me.
how can the PHE expect us to have confidence in there report when it takes less than 5 seconds to search online and see the harmful side effects of fluoride ....definitely no no no to fluoride
[quote][p][bold]Drhysted[/bold] wrote: I'm quoting straight from the instructions of my toothpaste. "In case of intake of flouride from other sources, consult your doctor". Is the NHS ready for everyone to consult their doctor? After all it is a poison.[/p][/quote]Thank you Drhysted someone else has the same thought pattern as me. how can the PHE expect us to have confidence in there report when it takes less than 5 seconds to search online and see the harmful side effects of fluoride ....definitely no no no to fluoride southampton liza
  • Score: 9

5:12pm Tue 25 Mar 14

southampton liza says...

hantslass wrote:
Has SHA changed their initials to PHE, When are these idiots going to listen to the public WE DONT WANT FLUORIDE IN OUR WATER . it is mass poisoning , we want clean drinking water there is enough additives without adding more .
too true hantslass agree completely
[quote][p][bold]hantslass[/bold] wrote: Has SHA changed their initials to PHE, When are these idiots going to listen to the public WE DONT WANT FLUORIDE IN OUR WATER . it is mass poisoning , we want clean drinking water there is enough additives without adding more .[/p][/quote]too true hantslass agree completely southampton liza
  • Score: 8

5:18pm Tue 25 Mar 14

BeyondImagination says...

Lots of percentages but no real numbers of people who may "benefit" from fluoridating the water supply of 200,000. All the children surveyed are in school. This is where an effective oral health programme should be implemented.
Lots of percentages but no real numbers of people who may "benefit" from fluoridating the water supply of 200,000. All the children surveyed are in school. This is where an effective oral health programme should be implemented. BeyondImagination
  • Score: 8

5:44pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ReflexD says...

Inform Al wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
ReflexD wrote:
Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.
'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'.

By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake.

Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?
No Plank, they are doing it for the money.
Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this.
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.[/p][/quote]'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'. By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake. Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?[/p][/quote]No Plank, they are doing it for the money.[/p][/quote]Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this. ReflexD
  • Score: 4

5:58pm Tue 25 Mar 14

southampton liza says...

ReflexD wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
ReflexD wrote:
Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.
'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'.

By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake.

Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?
No Plank, they are doing it for the money.
Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this.
I agree totally we all def need to pull together like they have in certain states in America and China where they very successfully pulled together and said no to fluoride and got it stopped.
[quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.[/p][/quote]'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'. By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake. Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?[/p][/quote]No Plank, they are doing it for the money.[/p][/quote]Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this.[/p][/quote]I agree totally we all def need to pull together like they have in certain states in America and China where they very successfully pulled together and said no to fluoride and got it stopped. southampton liza
  • Score: 8

6:16pm Tue 25 Mar 14

hantslass says...

southampton liza wrote:
ReflexD wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
ReflexD wrote:
Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.
'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'.

By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake.

Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?
No Plank, they are doing it for the money.
Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this.
I agree totally we all def need to pull together like they have in certain states in America and China where they very successfully pulled together and said no to fluoride and got it stopped.
I have been protesting this for a long time, i cant believe they are not taking any notice of what the public says. lets all stick together on this otherwise the kids of this country are going to be poisoned .SHA started this and it looks like they will win bloody poisoners. i feel angry i and everyone else has to keep battling with these ghastly people who want to add rubbish to our drinking water , and i bet they drink bottled water from abroad
[quote][p][bold]southampton liza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.[/p][/quote]'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'. By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake. Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?[/p][/quote]No Plank, they are doing it for the money.[/p][/quote]Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this.[/p][/quote]I agree totally we all def need to pull together like they have in certain states in America and China where they very successfully pulled together and said no to fluoride and got it stopped.[/p][/quote]I have been protesting this for a long time, i cant believe they are not taking any notice of what the public says. lets all stick together on this otherwise the kids of this country are going to be poisoned .SHA started this and it looks like they will win bloody poisoners. i feel angry i and everyone else has to keep battling with these ghastly people who want to add rubbish to our drinking water , and i bet they drink bottled water from abroad hantslass
  • Score: 5

6:31pm Tue 25 Mar 14

jenren says...

Because I had a calcium deficiency, my dentist advised giving my daughter a fluoride tablet every day. Her teeth turned brown & the horrified dentist said she knew it was a side effect, but hadn't seen it quite as bad. Is that what the powers that be want, brown teeth?
Because I had a calcium deficiency, my dentist advised giving my daughter a fluoride tablet every day. Her teeth turned brown & the horrified dentist said she knew it was a side effect, but hadn't seen it quite as bad. Is that what the powers that be want, brown teeth? jenren
  • Score: 6

6:44pm Tue 25 Mar 14

hantslass says...

jenren wrote:
Because I had a calcium deficiency, my dentist advised giving my daughter a fluoride tablet every day. Her teeth turned brown & the horrified dentist said she knew it was a side effect, but hadn't seen it quite as bad. Is that what the powers that be want, brown teeth?
i heard of a little boy whos teeth went like brown pegs because fluoride was added to there water . criminal thats what these so called money scheming money grabbing agencies are .. sack the lot of them they are not fit to serve the public
[quote][p][bold]jenren[/bold] wrote: Because I had a calcium deficiency, my dentist advised giving my daughter a fluoride tablet every day. Her teeth turned brown & the horrified dentist said she knew it was a side effect, but hadn't seen it quite as bad. Is that what the powers that be want, brown teeth?[/p][/quote]i heard of a little boy whos teeth went like brown pegs because fluoride was added to there water . criminal thats what these so called money scheming money grabbing agencies are .. sack the lot of them they are not fit to serve the public [ i am so annoyed sorry everyone] hantslass
  • Score: 8

7:03pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ReflexD says...

hantslass wrote:
southampton liza wrote:
ReflexD wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
ReflexD wrote:
Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.
'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'.

By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake.

Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?
No Plank, they are doing it for the money.
Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this.
I agree totally we all def need to pull together like they have in certain states in America and China where they very successfully pulled together and said no to fluoride and got it stopped.
I have been protesting this for a long time, i cant believe they are not taking any notice of what the public says. lets all stick together on this otherwise the kids of this country are going to be poisoned .SHA started this and it looks like they will win bloody poisoners. i feel angry i and everyone else has to keep battling with these ghastly people who want to add rubbish to our drinking water , and i bet they drink bottled water from abroad
There has been petition after petition and our government still refuses to listen. they are not working FOR us or to HELP us, they have their own selfish interests at heart. Hampshire County Council and Southampton City Council are both against the addition of Fluoride to our water supply and I sincerely hope that they win the legal battle and stop this from happening. I am pleased to see how many people are aware of the truth behind Fluoride as it was my assumption that not enough people knew. We need at least 51% of the Southampton and surrounding areas population to know the truth so if a referendum does take place we can stop this once and for all. So spread the word!
[quote][p][bold]hantslass[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southampton liza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ReflexD[/bold] wrote: Oh please. Do your research before you post such absurd articles. FLUORIDE IS POISON, IT IS INDUSTRIAL WASTE, deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us. I urge everybody to research this properly for themselves and say No No No to fluoridation. There are absolutely ZERO health benefits, it is not even good for your teeth. It is a poison and very very bad for you.[/p][/quote]'Deliberately added to our drinking water to poison us'. By whom? For what reason? So the healthcare professionals at Public Health England want to deliberately poison everyone - you really believe that? Is it because they're all actually in doing the bidding of reptilian shapeshifters who run the world? The Illuminati perhaps, or the Bilderberg group? I expect you think the World Trade Centre was an inside job and the moon landings were fake. Seriously - why don't YOU do some actual research for once, instead of posting complete and utter nonsense?[/p][/quote]No Plank, they are doing it for the money.[/p][/quote]Yes to all of the above, look I have done an AWFUL lot of research and it sounds like you may have done some yourself, I am not here to insult anyone, I am sharing truth if you can't accept that keep it to yourself, no need for hostility, we all need to come together and fight this.[/p][/quote]I agree totally we all def need to pull together like they have in certain states in America and China where they very successfully pulled together and said no to fluoride and got it stopped.[/p][/quote]I have been protesting this for a long time, i cant believe they are not taking any notice of what the public says. lets all stick together on this otherwise the kids of this country are going to be poisoned .SHA started this and it looks like they will win bloody poisoners. i feel angry i and everyone else has to keep battling with these ghastly people who want to add rubbish to our drinking water , and i bet they drink bottled water from abroad[/p][/quote]There has been petition after petition and our government still refuses to listen. they are not working FOR us or to HELP us, they have their own selfish interests at heart. Hampshire County Council and Southampton City Council are both against the addition of Fluoride to our water supply and I sincerely hope that they win the legal battle and stop this from happening. I am pleased to see how many people are aware of the truth behind Fluoride as it was my assumption that not enough people knew. We need at least 51% of the Southampton and surrounding areas population to know the truth so if a referendum does take place we can stop this once and for all. So spread the word! ReflexD
  • Score: 7

7:03pm Tue 25 Mar 14

SotonGreen says...

Again the wild eyed sweaty toothed nutters obiediently trot out their nonsense. It is really like sticking a stick in a nest of angry little ants.
Again the wild eyed sweaty toothed nutters obiediently trot out their nonsense. It is really like sticking a stick in a nest of angry little ants. SotonGreen
  • Score: -4

7:03pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Turtlebay says...

But does fluoride actually prevent tooth decay? Not according to the largest study ever conducted on fluoridation and oral health. 39,000 school children in 84 areas around the U.S.A. were studied in the mid-80's, and the results showed no statistical difference in tooth decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated cities.

Meanwhile, tooth decay trends tracked by the World Health Organization from 1970 to the present show that the incidence of decayed, missing or filled teeth has been steadily in decline with each passing year in the U.S., France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway, The Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Austria, Belgium, Portugal, Iceland and Greece. And why are the numbers of decayed teeth on the decline? Better oral hygiene and improved dental practice is the most obvious answer. It's certainly not the fluoride. Because of all of those countries, only one adds fluoride to the public water supply: the United States.

A few of the countries listed above used to put fluoride in some of their water, but they eventually wised up to the dangers of this aluminium by-product. And here's some truly radical thinking for you: many of those countries simply refuse to run fluoride through every citizen's taps based on the idea that health treatments should be a personal choice and not mandated by the government.

http://tinyurl.com/c
ptefa7
But does fluoride actually prevent tooth decay? Not according to the largest study ever conducted on fluoridation and oral health. 39,000 school children in 84 areas around the U.S.A. were studied in the mid-80's, and the results showed no statistical difference in tooth decay rates between fluoridated and non-fluoridated cities. Meanwhile, tooth decay trends tracked by the World Health Organization from 1970 to the present show that the incidence of decayed, missing or filled teeth has been steadily in decline with each passing year in the U.S., France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway, The Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Austria, Belgium, Portugal, Iceland and Greece. And why are the numbers of decayed teeth on the decline? Better oral hygiene and improved dental practice is the most obvious answer. It's certainly not the fluoride. Because of all of those countries, only one adds fluoride to the public water supply: the United States. A few of the countries listed above used to put fluoride in some of their water, but they eventually wised up to the dangers of this aluminium by-product. And here's some truly radical thinking for you: many of those countries simply refuse to run fluoride through every citizen's taps based on the idea that health treatments should be a personal choice and not mandated by the government. http://tinyurl.com/c ptefa7 Turtlebay
  • Score: 5

7:21pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Hiram Abiff says...

My father was a Dental Surgeon (LDS RCS) and in the 1960's he insisted I used fluoride toothpaste and he gave me fluoride tablets called 'Dentabs' which I was allowed instead of sweets. All through my teens and twenties he was forever saying he could not understand why my teeth were so brown and soft. (The dangers had not been recognised back then by the British Dental Association).
Through my mid life I regularly lost my teeth through fillings and extractions and now t the age of 60 I have lost all my teeth.

Is that what you want for your children? Is it?
My father was a Dental Surgeon (LDS RCS) and in the 1960's he insisted I used fluoride toothpaste and he gave me fluoride tablets called 'Dentabs' which I was allowed instead of sweets. All through my teens and twenties he was forever saying he could not understand why my teeth were so brown and soft. (The dangers had not been recognised back then by the British Dental Association). Through my mid life I regularly lost my teeth through fillings and extractions and now t the age of 60 I have lost all my teeth. Is that what you want for your children? Is it? Hiram Abiff
  • Score: 5

7:31pm Tue 25 Mar 14

InCortesewetrust says...

Sodium Fluoride is toxic wast, a derivative of the manufacturer of aluminium /fertilisers, its also the main ingredient in rat poison, still think it's safe? http://m.youtube.com
/watch?v=LLWk3cBnHOg
Sodium Fluoride is toxic wast, a derivative of the manufacturer of aluminium /fertilisers, its also the main ingredient in rat poison, still think it's safe? http://m.youtube.com /watch?v=LLWk3cBnHOg InCortesewetrust
  • Score: 4

7:36pm Tue 25 Mar 14

InCortesewetrust says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c
om/fleffect.html
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html InCortesewetrust
  • Score: 6

8:02pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Ryan Cannard says...

Hampshire Against Fluoride Facebook Page https://www.facebook
.com/groups/56086658
918/
Hampshire Against Fluoride Facebook Page https://www.facebook .com/groups/56086658 918/ Ryan Cannard
  • Score: 2

9:51pm Tue 25 Mar 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c

om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c
om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
[quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 0

9:57pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c


om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c

om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

10:26pm Tue 25 Mar 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c



om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c


om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
@GingerCyclist: alcohol is a toxin. Pure alcohol is in fact a pretty deadly toxin - if you ingest too much of it, it'll kill you very quickly. If you ingest a small amount in beer, wine etc. it's harmless and can even have some benefit. The same holds true for many other toxic substances. The fact that something has to be labelled when being transported in bulk does not have any relevance on what it does in massively diluted quantities.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.[/p][/quote]@GingerCyclist: alcohol is a toxin. Pure alcohol is in fact a pretty deadly toxin - if you ingest too much of it, it'll kill you very quickly. If you ingest a small amount in beer, wine etc. it's harmless and can even have some benefit. The same holds true for many other toxic substances. The fact that something has to be labelled when being transported in bulk does not have any relevance on what it does in massively diluted quantities. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 1

10:34pm Tue 25 Mar 14

InCortesewetrust says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c



om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c


om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth
.org/7-Health-Secret
s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha
rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.[/p][/quote]The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth .org/7-Health-Secret s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride, InCortesewetrust
  • Score: -2

10:35pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

WalkingOnAWire wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c




om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c



om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
@GingerCyclist: alcohol is a toxin. Pure alcohol is in fact a pretty deadly toxin - if you ingest too much of it, it'll kill you very quickly. If you ingest a small amount in beer, wine etc. it's harmless and can even have some benefit. The same holds true for many other toxic substances. The fact that something has to be labelled when being transported in bulk does not have any relevance on what it does in massively diluted quantities.
Takes a LOT less Fluoride to have a detrimental effect on you than alcohol AND even toothpastes and mouthwash with fluoride in them, specifically state on them, "Avoid/minimise swallowing and spit out, if irritation occurs, discontinue use, if irritation persists, seek mdical help", even dental products know how toxic they are if swallowed due to the fluoride content.
[quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.[/p][/quote]@GingerCyclist: alcohol is a toxin. Pure alcohol is in fact a pretty deadly toxin - if you ingest too much of it, it'll kill you very quickly. If you ingest a small amount in beer, wine etc. it's harmless and can even have some benefit. The same holds true for many other toxic substances. The fact that something has to be labelled when being transported in bulk does not have any relevance on what it does in massively diluted quantities.[/p][/quote]Takes a LOT less Fluoride to have a detrimental effect on you than alcohol AND even toothpastes and mouthwash with fluoride in them, specifically state on them, "Avoid/minimise swallowing and spit out, if irritation occurs, discontinue use, if irritation persists, seek mdical help", even dental products know how toxic they are if swallowed due to the fluoride content. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

10:36pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

InCortesewetrust wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c




om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c



om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth

.org/7-Health-Secret

s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha

rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,
You quoted the wrong person but I know who it was meant for.
[quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.[/p][/quote]The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth .org/7-Health-Secret s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,[/p][/quote]You quoted the wrong person but I know who it was meant for. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

10:47pm Tue 25 Mar 14

InCortesewetrust says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c





om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c




om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth


.org/7-Health-Secret


s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha


rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,
You quoted the wrong person but I know who it was meant for.
Sorry
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.[/p][/quote]The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth .org/7-Health-Secret s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,[/p][/quote]You quoted the wrong person but I know who it was meant for.[/p][/quote]Sorry InCortesewetrust
  • Score: 1

10:48pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

InCortesewetrust wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c






om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c





om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth



.org/7-Health-Secret



s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha



rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,
You quoted the wrong person but I know who it was meant for.
Sorry
It's ok, it happens.
[quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.[/p][/quote]The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth .org/7-Health-Secret s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,[/p][/quote]You quoted the wrong person but I know who it was meant for.[/p][/quote]Sorry[/p][/quote]It's ok, it happens. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

10:48pm Tue 25 Mar 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

InCortesewetrust wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c




om/fleffect.html
I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c



om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.
I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.
The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth

.org/7-Health-Secret

s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha

rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,
So, to summarise your argument: figs are good for your balls because they look like balls. That, in your view, is science. Amazonian tribes, with their massively lower life expectancy, are better off than us with our evil western medicine. I'm trying to have a debate with you here, but the fact is, you're so ignorant that your arguments are what a scientist would call 'not even wrong'. Do please try and do what I said before: start looking at some proper, peer-reviewed sources for your information, instead of this quasi-mystical nonsense that you think is fact. It's not.
[quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]I'll ignore the insult - let's stick to the facts. You've quoted a link to a post from a 'natural healing resource center' website. The post itself is written by an 'Allen Buresz DC'. He is a chiropractor. Chiropractic is a pseudo-science which believes that all disease stems from misalignment of the spine. In the UK the British Chiropractic Association was recently forced to drop a libel case against an eminent scientist, Simon Singh, who claimed its treatments are 'bogus'. The NHS website states that 'there is no scientific evidence to support the idea that most illness is caused by misalignment of the spine'. Allen Buresz himself was sanctioned, fined and suspended from practice in August 2012 for having 'engaged in immoral and unprofessional conduct related to his conduct with a ten year old female patient of his practice and her parents during an office visit'. Anything Allen Buresz has to say about fluoridation, therefore, cuts no ice with me I'm afraid. If we turn to the studies he cites on his webpage, we find that many of them are decades old (1943, 1954, 1962, 1965) and there is nothing at all from the 21st century. And many of them cite small-scale studies in rodents which as we all know are of highly limited applicability in humans. And finally, on the same website you can find all about other cutting-edge science such as Auras and The Healing Touch. Best of all, though, is this: http://all-natural.c om/food-pharmacy.htm My favourite has to be: 'Oranges, Grapefruits, and other Citrus fruits look just like the mammary glands of the female and actually assist the health of the breasts and the movement of lymph in and out of the breasts.' My point is this: do research, yes, but be critical about the sources. PubMed is generally the best place to start. If you think the website you've cited is a good place to find what you have termed 'the truth' then I'm afraid you're going to remain sorely misinformed.[/p][/quote]I go by the fact that fluoride and it's compounds have to be labeled as class 3 or 4 toxins on their containers and during transport.[/p][/quote]The truth is fluoride is a deadly poison, also what you stated as your favourite bit, orange grapefruits ect ect, its true, your probably to narrow minded to see past your own nose, before big pharma come along humans used what earth provides to heal and maintain there body's, as do the aboriginal and amazon's tribs today, http://present-truth .org/7-Health-Secret s-Sem/8%20Laws/G-Pha rm.htm the NHS and pharmaceutical industry is just there for profit, sick people = lots of business healthy people = no business that = no money, which brings me back to fluoride,[/p][/quote]So, to summarise your argument: figs are good for your balls because they look like balls. That, in your view, is science. Amazonian tribes, with their massively lower life expectancy, are better off than us with our evil western medicine. I'm trying to have a debate with you here, but the fact is, you're so ignorant that your arguments are what a scientist would call 'not even wrong'. Do please try and do what I said before: start looking at some proper, peer-reviewed sources for your information, instead of this quasi-mystical nonsense that you think is fact. It's not. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 1

11:02pm Tue 25 Mar 14

IronLady2010 says...

Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase.

I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.
Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase. I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not. IronLady2010
  • Score: 1

11:06pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase.

I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.
Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase. I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.[/p][/quote]Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

11:15pm Tue 25 Mar 14

southampton liza says...

InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c

om/fleffect.html
Im sorry but can you prove to me that there is a public health benefit to fluoridation....? because I sure as hell cant see any benefits to it myself..so please show me some evidence to back up your statement above..!!!
Im not trying to be pedantic or precocious but I really do think that there is more evidence against putting this in our water than there is to actually forcing us all to have it ...
[quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]Im sorry but can you prove to me that there is a public health benefit to fluoridation....? because I sure as hell cant see any benefits to it myself..so please show me some evidence to back up your statement above..!!! Im not trying to be pedantic or precocious but I really do think that there is more evidence against putting this in our water than there is to actually forcing us all to have it ... southampton liza
  • Score: 2

11:16pm Tue 25 Mar 14

southampton liza says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase.

I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.
Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea.
agree
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase. I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.[/p][/quote]Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea.[/p][/quote]agree southampton liza
  • Score: 1

11:25pm Tue 25 Mar 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

southampton liza wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c


om/fleffect.html
Im sorry but can you prove to me that there is a public health benefit to fluoridation....? because I sure as hell cant see any benefits to it myself..so please show me some evidence to back up your statement above..!!!
Im not trying to be pedantic or precocious but I really do think that there is more evidence against putting this in our water than there is to actually forcing us all to have it ...
Hi Liza. Here is the link to the actual report. It's 40-odd pages so takes a bit of time and effort to read. But it's well worth it.

https://www.gov.uk/g
overnment/uploads/sy
stem/uploads/attachm
ent_data/file/295735
/Water_fluoridation_
health_monitoring_re
port__for_England_20
14.pdf

Why not have a read of the whole document - it's actually fascinating! - and then post what you think? Thanks.
[quote][p][bold]southampton liza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]Im sorry but can you prove to me that there is a public health benefit to fluoridation....? because I sure as hell cant see any benefits to it myself..so please show me some evidence to back up your statement above..!!! Im not trying to be pedantic or precocious but I really do think that there is more evidence against putting this in our water than there is to actually forcing us all to have it ...[/p][/quote]Hi Liza. Here is the link to the actual report. It's 40-odd pages so takes a bit of time and effort to read. But it's well worth it. https://www.gov.uk/g overnment/uploads/sy stem/uploads/attachm ent_data/file/295735 /Water_fluoridation_ health_monitoring_re port__for_England_20 14.pdf Why not have a read of the whole document - it's actually fascinating! - and then post what you think? Thanks. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 2

1:30am Wed 26 Mar 14

IronLady2010 says...

southampton liza wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase.

I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.
Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea.
agree
Problem is those who need help, don't drink water. They tend to go for fizzy drinks hence why the teeth rot.
[quote][p][bold]southampton liza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase. I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.[/p][/quote]Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea.[/p][/quote]agree[/p][/quote]Problem is those who need help, don't drink water. They tend to go for fizzy drinks hence why the teeth rot. IronLady2010
  • Score: -1

7:51am Wed 26 Mar 14

FoysCornerBoy says...

southampton liza wrote:
InCortesewetrust wrote:
WalkingOnAWire wrote:
It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.
You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c


om/fleffect.html
Im sorry but can you prove to me that there is a public health benefit to fluoridation....? because I sure as hell cant see any benefits to it myself..so please show me some evidence to back up your statement above..!!!
Im not trying to be pedantic or precocious but I really do think that there is more evidence against putting this in our water than there is to actually forcing us all to have it ...
Can I suggest you read the report just published by Public Health England which is the basis of this newspaper story? Open-minded people prepared to consider all sides of the argument might also want to refer to an interesting article in January's British Dental Journal magazine. Here they compared child hospital admission rates for tooth decay from the fluoridated West Midlands and the non fluoridated North West. The differences between Birmingham and Liverpool (both areas with significant levels of urban deprivation) were quite marked and would strongly suggest that there are positive dental health benefits from water fluoridation.
[quote][p][bold]southampton liza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]InCortesewetrust[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WalkingOnAWire[/bold] wrote: It's good to see more strong evidence in favour of fluoridation. I agree with other posters that education on dental hygiene is also very important, but it is young children's teeth and health which are most at risk, and they are the vulnerable ones whom this measure will protect. Doubtless this thread will be invaded shortly by the pseudoscientific nonsense that always gets posted when this issue comes up. The bottom line is that fluoridation is a public health benefit. What it's not is a conspiracy theory involving big business, an attempt by the government to poison everyone, or any other kind of outlandish plot.[/p][/quote]You have had too much fluoride, it is the reason you are dim and believe what your told without reassuring for the truth yourself, I'll help you a little http://all-natural.c om/fleffect.html[/p][/quote]Im sorry but can you prove to me that there is a public health benefit to fluoridation....? because I sure as hell cant see any benefits to it myself..so please show me some evidence to back up your statement above..!!! Im not trying to be pedantic or precocious but I really do think that there is more evidence against putting this in our water than there is to actually forcing us all to have it ...[/p][/quote]Can I suggest you read the report just published by Public Health England which is the basis of this newspaper story? Open-minded people prepared to consider all sides of the argument might also want to refer to an interesting article in January's British Dental Journal magazine. Here they compared child hospital admission rates for tooth decay from the fluoridated West Midlands and the non fluoridated North West. The differences between Birmingham and Liverpool (both areas with significant levels of urban deprivation) were quite marked and would strongly suggest that there are positive dental health benefits from water fluoridation. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 4

1:25pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph




.co.uk/news/politics




/10380523/Birmingham




-is-national-disgrac




e-says-Ofsted-chief-




inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l

2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/health-2672948
4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ
R4



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: -1

1:49pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southampton liza wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase.

I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.
Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea.
agree
Problem is those who need help, don't drink water. They tend to go for fizzy drinks hence why the teeth rot.
Then educate them, also, I know a family personally who can't drink their tap water because it comes out white, so they have to go buy bottles of water instead.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southampton liza[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Fluoride should not be forced on the masses. By all means provide Fluoride bottled water or add it to drinks which are optional to purchase. I'm no chemist, but I am assuming products like Cola don't do your teeth any good, so add it to Cola and then people can choose wether to consume it or not.[/p][/quote]Put it in cheap bottles of water, that's a better idea.[/p][/quote]agree[/p][/quote]Problem is those who need help, don't drink water. They tend to go for fizzy drinks hence why the teeth rot.[/p][/quote]Then educate them, also, I know a family personally who can't drink their tap water because it comes out white, so they have to go buy bottles of water instead. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -3

11:01pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph





.co.uk/news/politics





/10380523/Birmingham





-is-national-disgrac





e-says-Ofsted-chief-





inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l


2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/health-2672948

4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ

R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail
.co.uk




,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: -1

2:36am Thu 27 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph






.co.uk/news/politics






/10380523/Birmingham






-is-national-disgrac






e-says-Ofsted-chief-






inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l



2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk


/news/health-2672948


4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ


R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail

.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta
l.co.uk/article-626-
Dental-Health-Month-
for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l
aqdklh




,,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,, Dan Soton
  • Score: -1

2:55am Thu 27 Mar 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

Dan Soton, can you stop flooding the forum with these stupid posts that are half a mile long? No-one's interested. You' re incapable of engaging with the facts and having a sensible debate. It's pathetic.
Dan Soton, can you stop flooding the forum with these stupid posts that are half a mile long? No-one's interested. You' re incapable of engaging with the facts and having a sensible debate. It's pathetic. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 0

10:38am Thu 27 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

,,

WalkingOnAWire says... can you stop flooding the forum with these stupid posts that are half a mile long?


After all you've said I can believe you're not interested to know... Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction's ?

It would seem the only thing I'm doing is cramping your poke everyone in the eye with a pointy stick style.. go ahead you're welcome to report me to the Echo

Whatever you do don't waste everyone's time by starting a thread on the merits of short and long posts



,,,
,, WalkingOnAWire says... can you stop flooding the forum with these stupid posts that are half a mile long? After all you've said I can believe you're not interested to know... Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction's ? It would seem the only thing I'm doing is cramping your poke everyone in the eye with a pointy stick style.. go ahead you're welcome to report me to the Echo Whatever you do don't waste everyone's time by starting a thread on the merits of short and long posts ,,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

8:52pm Thu 27 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph







.co.uk/news/politics







/10380523/Birmingham







-is-national-disgrac







e-says-Ofsted-chief-







inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l




2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk



/news/health-2672948



4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ



R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail


.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta

l.co.uk/article-626-

Dental-Health-Month-

for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l

aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n
4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

5:48am Fri 28 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph








.co.uk/news/politics








/10380523/Birmingham








-is-national-disgrac








e-says-Ofsted-chief-








inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l





2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk




/news/health-2672948




4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c




om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ




R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail



.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta


l.co.uk/article-626-


Dental-Health-Month-


for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l


aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n

4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph









.co.uk/news/politics









/10380523/Birmingham









-is-national-disgrac









e-says-Ofsted-chief-









inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l






2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk





/news/health-2672948





4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c





om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ





R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail




.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta



l.co.uk/article-626-



Dental-Health-Month-



for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l



aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n


4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra per year 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l
aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ
R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-24
880356


,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra per year 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

2:15pm Sat 29 Mar 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph









.co.uk/news/politics









/10380523/Birmingham









-is-national-disgrac









e-says-Ofsted-chief-









inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l






2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk





/news/health-2672948





4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c





om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ





R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail




.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta



l.co.uk/article-626-



Dental-Health-Month-



for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l



aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n


4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l
aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ
R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-24
880356


,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

3:00am Mon 7 Apr 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph










.co.uk/news/politics










/10380523/Birmingham










-is-national-disgrac










e-says-Ofsted-chief-










inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l







2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk






/news/health-2672948






4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c






om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ






R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail





.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta




l.co.uk/article-626-




Dental-Health-Month-




for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l




aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n



4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l

aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ

R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-scotland-24

880356


,,
,,

Last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies.. with their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show it bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse..

Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is...


1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ?

-


REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005.

Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED....

If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade...



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,,[/p][/quote],, Last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies.. with their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show it bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse.. Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is... 1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ? - REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005. Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED.... If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade... ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

3:02am Mon 7 Apr 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph










.co.uk/news/politics










/10380523/Birmingham










-is-national-disgrac










e-says-Ofsted-chief-










inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l







2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk






/news/health-2672948






4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c






om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ






R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail





.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta




l.co.uk/article-626-




Dental-Health-Month-




for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l




aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n



4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l

aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ

R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-scotland-24

880356


,,
only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies..

With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse..

Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is...


1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ?

-


REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005.

Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED....

If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade...



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,,[/p][/quote]only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies.. With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse.. Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is... 1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ? - REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005. Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED.... If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade... ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

3:10am Mon 7 Apr 14

WalkingOnAWire says...

Dan, seriously, you need to seek some help.
Dan, seriously, you need to seek some help. WalkingOnAWire
  • Score: 0

3:10am Mon 7 Apr 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph











.co.uk/news/politics











/10380523/Birmingham











-is-national-disgrac











e-says-Ofsted-chief-











inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l








2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk







/news/health-2672948







4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c







om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ







R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail






.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta





l.co.uk/article-626-





Dental-Health-Month-





for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l





aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n




4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l


aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ


R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk


/news/uk-scotland-24


880356


,,
only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies..

With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse..

Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is...


1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ?

-


REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005.

Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED....

If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade...



,,
Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ?



If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like..



ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION

2008-02-06 01:10:30

Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme.

“The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it."

The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs.

http://www.labour.or
g.uk/johnson_debate_
on_fluoridation_to_i
mprove_dental_care,2
008-02-05





,,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,,[/p][/quote]only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies.. With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse.. Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is... 1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ? - REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005. Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED.... If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade... ,,[/p][/quote]Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ? If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like.. ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION 2008-02-06 01:10:30 Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme. “The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it." The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs. http://www.labour.or g.uk/johnson_debate_ on_fluoridation_to_i mprove_dental_care,2 008-02-05 ,,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

12:22pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph












.co.uk/news/politics












/10380523/Birmingham












-is-national-disgrac












e-says-Ofsted-chief-












inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l









2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk








/news/health-2672948








4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c








om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ








R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail







.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta






l.co.uk/article-626-






Dental-Health-Month-






for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l






aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n





4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l



aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ



R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk



/news/uk-scotland-24



880356


,,
only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies..

With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse..

Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is...


1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ?

-


REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005.

Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED....

If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade...



,,
Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ?



If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like..



ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION

2008-02-06 01:10:30

Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme.

“The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it."

The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs.

http://www.labour.or

g.uk/johnson_debate_

on_fluoridation_to_i

mprove_dental_care,2

008-02-05





,,,
Where's Johnson's £45 million gone?


LABOUR'S SICK LEGACY.

In 2008 Labour’s genial Secretary of Health, Alan Johnson, awarded £14 million a year for three years to the Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) . The money was to be used exclusively to fund new fluoridation schemes, or to carry out feasibility studies on any new proposals for such projects.

But SHAs are not allowed to hold capital allocations, so with the collaboration of Primary care trusts (PCTs) some creative accounting allowed the money to be diverted to prop up ailing existing fluoridation schemes.

To launder Johnson’s millions, the Capital allowance is first transferred to PCTs, who convert it to Revenue. They then pass this back to the SHAs, who have then are able to switch it into repairing defective existing fluoridation equipment. This is in direct defiance of Johnson’s quite specific intention.


--------------

Wherever the money is now.. £42 million invested in a UK Childsmile programme could save Taxpayers £140 million or more in dental costs



NURSERY TOOTHBRUSHING SAVES £6m IN DENTAL COSTS

10 November 2013 Last updated at 01:03

A scheme to encourage nursery children to brush their teeth has saved more than £6m in dental costs, according to a new study.

Childsmile involves staff at all Scottish nurseries offering free supervised toothbrushing every day.

Glasgow researchers found that the scheme had reduced the cost of treating dental disease in five-year-olds by more than half between 2001 and 2010.

The programme was launched in 2001 and costs about £1.8m a year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-24
880356



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,,[/p][/quote]only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies.. With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse.. Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is... 1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ? - REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005. Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED.... If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade... ,,[/p][/quote]Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ? If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like.. ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION 2008-02-06 01:10:30 Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme. “The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it." The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs. http://www.labour.or g.uk/johnson_debate_ on_fluoridation_to_i mprove_dental_care,2 008-02-05 ,,,[/p][/quote]Where's Johnson's £45 million gone? LABOUR'S SICK LEGACY. In 2008 Labour’s genial Secretary of Health, Alan Johnson, awarded £14 million a year for three years to the Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) . The money was to be used exclusively to fund new fluoridation schemes, or to carry out feasibility studies on any new proposals for such projects. But SHAs are not allowed to hold capital allocations, so with the collaboration of Primary care trusts (PCTs) some creative accounting allowed the money to be diverted to prop up ailing existing fluoridation schemes. To launder Johnson’s millions, the Capital allowance is first transferred to PCTs, who convert it to Revenue. They then pass this back to the SHAs, who have then are able to switch it into repairing defective existing fluoridation equipment. This is in direct defiance of Johnson’s quite specific intention. -------------- Wherever the money is now.. £42 million invested in a UK Childsmile programme could save Taxpayers £140 million or more in dental costs NURSERY TOOTHBRUSHING SAVES £6m IN DENTAL COSTS 10 November 2013 Last updated at 01:03 A scheme to encourage nursery children to brush their teeth has saved more than £6m in dental costs, according to a new study. Childsmile involves staff at all Scottish nurseries offering free supervised toothbrushing every day. Glasgow researchers found that the scheme had reduced the cost of treating dental disease in five-year-olds by more than half between 2001 and 2010. The programme was launched in 2001 and costs about £1.8m a year. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph












.co.uk/news/politics












/10380523/Birmingham












-is-national-disgrac












e-says-Ofsted-chief-












inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l









2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk








/news/health-2672948








4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c








om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ








R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail







.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta






l.co.uk/article-626-






Dental-Health-Month-






for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l






aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n





4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l



aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ



R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk



/news/uk-scotland-24



880356


,,
only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies..

With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse..

Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is...


1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ?

-


REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005.

Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED....

If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade...



,,
Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ?



If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like..



ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION

2008-02-06 01:10:30

Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme.

“The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it."

The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs.

http://www.labour.or

g.uk/johnson_debate_

on_fluoridation_to_i

mprove_dental_care,2

008-02-05





,,,
,,

Where's Johnson's £42 million gone?


LABOUR'S SICK LEGACY.

In 2008 Labour’s genial Secretary of Health, Alan Johnson, awarded £14 million a year for three years to the Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) . The money was to be used exclusively to fund new fluoridation schemes, or to carry out feasibility studies on any new proposals for such projects.

But SHAs are not allowed to hold capital allocations, so with the collaboration of Primary care trusts (PCTs) some creative accounting allowed the money to be diverted to prop up ailing existing fluoridation schemes.

To launder Johnson’s millions, the Capital allowance is first transferred to PCTs, who convert it to Revenue. They then pass this back to the SHAs, who have then are able to switch it into repairing defective existing fluoridation equipment. This is in direct defiance of Johnson’s quite specific intention.


--------------


Wherever the money is now.. £42 million invested in a UK Childsmile programme could save Taxpayers £140 million or more in dental costs



NURSERY TOOTHBRUSHING SAVES £6m IN DENTAL COSTS

10 November 2013 Last updated at 01:03

A scheme to encourage nursery children to brush their teeth has saved more than £6m in dental costs, according to a new study.

Childsmile involves staff at all Scottish nurseries offering free supervised toothbrushing every day.

Glasgow researchers found that the scheme had reduced the cost of treating dental disease in five-year-olds by more than half between 2001 and 2010.

The programme was launched in 2001 and costs about £1.8m a year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-24
880356



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,,[/p][/quote]only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies.. With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse.. Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is... 1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ? - REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005. Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED.... If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade... ,,[/p][/quote]Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ? If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like.. ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION 2008-02-06 01:10:30 Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme. “The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it." The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs. http://www.labour.or g.uk/johnson_debate_ on_fluoridation_to_i mprove_dental_care,2 008-02-05 ,,,[/p][/quote],, Where's Johnson's £42 million gone? LABOUR'S SICK LEGACY. In 2008 Labour’s genial Secretary of Health, Alan Johnson, awarded £14 million a year for three years to the Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) . The money was to be used exclusively to fund new fluoridation schemes, or to carry out feasibility studies on any new proposals for such projects. But SHAs are not allowed to hold capital allocations, so with the collaboration of Primary care trusts (PCTs) some creative accounting allowed the money to be diverted to prop up ailing existing fluoridation schemes. To launder Johnson’s millions, the Capital allowance is first transferred to PCTs, who convert it to Revenue. They then pass this back to the SHAs, who have then are able to switch it into repairing defective existing fluoridation equipment. This is in direct defiance of Johnson’s quite specific intention. -------------- Wherever the money is now.. £42 million invested in a UK Childsmile programme could save Taxpayers £140 million or more in dental costs NURSERY TOOTHBRUSHING SAVES £6m IN DENTAL COSTS 10 November 2013 Last updated at 01:03 A scheme to encourage nursery children to brush their teeth has saved more than £6m in dental costs, according to a new study. Childsmile involves staff at all Scottish nurseries offering free supervised toothbrushing every day. Glasgow researchers found that the scheme had reduced the cost of treating dental disease in five-year-olds by more than half between 2001 and 2010. The programme was launched in 2001 and costs about £1.8m a year. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 1

12:32pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Watch this and see the truth.

https://www.youtube.
com/watch?annotation
_id=annotation_42880
9033&feature=iv&src_
vid=6N2E9G-LV6s&v=na
32dT2gfd0#t=1s
Watch this and see the truth. https://www.youtube. com/watch?annotation _id=annotation_42880 9033&feature=iv&src_ vid=6N2E9G-LV6s&v=na 32dT2gfd0#t=1s Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

12:38pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Dan Soton says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile?

..



BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD.

Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker.

Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world".

Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average.



-

http://www.telegraph












.co.uk/news/politics












/10380523/Birmingham












-is-national-disgrac












e-says-Ofsted-chief-












inspector.html
,,


My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride.

Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham...

For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets


,,
,,

SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation


Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt..


TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA

Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected.


http://tinyurl.com/l









2h4jys


FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds.

The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation.




,,
DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds



PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water


http://www.bbc.co.uk








/news/health-2672948








4


-


MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM.

The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been.

MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.

-

http://www.youtube.c








om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ








R4



,,
,,


Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate.


If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate.


Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population?


-


UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON.

Press Release to all Media Outlets.

13 JAN 2013.

United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation.

We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume .

Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue .

There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe .

In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC.

Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures.

In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary.

We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride.

But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin.

Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water .
We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue.

For further info contact organising members of UCS

Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail







.co.uk




,,
,,


Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions..



Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities!




CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH

By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY.

16 Feb 2013.

A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH.

Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites.


http://www.zetadenta






l.co.uk/article-626-






Dental-Health-Month-






for-Children.html




PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay


Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011?


http://tinyurl.com/l






aqdklh




,,,
,,


WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay


I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children...

ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues..

PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children

If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000.

(as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n





4kfyaj)

Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply

Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime.

... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile.

-

At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures.

Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets



,,
,,


I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting


The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT


2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7


Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay.

If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions.

-

Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers

Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental?



,,
,,


PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.  



(1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224
 

(2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues


(3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.
 

1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106

2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212

3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319

4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425

5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532

6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638

7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745

8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852

9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957

10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063

11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170

12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276


Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay..

THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free.

http://tinyurl.com/l



aqdklh


NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been


http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ



R4


-

GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing



Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs

http://www.bbc.co.uk



/news/uk-scotland-24



880356


,,
only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies..

With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse..

Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is...


1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ?

-


REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005.

Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED....

If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade...



,,
Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ?



If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like..



ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION

2008-02-06 01:10:30

Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme.

“The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it."

The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs.

http://www.labour.or

g.uk/johnson_debate_

on_fluoridation_to_i

mprove_dental_care,2

008-02-05





,,,
,,,

Where's Johnson's £42 million gone?


LABOUR'S SICK LEGACY.

In 2008 Labour’s genial Secretary of Health, Alan Johnson, awarded £14 million a year for three years to the Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) . The money was to be used exclusively to fund new fluoridation schemes, or to carry out feasibility studies on any new proposals for such projects.

But SHAs are not allowed to hold capital allocations, so with the collaboration of Primary care trusts (PCTs) some creative accounting allowed the money to be diverted to prop up ailing existing fluoridation schemes.

To launder Johnson’s millions, the Capital allowance is first transferred to PCTs, who convert it to Revenue. They then pass this back to the SHAs, who have then are able to switch it into repairing defective existing fluoridation equipment. This is in direct defiance of Johnson’s quite specific intention.

--------------


Wherever the money is now.. A UK Childsmile programme could be saving Taxpayers millions in dental costs



NURSERY TOOTHBRUSHING SAVES £6m IN DENTAL COSTS

10 November 2013 Last updated at 01:03

A scheme to encourage nursery children to brush their teeth has saved more than £6m in dental costs, according to a new study.

Childsmile involves staff at all Scottish nurseries offering free supervised toothbrushing every day.

Glasgow researchers found that the scheme had reduced the cost of treating dental disease in five-year-olds by more than half between 2001 and 2010.


http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-scotland-24
880356



,,
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: So why has fluoridated Birmingham the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile? .. BIRMINGHAM BRANDED A NATIONAL DISGRACE AND ONE OF WORST PLACE TO GROW UP IN WESTERN WORLD. Oct 16, 2013 09:10 By Martin Fricker. Birmingham Infant mortality rate almost twice the national average makes city "one of the worst places to grow up in the western world". Sir Michael Wilshaw, Ofsted’s chief inspector, slammed the city whose infant mortality rate is almost twice the national average. - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/news/politics /10380523/Birmingham -is-national-disgrac e-says-Ofsted-chief- inspector.html[/p][/quote],, My dentist/s have been telling me for years that all good health revolves around good oral hygiene and healthy (crucial in preventing heart attacks etc) teeth... key to that is fluoride. Yet all the evidence points to poorer overall health in the fluoridated Birmingham... For me.. PHEs report is utterly biased in favour of fluoridation and presumes to much, like all Children East, West, North and South brush their teeth alike, there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families. The Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in children from low-income families. by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, SHA/PHE have a history of pedaling disinformation Forget taking PHEs report with a pinch salt.. TAKE.. Professor John Newton Chief Knowledge Officer at PHE, previously Regional Director of Public Health SHA Among other things.. as Regional Director of Public Health SHA he misrepresented the extent of dental fluorosis in Ireland which he claimed affected only 4% of children when in fact official Irish government evidence from 2002 states that 37% of 15-year-olds are affected. http://tinyurl.com/l 2h4jys FURTHER.. Irish Dentists Opposing Fluoridation (IDOF), a group of over 100 dentists, has published an article in The Irish Dentist slamming Minister Harney and the Department of Health for doing nothing to combat the NEAR EPIDEMIC LEVELS OF DENTAL FLUOROSIS IN IRISH CHILDREN. HERE, DENTAL FLUOROSIS, FLUORIDE DAMAGE TO TEETH, HAS SKY-ROCKETED WITH A SEVEN FOLD INCREASE FROM 1984 TO 2002 and the Republic of Ireland (artificially fluoridated since 1960s) now has three times more fluorosis than Northern Ireland which still rejects water fluoridation on health and safety grounds. The figures come from the North/South Oral Health study carried out by the Department of Health in 2002 as part of the Forum on Fluoridation. ,,[/p][/quote]DISTURBING.. PHE is advocating Mass Fluoridation on finding 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds PHE have taken all its best and all its worst results clicked a mouse and have come up with Mass Fluoridation.. on finding, 11% less GENERAL ( wide gamut perinatal diseases to choose from) decay for 12-year-olds where Toxic waste/fluoride is added to drinking water http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/health-2672948 4 - MAY 2013... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM. The level of dental decay in Southampton among five year old children is the lowest it has ever been. MORE CHILDREN ARE CARIES FREE THAN EVER BEFORE, UP TO 40 % LOWER THEN JUST A FEW YEARS AGO. 70% of Southampton's children do not have any dental disease what's so ever. - http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 ,,[/p][/quote],, Birmingham's dentists carry out 5,475 extraction's on children a year... 11x Southampton's extraction rate. If you believe PHE that could of been 10,950... 22x Southampton's extraction rate. Odd when you think Birmingham has only 4x Southampton's population? - UNITED COMMUNITIES OF SOUTHAMPTON. Press Release to all Media Outlets. 13 JAN 2013. United Communities of Southampton Statement on fluoridation. We firmly believe that it is our GOD given right, and responsibility, to choose what medications and food we consume . Whilst we understand the plight of those suffering from tooth decay; and our hearts go out to all those affected .We most firmly do NOT support the addition of hydrofluosilicic acid commonly referred to as fluoride to our water to address this issue . There is no good science to show that fluoridation is effective in reducing tooth decay, nor is there good evidence to prove that it is safe . In fact, we have solid PROOF that fluoridating the water is both ineffective and dangerous - to the health of humans and to Nature too . IN BIRMINGHAM THE WATER HAS BEEN FLUORIDATED FOR SOME TIME; DESPITE THIS, BIRMINGHAM IS STILL CARRYING OUT DENTAL EXTRACTIONS ON 15 CHILDREN PER DAY UNDER GENERAL ANAESTHETIC. Dr Dean Burke , chief scientist at the National Cancer Institute (USA) , stated under oath at a Congressional hearing 'Nothing causes or makes cancer explode faster in the body than fluoride.'Dr Burke calculated that adding fluoride to the water would increase the cancer rate by at least 10%. No-one has challenged his figures. In 2007 the American Dental Association warned parents not to make up formula milk with fluoridated water. In Southampton the reckless SHA has deemed any such warning as unnecessary. We have many , many concerns about the safety of ingesting an accumulative poison ; there are too many to list here .You need to understand that very few medical or dental 'professionals' are fully aware of the toxicity of fluoride. But fundamentally, the enforced medication by means of fluoridation is absolutely against our religious beliefs and is an insult to our Freedom. We feel most strongly that this is breaking the Law of the land. You do NOT have our consent to force our community to consume this awful toxin. Furthermore we have PROVEN methods that will safely and significantly reduce tooth decay , if not entirely eradicate this disease. We would very much like to share these proven measures with our communities and health authorities alike. Therefore we most strongly urge you to 'cease and desist' with any plans to fluoridate our drinking water . We urge you to meet with us in the near future so that we may work together to resolve this issue. For further info contact organising members of UCS Dr Zac Cox (Dentist), Mr Harjap Singh, Mr Ziarat Hussain, Mr Arshad Sharif, Mr Prithipal Singh Roath – p.singhroath@hotmail .co.uk ,,[/p][/quote],, Re: Birmingham's dentists carry out dental extraction's on 5,475 children a year... 11x Southampton's extractions.. Fluoridated since 1964.. LOTS of Solihull's ( Birmingham ) youngsters have cavities! CHILDREN SET TO BE TARGETED IN A BID TO BOOST DENTAL HEALTH By HANNAH JENNINGS PARRY. 16 Feb 2013. A DENTIST from Solihull, is offering special children's clinics AFTER HAVING TO TREAT "LOTS" OF LOCAL YOUNGSTERS FOR FILLINGS BEFORE THEY EVEN HAVE ADULT TEETH. Satinder and Joanna Kelley, owners of Dickens Heath surgery, Heath Dental, said childhood cavities were such an issue, they were now offering foaming fluoride treatment Flairesse, to help repair cavities in youngsters' pearly whites. http://www.zetadenta l.co.uk/article-626- Dental-Health-Month- for-Children.html PHE say 500 children in the (Southampton) region need to have teeth extracted under general anaesthetic due to tooth decay Surely that can't be the same 500 children they quoted back in June 2011? http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh ,,,[/p][/quote],, WalkingOnAWire says...The 2011 census has a figure of 27,200 children aged 0-9 in Southampton. If we assume 5/9 of those are aged 0-5 then that's about 15,000 children. 15% of 15,000 is 2,250 children who would otherwise have tooth decay I have no reason to doubt you, so I'll agree with you on the 2011 census figure of 27,200 Children... ACCORDING TO PROFESSOR STEPHEN PECKHAM 70% (3/4) of those 27,200 Children do not and may never have any dental disease.. that leaves 1/4, 6,800 Children who may at some time have dental disease issues.. PHE found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay for 12-year-olds when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water (hopefully at some point in time all those 6,800 children will reach the age of 12), So if you extract out the 11% from the 6,800 Children who may or may not get GENERAL tooth decay by the time their 12-year-olds you have PHEs targeted 748 Children If we agree to say ( given variables like inflation ) fluoridation will cost Southampton £80,000 per year.. over 12-year period you have a sum of £960,000. (as of 2008, £59,000 per a year/ £471,000 installing plant, http://tinyurl.com/n 4kfyaj) Given the on going shambles.. at the very least, against the will of Southampton it will cost over £1m to put Toxic waste/fluoride into our drinking water supply Taken all costs into consideration (anything above £2m) to have 11% less (748) 12-year-olds with GENERAL tooth decay lumbers Taxpayers and Southampton with a bill of £2,673 per child.. £21,384 over a 96 year lifetime. ... and who's to say those 748 Children are not the most vulnerable to Toxic Posing?.. Fluoridated Birmingham has the highest Infant mortality rate in the UK, worse than in Cuba and on a par with Latvia and Chile. - At the end of the day however you move the figures up or down in favour of fluoridation.. it would be more cost effective to give them all a free lifetime supply of dentures. Thankfully there are better/safer ways to fight tooth decay in low-income families, the Childsmile program has shown that large reductions in tooth decay can be achieved in Children from low-income families by teaching tooth brushing in nursery schools and educating parents on better diets ,,[/p][/quote],, I'll make do with the below figures until I can find out exactly how many Totton, Eastleigh and Southampton 12-year-old's PHE is targeting The below data relates to births recorded by Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) Includes births to mothers with a home postcode within Southampton. does not include births to mothers with a Southampton postcode but the birth occurs within a loction not covered by SUHT 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton shot up to 3,224 from 2,816 in 2006/7 Taking the higher figure of the two, 3,224 x 12 yrs = 38,688 Children (using Prof Peckham's and PHE's stats )... over a 12-year period Southampton will have 1,064 less 12-year old Children with GENERAL tooth decay. If 12 yrs of Fluoridation soul purpose is to reduce 12-year old Children's GENERAL tooth decay by 11% it would be a crime on biblical proportions. - Does that small 11% benefit tail off?.. PHE's report mentions Hip fractures, Kidney stones, Cancers etc, but fails to mention any benefits for Teenagers Fluoridation... Zero statistical benefits for Teenagers or detrimental? ,,[/p][/quote],, PHEs Best Case Scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation only an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.   (1) ACCORDING to Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust (SUHT) 2009/10 Live Births in Southampton numbered.. 3,224   (2) ACCORDING to Prof Stephen Peckham 70% of those 3,224 babies will grow up dental disease free.. that leaves 967 babies who may at some time have a dental disease issues (3) ACCORDING to PHEs Best Case Scenario.. they found 11% less GENERAL tooth decay when Toxic Waste/Fluoride is added to drinking water... 11% of 967 leaves 106 babies in the first year with less GENERAL ( not dental disease free for life ) tooth decay.   1 yr.. (1) 3,224 (2) 967 (3) 106 2 yrs.. (1) 6,448 (2) 1,935 (3) 212 3 yrs.. (1) 9,672 (2) 2,902 (3) 319 4 yrs.. (1) 12,896 (2) 3,869 (3) 425 5 yrs.. (1) 16,120 (2) 4,836 (3) 532 6 yrs.. (1) 19,344 (2) 5,804 (3) 638 7 yrs.. (1) 22,568 (2) 6,771 (3) 745 8 yrs.. (1) 25,792 (2) 7,738 (3) 852 9 yrs.. (1) 29,016 (2) 8,705 (3) 957 10 yrs.. (1) 32,240 (2) 9,672 (3) 1,063 11 yrs.. (1) 35,464 (2) 10,640 (3) 1,170 12 yrs.. (1) 38,688 (2) 11,607 (3) 1,276 Using PHEs best case scenario.. after 12 yrs of Toxic Waste/Fluoridation ( WE WILL HAVE) an extra 1,276 Children per year with less GENERAL tooth decay.. THAT's HARDLY the 50% of all 38,688 Children tooth decay free promised back in June 2011.. 50% of 38,688 of equals (PROMISED) an extra 19,344 per year Children tooth decay free. http://tinyurl.com/l aqdklh NO MATER, ACCORDING to Prof. Stephen Peckham we are already an impressive 70% dental disease free.. 70% of 38,688 would of equalled 27,081 Children tooth decay free.. over only a few years 70% is a superb achievement, among five years tooth decay is the lowest it has ever been http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=1LglU4uUJ R4 - GIVEN ALL THE ABOVE.. As I see it, the only way to improve on Southampton's superb 70% of children do not have any dental disease what's so ever.. is to follow Scotland's lead, Childsmile, supervised Nursery toothbrushing Nursery toothbrushing saves £6m in dental costs http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,,[/p][/quote]only last week PHE urged more councils to consider adding fluoride to their water supplies.. With their sights firmly set on mass fluoridation.. if PHEs water fluoridation scheme goes to a vote they will be obliged to show a bit of backbone (worst case scenario for PHE) and openly debate with their peers (and betters) the issues they so eagerly endorse.. Given PHE likes to quote the World Health Organisation when it suits them I suggest the first question is... 1) Where's your case for fluoridation if Children's poor dental health is (statistically) eradicated ? - REF: Data from 1965 to 2005 provided by the World Health Organisation (WHO) shows Decayed, Missing & Filled teeth (DMFT) among 12 yr old's has fallen from above eight in 1965 to below one in 2005. Essentially, all countries in the Western World have the same level of dental health regardless of Wealth, Country, or WHETHER THE WATER IS OR NOT FLUORIDATED.... If the 30 yr trend continues 12 yr old Children’s poor dental health will be statistically eradicated within a decade... ,,[/p][/quote]Has SHA/PHE the resources to influence a local vote ? If Cameron (the coalition gov) hasn't found the £14 million per annum per set aside by SHA/PHE for fluoridation I'd call it a SECRET slush fund.. you can call it whatever you like.. ON.. LABOUR.ORG... ALAN JOHNSON CALLS FOR DEBATE ON FLUORIDATION 2008-02-06 01:10:30 Extra funding worth £14 million per annum over the next three years will be made available to Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) that, following consultations, decide the local community would benefit from the scheme. “The extra funding I am announcing means that, should local people decide to support fluoridation, SHAs have the resources to implement it." The new Government funding will allow SHAs to meet the cost of fluoridation schemes without depleting funds for other health needs. http://www.labour.or g.uk/johnson_debate_ on_fluoridation_to_i mprove_dental_care,2 008-02-05 ,,,[/p][/quote],,, Where's Johnson's £42 million gone? LABOUR'S SICK LEGACY. In 2008 Labour’s genial Secretary of Health, Alan Johnson, awarded £14 million a year for three years to the Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) . The money was to be used exclusively to fund new fluoridation schemes, or to carry out feasibility studies on any new proposals for such projects. But SHAs are not allowed to hold capital allocations, so with the collaboration of Primary care trusts (PCTs) some creative accounting allowed the money to be diverted to prop up ailing existing fluoridation schemes. To launder Johnson’s millions, the Capital allowance is first transferred to PCTs, who convert it to Revenue. They then pass this back to the SHAs, who have then are able to switch it into repairing defective existing fluoridation equipment. This is in direct defiance of Johnson’s quite specific intention. -------------- Wherever the money is now.. A UK Childsmile programme could be saving Taxpayers millions in dental costs NURSERY TOOTHBRUSHING SAVES £6m IN DENTAL COSTS 10 November 2013 Last updated at 01:03 A scheme to encourage nursery children to brush their teeth has saved more than £6m in dental costs, according to a new study. Childsmile involves staff at all Scottish nurseries offering free supervised toothbrushing every day. Glasgow researchers found that the scheme had reduced the cost of treating dental disease in five-year-olds by more than half between 2001 and 2010. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-scotland-24 880356 ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 4

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree